Supreme Court rules inmates don't have a right to DNA tests

[Popeye]

Sure, there's only been 238 men exonerated through DNA testing since 1992...but the SC doesn't seem to think that prisoners have a right to have access to all the possible tools at their disposal to prove their innocence. I mean, how many innocent men are sitting in prison right now?

It was a 5-4 decision, with the usual suspects voting in the majority..Roberts, Scalia, Uncle Clarence, Kennedy and Alito. One, preferably all, but at least one of these fools has to go.

Convicts do not have a right under the Constitution to obtain DNA testing to try to prove their innocence after being found guilty the Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

--------

Mr. Neufeld, a co-founder of The Innocence Project, which works to free wrongly convicted prisoners, told The Associated Press on Thursday that he was disappointed with the ruling.

“There is no question that a small group of innocent people — and it is a small group — will languish in prison because they can’t get access to the evidence,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/us/19scotus.html?hp

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Sure, there's only been 238 men exonerated through DNA testing since 1992...but the SC doesn't seem to think that prisoners have a right to have access to all the possible tools at their disposal to prove their innocence. I mean, how many innocent men are sitting in prison right now?

It was a 5-4 decision, with the usual suspects voting in the majority..Roberts, Scalia, Uncle Clarence, Kennedy and Alito. One, preferably all, but at least one of these fools has to go.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/us/19scotus.html?hp

Well that certainly was a horrible decision; considering that DNA testing wasn't around during the conception of the constitution {but neither was many, many of the things that we currently use as evidence collection} but the law and the law libraries are full of 'NEW & IMPROVED' techniques in evidence gathering.

For crying out loud...this ruling is just wrong on so many fronts!

 

[BigRob]

Sure, there's only been 238 men exonerated through DNA testing since 1992...but the SC doesn't seem to think that prisoners have a right to have access to all the possible tools at their disposal to prove their innocence. I mean, how many innocent men are sitting in prison right now?

It was a 5-4 decision, with the usual suspects voting in the majority..Roberts, Scalia, Uncle Clarence, Kennedy and Alito. One, preferably all, but at least one of these fools has to go.




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/us/19scotus.html?hp

As usual you cherry pick stories and make them sound much worse than the reality actually is. Fact is, under most circumstances, almost all prisoners already have the legal ability to obtain and use DNA in their appeal processes.

 

[GenSeneca]

It was a 5-4 decision, with the usual suspects voting in the majority..Roberts, Scalia, Uncle Clarence, Kennedy and Alito. One, preferably all, but at least one of these fools has to go.

"Conservatives are Racists!" - Progbot Talking Point

Remember how I said these Progs like to call Conservatives racists yet they were the ones who used racial epithets to denigrate black Conservatives? There is yet another example of such behavior...

 

[Popeye]

As usual you cherry pick stories and make them sound much worse than the reality actually is. Fact is, under most circumstances, almost all prisoners already have the legal ability to obtain and use DNA in their appeal processes.

Four states are still without laws that allow for post conviction DNA testing. If even one man sits in prison because of this decision...it's one too many

Peter Neufeld, a director of the project, said Thursday’s decision would have pernicious consequences.

“It’s unquestionable that some people in some states who are factually innocent will not get DNA testing and will languish in prison,” Mr. Neufeld said. “Some of them will die in prison.”

 

[GenSeneca]

Four states are still without laws that allow for post conviction DNA testing. If even one man sits in prison because of this decision...it's one too many

The Nirvana fallacy is the logical error of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives. It can also refer to the tendency to assume that there is a perfect solution to a particular problem.

The perfect solution fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it was implemented.

 

[bododie]

Out of cash and understaffed, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has suspended its faltering effort to analyze DNA evidence from thousands of rape and sexual assault cases....But L.A. County is hardly alone in its predicament. A state legislative budget committee recently recommended that funding for the California Department of Justice lab be slashed by $20 million next fiscal year -- a move that, if approved by lawmakers, would force the lab to stop providing free DNA testing to 47 of the state's 53 county governments.

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-dna23-2009jun23,0,7254608.story?track=rss

Gosh oh golly, does this bother you at all Popeye? How many criminals do you think are going to walk because the failed liberal policies of California, including those which deny citizens the right to defend themselves because the clip in their gun might be illegal in California, have made it even more of a breeding ground for the human trash that it has welcomed with open arms that bankrupted the state? Do you think it is going to be more than 238?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

As usual you cherry pick stories and make them sound much worse than the reality actually is. Fact is, under most circumstances, almost all prisoners already have the legal ability to obtain and use DNA in their appeal processes.

problem is, almost does not equal all. if your going to kill someone, and a dna test could make sure, then it should be done. fact is regardless if the SC says you have a right to it or not, the fact is we should do it when at all possible regardless of "the right"

 

[BigRob]

problem is, almost does not equal all. if your going to kill someone, and a dna test could make sure, then it should be done. fact is regardless if the SC says you have a right to it or not, the fact is we should do it when at all possible regardless of "the right"

DNA tests should be done when they are available. Problem is they are not always an option and it should not be considered a "right" in my view. You do not need DNA to establish guilt, and demanding a test after the fact that might not even be available to "prove your innocence" is just a waste of money and time for all involved.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

DNA tests should be done when they are available. Problem is they are not always an option and it should not be considered a "right" in my view. You do not need DNA to establish guilt, and demanding a test after the fact that might not even be available to "prove your innocence" is just a waste of money and time for all involved.

I would agree in that , but would ask if a DNA test would not be avalible to use to show anything...why would you want it anyway? I mean all it would show is here is your DNA...we dont have any DNA to put it against, thus nothing is learned regardless...that no DNA was found or what have you already would be known, thus not change the outcome...so yes in such cases there is no right to a test that will not be able to do anything....I think we basicly agree on this one.