Open Wide Please........

In a landmark decision today the Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 vote, ruled that the police could take a DNA sample from anyone arrested for a "serious or violent crime". It was a strange cadre of justices ruling in the affirmative including liberal Stephen Breyer and schizophrenic Anthony Kennedy. Scalia voted with the liberals. Go figure.

Now before you nod off let's think about this. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Everyone agrees that this decision is going to help protect the innocent from wrongful conviction. It is also going to convict the guilty easier. If that is as far as it goes maybe it's a good thing.

But wait. Who decides what a serious crime is? Will this DNA database be perpetual or will your sample be destroyed if you are exonerated? As damning as DNA evidence is would the fact that your DNA is at or near a crime result in an almost certain conviction? We leave our DNA behind all the time so it's proximity to a crime is a possibility.

It's a tough question and the Supreme Court's decision is going to have to address some of the above concerns in future rulings. But for now I think the police will need to be watched. There is a tendency in law enforcement to overreach in their zeal to solve a crime. This, as well as tunnel vision by prosecutors have resulted in far too many wrongful convictions. It should be just as important to exonerate the innocent as convict the guilty!

The burden of proof still lies with the state. A suspect is still innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. The defendant cannot be forced to testify against himself. I am wondering if this is going to result in a shift in the defendant having to prove his innocence. Time will tell but the canary in the mine shaft may be Scalia voting with Sotomayor. He may be on to something....