A Maryland DNA law being challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court helped lead to 43 convictions over the past four years, but state data show the majority of the convictions could eventually have happened even without the new law.
For years, Maryland required people convicted of serious crimes to provide a DNA sample. The sample, taken from a swab of saliva, was then compared against a database of DNA evidence from crime scenes, and some old cases were able to be solved.
Maryland changed its law in 2009, however, so that people had to provide the saliva sample when they were arrested on charges of committing certain violent crimes — before going to trial.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
2 comments:
There goes self-incrimination and innocence before trial. Like so many ideas about fighting crime -- street cameras, drones, secret trials, warrantless searches, stop & frisk (innocent citizens while they LOOK for a crime), etc, it SOUNDS like a great idea. But mostly in China, North Korea, and Iran. I know, and its QUITE obvious, that our "representatives" don't think the Bill of Rights is relevant anymore, and the Constitution is merely a "suggestion", but being FORCED to give possible evidence against YOURSELF before ANY conviction is outrageous. There are so many avenues of possible government abuse of this procedure, it boggles the mind. But keep cheering. And picture YOURSELF among the millions of wildly cheering Germans as Hitler rose to power. Then realize that history DOES repeat itself. Like now.
The new laws , guilty until proven innocent.
Post a Comment