The Dark Side of DNA Evidence

[xchrom]

http://www.thenation.com/article/173554/dark-side-dna-evidence


A DNA analyst processes evidence. (AP Photo/Marshall University, Alex Wilson)
?

On February 26, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Maryland v. King, which presents the question of whether the Fourth Amendment permits the warrantless collection of DNA from people arrested for, but not convicted of, a crime. Currently, twenty-eight states and federal law enforcement collect DNA upon arrest—when a person is still presumed innocent. During oral arguments, Justice Samuel Alito called it “perhaps the most important criminal procedure case that this Court has heard in decades.”

The case goes back to April 10, 2009, when Maryland police arrested Alonzo King on assault charges. A DNA sample was collected, and four months later, it was found to match evidence from an unsolved rape, which led to King’s conviction for the crime. The case is precisely the sort of example given by proponents of broad DNA collection: DNA has the power to identify the guilty and exonerate the innocent. But in King’s case, the Maryland Court of Appeals determined that arrestees have privacy expectations that outweigh the state’s crime-solving interest.

In its petition to the Supreme Court, Maryland argues that collecting DNA is no more invasive than its twentieth-century counterpart, the fingerprint. But King and opposing groups filing friend of the court, or amicus, briefs respond that unlike fingerprints, DNA is a trove of personal, medical and ancestral information. What’s more, DNA solves cases far less frequently than the state suggests. In 2011, Maryland police collected 10,666 DNA samples; only nineteen led to an arrest. The state’s interest is thus not identification but investigation—and the Court has never
permitted suspicionless searches of suspects without a warrant. If it does in King, there will be no principle limiting when our DNA may be collected in the name of fighting crime.

* * *

But beyond privacy concerns, there is another reason to reconsider DNA collection on arrest. Because people of color are disproportionately stopped, searched and arrested, they will disproportionately bear the burden of this genetic dragnet. And because DNA samples can be used to establish family relationships, it has the potential to widen the surveillance to entire communities.

[Renew Deal]

1. This is an interesting case

I can see both sides of it. If you equate DNA to a fingerprint, you have a more potent way of solving crimes. The argument can be made about whether DNA is any more personal than a fingerprint. There is also a question of how long it can be stored. I think storing permanently for non-convicted people and for some convicts is an invasion of privacy.

It will be interesting to see how this comes down because it is not cut and dry. Is there a law and order wing of the court?

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. Looked at from another point of view, they had a serious unsolved crime

with some identifying features of the suspect - the DNA from the rape. This man then came into the justice system, and they had the chance to put a name to the suspect they'd been looking for.

If the match had been made within a few days of taking the DNA sample from the assault charges, or while he was still in custody, would there be a problem?

You could have a system in which a DNA sample is taken for anyone charged with a crime, checked against outstanding cases, and then discarded if the case doesn't end in a conviction.

[geek tragedy]

3. If they segregate the data so that the only information available to law enforcement is

"match or no match" then it should probably be okay.

Don't commit rape would seem to be the way to avoid this problem.

[mountain grammy]

4. Interesting case for the annointed ones to decide.

Can't wait for pearls of wisdom to drip from Scalia's pen. I'm sure his DNA would trace back to Mussolini and Attila the Hun before that (was he Italian?)

[byeya]

5. Since the DNA examined is a small portion of the person's complete genotype, false positives among

closely related people are possible and have occurred. DNA, in samples these sizes, are not fail safe.

Fingerprints are not fail safe either; courts have taken judicial notice to allow the evidence. Like DNA, fingerprint analysis from a competent and honest lab are over 90% accurate for purposes of identification. Same with DNA but you need, or should need, corroborating facts to support a conviction.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

6. I'm on Maryland's side.

And support a national DNA database.

As long as the legislation comes with changes to the way it's collected and used as evidence.