Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

USA DNA Tests - A Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • USA DNA Tests - A Question

    I was watching a programme about serial killer Faryion Wardrip, and there came a point in the investigation when the police needed a sample of his DNA to compare it with samples left on two of the victims. However, the police didn't simply obtain a court order forcing him to give a sample. I'm wondering why. Was there some law that prevented this?

    Ironically, they obtained a sample from him by subterfuge, without his knowledge, and I was sure that the programme would go on to say that this was ruled inadmissible, for some obscure legal reason. But it stood up.

    I don't see why they couldn't just order him to provide a sample.

  • #2
    It was the 90s in Texas. They didn't add rules on DNA gathering by court order in criminal cases until after this case, as I recall they made the first of those rules the same year.
    As for how they did get the DNA it has long been held in the US that there is no expectation of privacy with trash or any item one willingly gives up, it was the most common means of DNA gathering in many states for a long while.
    I’m often irrelevant. It confuses people.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks Shaggy.

      Comment


      • #4
        You need to show probable cause in order to get a warrant to compel a DNA test. I don't know what the evidence against the guy was, but there must be sufficient to show probable cause, otherwise you can't just force someone via court order to give a DNA sample. It's considered self-incrimination and is protected by our 5th amendment right.

        Let all Oz be agreed;
        I need a better class of flying monkeys.

        Comment


        • #5
          DNA is not covered by the 5th Amendment. Like fingerprints, DNA is non-testimonial evidence so self incrimination does not apply.
          I’m often irrelevant. It confuses people.

          Comment


          • #6
            I believe that the Supreme Court ruling on that only applies after the person has been arrested. If the person hasn't actually been arrested (and an arrest required probable cause) then they can't compel a DNA sample.

            I could be wrong though, the Courts are doing away with our rights in favor of a police state more and more.

            Let all Oz be agreed;
            I need a better class of flying monkeys.

            Comment


            • #7
              A court order when needed, which is rarer than ever these days, is to fulfill 4th ammendment unreasonable search and seizure issues. Which is why police rarely bother with them and instead will just dig through your trash.

              I did type that out earlier but I'm using my phone. It hates me and sometimes things I type disappear after hitting post. Should have double checked, my bad. Bastard phone.
              Last edited by Shaggyrand; 10-09-2015, 06:52 AM. Reason: The earlier stated jerkwad phone.
              I’m often irrelevant. It confuses people.

              Comment

              Working...
              X