Supreme Court Allow Police to Take D.N.A. Samples After Arrests

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,279
6,866
568
Nothern VA
#1
WASHINGTON — Police may take D.N.A. samples from people arrested for serious crimes, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday in a 5-to-4 decision.

“When officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and they bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, “taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee’s D.N.A. is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas, Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined the majority opinion.

Justice Antonin Scalia summarized his dissent from the bench, a rare move signaling deep disagreement.
“Make no mistake about it: because of today’s decision, your D.N.A. can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason,” he said.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined the dissent. The case arose from the collection of D.N.A. in 2009 from Alonzo Jay King Jr. after his arrest on assault charges in Wicomico County, Md. His D.N.A. profile, obtained by swabbing his cheek, matched evidence in a 2003 **** case, and he was convicted of that crime. The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that a state law authorizing D.N.A. collection from people arrested but not yet convicted violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches.

Collecting D.N.A. from people convicted of crimes was not at issue in the case, Maryland v. King, No. 12-207. The question was, rather, whether the Fourth Amendment allowed collecting it from people who have merely been arrested and so are presumed innocent.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/us/supreme-court-says-police-can-take-dna-samples.html?_r=0
 

kidconnor

55gallon hog
Mar 16, 2005
5,371
1,144
678
brooklyn
#3
They are blueprinting your DNA from a swab just like they have a blueprint of your finger print. They can't plant your DNA somewhere like they can't plant your fingerprint.. Or can they?

A fingerprint is done for, mostly, every crime where as DNA only for serious crimes. I would guess **** and violent assaults.

I kind of don't see the difference.

Explain what I am missing.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,222
12,972
438
Atlanta, GA
#4
I kind of don't see the difference.

Explain what I am missing.
The fact that they would keep your DNA sample in national database even if you were to be found not guilty in court. Also, its now only a matter of time (maybe 10-15 years) before they start collecting DNA samples for minor crimes too. That would also be permanent additions to the national database regards of trial outcome. From there (maybe 10-20 later), they'll start requesting and collecting DNA samples during routine traffic stops as well.
 

kidconnor

55gallon hog
Mar 16, 2005
5,371
1,144
678
brooklyn
#5
The fact that they would keep your DNA sample in national database even if you were to be found not guilty in court. Also, its now only a matter of time (maybe 10-15 years) before they start collecting DNA samples for minor crimes too. That would also be permanent additions to the national database regards of trial outcome. From there (maybe 10-20 later), they'll start requesting and collecting DNA samples during routine traffic stops as well.

Like a fingerprint, minus the traffic stop part, all those steps are already in place regardless of trial outcomes. And its not exactly they sample they keep stored but a blueprint of that sample.





EDIT :Just to be clear I'm not saying everyone line up to give DNA samples and the gubmint rules. I'm just trying to figure out the difference between a fingerprint and a DNA blueprint. How, once your arrested and before trial, that DNA blueprint is more intrusive than a fingerprint.

Fore example Every prisoner going through central booking down here takes an iris picture. Its something that cant be left at a scene but thats in a database too.
 
Last edited:

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#6
Fore example Every prisoner going through central booking down here takes an iris picture. Its something that cant be left at a scene but thats in a database too.
You answered your own question. It's too easy to plant DNA evidence, even if they only have the "blueprint."
 

kidconnor

55gallon hog
Mar 16, 2005
5,371
1,144
678
brooklyn
#7
You answered your own question. It's too easy to plant DNA evidence, even if they only have the "blueprint."

How do you drop a dna blueprint without a sample? A sample being saliva, skin, blood, semen and stuff. I figure it would be just as easy, if not easier, to plant a fingerprint with a "blueprint".

Discarding the sample and keeping the blueprint seems no different than a fingerprint.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#8
How do you drop a dna blueprint without a sample? A sample being saliva, skin, blood, semen and stuff. I figure it would be just as easy, if not easier, to plant a fingerprint with a "blueprint".

Discarding the sample and keeping the blueprint seems no different than a fingerprint.
You've got a guy in jail serving time and you don't think it would be possible to get some hair from his pillow to plant at some unsolved crime?
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,806
6,920
763
F.U.B.A.R
#9
Iris scans are a biometric ID. Guess they figure its 'hack' proof at this point in time. That is until someone builds a 3D cloning machine.
 

kidconnor

55gallon hog
Mar 16, 2005
5,371
1,144
678
brooklyn
#10
You've got a guy in jail serving time and you don't think it would be possible to get some hair from his pillow to plant at some unsolved crime?
Sure. But that has nothing to do with the sample they collected from the arrest. Which they then blueprinted and threw away.


Which is what I am getting at. They don't have a sample anymore just the blueprint. Similar to the fingerprint blueprint. And if thats ok, why not DNA.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,279
6,866
568
Nothern VA
#11
If you're booked and fingerprinted are your prints retained regardless of the outcome?

If I were a bad guy I'd take DNA from a previously sampled convict/person I don't like and leave that DNA behind at the scene of a crime.
 

Voodoo Ben

You gotta wash your ass
Dec 5, 2010
8,369
6,733
293
#12
it's a trick to get DNA for clones.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#13
Sure. But that has nothing to do with the sample they collected from the arrest. Which they then blueprinted and threw away.

Which is what I am getting at. They don't have a sample anymore just the blueprint. Similar to the fingerprint blueprint. And if thats ok, why not DNA.
Because it's a lot harder to plant fingerprint evidence.
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,806
6,920
763
F.U.B.A.R
#14
If you're booked and fingerprinted are your prints retained regardless of the outcome?

If I were a bad guy I'd take DNA from a previously sampled convict/person I don't like and leave that DNA behind at the scene of a crime.
Luckily, most criminals are stupid.
 

kidconnor

55gallon hog
Mar 16, 2005
5,371
1,144
678
brooklyn
#15
Because it's a lot harder to plant fingerprint evidence.
I would disagree. It's a lot harder to plant DNA without a sample like hair or blood. All they have is a blueprint of it to compare to actual samples collected from crime scenes.

But the conspiracy planted evidence reason is not really a valid argument. An it doesn't explain the difference between fingerprint and DNA blueprints if both can be planted anyway.


Besides. DNA at a crime scene or lack of DNA isn't enough by itself to prove guilt or innocence.
 

CougarHunter

Lying causes cat piss smell.
Mar 2, 2006
10,594
2,574
566
KC Metro
#17
I'd tell the fuckers that you'll be getting my sample off the floor after you beat it out of me. You won't get it any other way.
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,561
926
753
With a stranger
#19
You've got a guy in jail serving time and you don't think it would be possible to get some hair from his pillow to plant at some unsolved crime?
If the guy's in prison, how can they frame him for a new crime? They'd have to explain how he got out of prison, committed the crime, and decided for some reason to return to prison without anyone noticing. Or do you mean that they'd pin an old, unsolved crime from before his prison time? Even in that case, they'd only need the hair and that would still require at least 1 detective to get at least 1 prison guard to agree to go along with his plan, be able to plant the evidence in the file, and explain how a hair went unnoticed all that time and was suddenly discovered while that guy was in prison. The odds of someone going to those lengths to frame an inmate are pretty slim and the odds of it being successful are even slimmer.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#20
If the guy's in prison, how can they frame him for a new crime? They'd have to explain how he got out of prison, committed the crime, and decided for some reason to return to prison without anyone noticing. Or do you mean that they'd pin an old, unsolved crime from before his prison time? Even in that case, they'd only need the hair and that would still require at least 1 detective to get at least 1 prison guard to agree to go along with his plan, be able to plant the evidence in the file, and explain how a hair went unnoticed all that time and was suddenly discovered while that guy was in prison. The odds of someone going to those lengths to frame an inmate are pretty slim and the odds of it being successful are even slimmer.
I'm not talking about some guy institutionalized in a big prison. More like some Mayberry local jail where the "guard" is one of the sheriff's deputies. And even in bigger cities you don't think cops still plant evidence? Nigga please...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/n...f-planting-drugs-on-innocent-people.html?_r=0
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,561
926
753
With a stranger
#21
I'm not talking about some guy institutionalized in a big prison. More like some Mayberry local jail where the "guard" is one of the sheriff's deputies. And even in bigger cities you don't think cops still plant evidence? Nigga please...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/n...f-planting-drugs-on-innocent-people.html?_r=0
I'm not saying cops never plant evidence. What I'm saying is that planting DNA evidence is harder to do than planting drugs at the crime scene before anyone else arrives or while nobody else is looking or to say you found drugs on a person during a pat-down. For an unsolved crime, the crime scene no longer exists so going back after the fact to plant evidence is useless. Going into the file to plant evidence that wasn't accounted for from the beginning creates an obvious opportunity for any defense lawyer with a functioning brain to plant reasonable doubt in the jurors' minds simply by asking why that DNA wasn't discovered until after his client was arrested on another charge.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,041
27,617
898
Seattle
#22
A bunch of panicky petes in this thread.

Yes, if you are ever fingerprinted it's in the database for good.
No, it is not easier to plant DNA from the blueprint than it is a fingerprint.

Mandatory DNA will exonerate more innocent people than it will convict.
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
Mar 10, 2006
49,333
37,392
628
In a porn tree
#23
I'm torn... part of me thinks taking DNA from a person who hasn't been convicted is too intrusive. Yes, I know they already take your fingerprints/mugshot... but it's just one more thing... a further eroding of our privacy.

On the other hand... I do fucking love it when the cops nab scumbag rapists with the "cold hits" they get when they enter more and more people into CODIS. And that is how they catch a LOT of those sick fucks.

The CODIS is a fantastic tool for law enforcement, and I'm really not too paranoid about cops planting DNA or the BillBurr Group using my DNA to make a clone army that will lock me up in a FEMA death camp.

Meh... you can have my DNA, just don't take my container of coffee.