TriggerFinger


Supreme Court to decide DNA residue case


Ars Technica"As human beings, we shed hundreds of thousands of skin and hair cells daily, with each cell containing information about who we are, where we come from, and who we will be," said Jennifer Lynch, a senior EFF staff attorney. "The court must recognize that allowing police the limitless ability to collect and search genetic material will usher in a future where DNA may be collected from any person at any time, entered into and checked against DNA databases, and used to conduct pervasive surveillance."

It seems to me that a warrant for DNA analysis should be necessary before it is collected. The same for fingerprints, though I know that isn't current policy. The warrant requirement means that police cannot simply conduct a DNA/fingerprint dragnet through a whole neighborhood or a victim's friends and associates at random. They should need to develop a case for a specific individual first.

Once you are convicted, however, you go into the database so future criminal activity can be detected more easily.

This entry was published Sat Feb 21 11:01:31 CST 2015 by TriggerFinger and last updated 2015-02-21 11:01:31.0. [Tweet]

comments powered by Disqus

Subscribe to Atom Feed

I am not a lawyer, and nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice.

This site is run on custom blog software and is being actively developed. Please be forgiving of errors.


This website is an Amazon affiliate and will receive financial compensation for products purchased from Amazon through links on this site.