Surreptitious DNA collecting[edit] Police forces may collect DNA samples without the suspects knowledge, and use it as evidence. Legality of this mode of proceeding has been questioned in Australia. In the United States, it has been accepted, courts often claiming that there was no expectation of privacy, citing California v. Greenwood (1985), during which the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home. Critics of this practice underline the fact that this analogy ignores that most people have no idea that they risk surrendering their genetic identity to the police by, for instance, failing to destroy a used coffee cup. Moreover, even if they do realize it, there is no way to avoid abandoning one’s DNA in public.[37] In the UK, the Human Tissue Act 2004 prohibited private individuals from covertly collecting biological samples (hair, fingernails, etc.) for DNA analysis, but excluded medical and criminal investigations from the offence.[38] The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on June 3, 2013, in the case of Maryland v. King that DNA sampling of prisoners arrested for serious crime is constitutional.[3
Posted on: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 04:04:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015