Oj Simpson Arrest

California Appeals Court Strikes Down Law That Required DNA Samples From ...

A year ago, we wrote about a legal challenge concerning the constitutionality of a California law that requires police to collect and store DNA of anyone arrested (not convicted). A California state appeals court has now struck down the law , saying that it's a violation of the 4th Amendment. Considering all of the rulings lately that seem to have done away with the 4th Amendment, it's nice to see one going in the other direction, though I'm sure there's still going to be an appeal. And, unfortunately, the article linked above suggests that this ruling will likely get reversed on appeal, noting that a federal appeals court (third circuit) recently ruled on the same issue, and said it's fine to collect DNA from arrestees. Still, while this court ruling is still in effect in CA, we might as well quote the judge: Even focusing on the DNA profile alone, the analogy to fingerprints is blind to the nature of DNA. Courts are well aware that—[r]ecent studies have begun to question the notion that junk DNA does not contain useful genetic programming material and that an intense debate on this subject is now taking place in scientific and legal communities. ... Like the DNA laws of almost every other state and federal law, the DNA Act is silent as to how long these specimens and samples may be kept, and it is reasonable to expect they will be preserved long into the future, when it may be possible to extract even more personal and private information than is now the case. ... [T]he Act places few restrictions on the law enforcement uses to which such information may be put. This raises questions both about the kind of personal and private information that may be derived from the DNA samples in the DOJ's possession, and the uses of that biometric data as scientific developments increase the type and amount of information that can be extracted from it. For example, commentators have discussed the potential for research to identify genetic causes of antisocial behavior that might be used to justify various crime control measures. Fingerprinting presents no comparable threat to privacy. Worst aspect is that it'll come to be taken as absolute proof, and then mere assertions of a DNA match will be used -- supplied by a preferred laboratory, as at current, which knows the result that police and prosecutors want. It's one of those "proofs" that rely on an assumption that the whole evidentiary chain is completely honest and never makes mistakes, either. Your address, and a host of other publicly available information, correlates with your likelihood of being convicted of crime. I don't see how the as yet theoretical possibility of DNA being used to predict ones propensity to commit crime is such a good reason to ban holding DNA samples from those arrested but not convicted. If I were on the jury of a case like that, I'd want to see the defense submit some blinded samples to the same lab, just to see whether they can get the same results without any covert hints. (That kind of curiosity is why I'll never be allowed on a jury, and that in turn is why a defender will rarely make that kind of test, for fear of how it might turn out.) Then I realized that I wasn't sure what I meant. Without a test, I'd have doubts about the lab results-- which is just what the defense would want. If the labs failed the test I would dismiss their results (and the testimony of any expert who vouched for them), but if they passed I'd trust that evidence, so maybe doing the tests would be a bad bet for the defense.

Crime History: O.J. Simpson arrested after police chase | News Life

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat.

O.J. Simpson facts and fictions, news rituals in the construction of reality

Jet

The O.J. Simpson trials, rhetoric, media, and the law

Jet

Jet