Whose DNA is it anyway?

First let me start by saying that I support the police … I believe that they have probably one of the thankless jobs in the country. Many of them put their lives on the line on a daily basis for less money than an entry level accounting position.

This makes stories such as the one taking place in Truro, Massachusetts, that much harder to take.

The police in Truro, Massachusetts, in an effort to solve a 2002 murder have been collecting DNA samples from the men in Truro. Nothing wrong with that, right?

Wrong.

The only reason that this is even remotely legal is that it is voluntary. But with statements by Trooper Chris Mason that "We have an awareness of the people who fail to consent," and State Prosecutor Michael O'Keefe who, to quote a CNN report, “indicated that investigators would take note of those who decline a swab of the inside of their mouths” one has to wonder just how voluntary it really is in the end.

Since it's fairly obvious that someone who has evaded police for the 3 years since the murder is unlikely to voluntarily submit to a DNA test, anyone who exercises their right to refuse to volunteer can be considered a suspect. With that suspicion it could be reasonably possible to prove 'probable cause' to secure a warrent or court order for a DNA test.

Also, despite the statement that "By law that DNA sample can't go anywhere" ... what he fails to mention is that the REPORT from that sample CAN. And while the report from that sample can not be used as evidence in future cases (as it was given voluntarily so would violate the constitutional protection against self-incrimination), it CAN be used to get a warrent/court order in order to obtain a current DNA sample.

I understand that they want to solve this case ... but is killing the rights of freedom and taking another step in the direction of a police state the right way to do it?

Besides ... this is not the first time that this method has been tried ... and, frankly, it has not been shown very effective:

Nebraska and Virginia have used mass DNA testing to try and solve cases, and have reported little to no success. Authorities in Louisiana tested roughly 1,200 DNA samples ... while they DID eventually make an arrest, authorities reported that it was NOT a result of the mass DNA effort.

Might I remind everyone that this is not a cheap method of investigation ... DNA tests are expensive and particularly in this case fails to take into account that, after 3 years, it is quite possible that the person that they are looking for may no longer be in the area.

Why don't we just install a transponder chip sub-dermally on every man, woman, and child in this country that is monitored and recorded 24/7 ... it will eliminate the need for alibies because the police will simply be able to pull up the record of where you were ... and for that mater pull up the record of WHO else was in the area of the victem just before the crime was commited. Never mind the miriad of abuses that it could lead to, never mind the invasion of privacy that this would be. Never mind ANY of that ... it would help solve crimes.

What are you THINKING?

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Don't give up your liberties willingly ... there are always those that are more than willing to take them away. Some will do it with a gun or a knife ... others will do it with a suit and a slick smile telling you that it's in your best intrest.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to my friend Ssark for bringing this story to my attention.

Sources:

CNN

Boston Channel

Bostom Indy Media

CBS