Category Archives: DNA

Changing an Indiana law that prevents law enforcement officers from taking DNA samples sooner could help Detective Tony Mayhew solve cold cases.

Often new evidence for such cases comes in the form of DNA samples provided by those arrested for unrelated crimes. Current Indiana law allows DNA samples to be taken only when officers have a search warrant, or when someone is convicted of a felony.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week validated the practice of 25 other states, which allow police to obtain samples upon arrest for a felony charge.

Mayhew said sampling DNA upon arrest for felony charges would broaden the list of names in the Combined DNA Index System, the national database of forensic DNA information.

Even with a search warrant, sometimes its hard to get people to comply, Mayhew said.

A bill to allow sampling DNA upon arrest died at an Indiana Senate committee in February.

Such a law would likely provided an onslaught of new samples which could be tested against previously collected evidence across the country.

In Indiana, DNA evidence from more than 3,500 unsolved cases is stored at state police laboratories, Indiana State Polic administrator Kristine Crouch said. Those cases could be solved sooner if Indiana allows for DNA swabbing upon arrest, because even the current likelihood a DNA sample will be matched is high. Crouch said 48 percent of current submissions from Indiana police are matched with criminal evidence.

It would be awesome if we could take DNA at arrest, Indiana State Police Sgt. Dean Marks said.

In 1992, Marks collected DNA samples from the scene where Miami County resident Toni Spicer was murdered. Twenty years later, a DNA match led to an arrest and pending trial.

Continue reading here:
Changing Indiana's DNA swabbing laws could solve more cold cases

WASHINGTON A sharply divided Supreme Court this week cleared the way for police to take a DNA swab from anyone they arrest for a serious crime, endorsing a practice now followed by more than half the states as well as the federal government.

The justices differed strikingly on how big a step that was.

Taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the courts five-justice majority. The ruling backed a Maryland law allowing DNA swabbing of people arrested for serious crimes.

But the four dissenting justices said the court was allowing a major change in police powers, with conservative Justice Antonin Scalia predicting the limitation to serious crimes would not last.

Make no mistake about it: Because of todays decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason, Scalia said in a sharp dissent which he read aloud in the courtroom. This will solve some extra crimes, to be sure. But so would taking your DNA when you fly on an airplane surely the TSA must know the identity of the flying public. For that matter, so would taking your childrens DNA when they start public school.

Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler agreed that theres nothing stopping his state from expanding DNA collection from those arrested for serious crimes to those arrested for lesser ones like shoplifting.

I dont advocate expanding the crimes for which you take DNA, but the legal analysis would be the same, Gansler said. The reason why Maryland chooses to only take DNA of violent criminals is that youre more likely to get a hit on a previous case. Shoplifters dont leave DNA behind, rapists do, and so youre much more likely to get the hit in a rape case.

Twenty-eight states and the federal government now take DNA swabs after arrests. But a Maryland court said it was illegal for that state to take Alonzo Kings DNA without approval from a judge, ruling that King had a sufficiently weighty and reasonable expectation of privacy against warrantless, suspicionless searches under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.

The high courts decision reverses that ruling and reinstates Kings rape conviction, which came after police took his DNA during an unrelated arrest.

Kennedy, who is often considered the courts swing vote, wrote the decision along with conservative-leaning Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas. They were joined by liberal-leaning Justice Stephen Breyer, while the dissenters were the conservative-leaning Scalia and liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Here is the original post:
SUNDAY ISSUE: DNA sampling

DNA sampling advocate hopes W.Va. policy is changed

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week, in a 5-4 decision, that law enforcement officers can collect DNA from swabs from inside a suspect's cheek and it does not amount to an "unreasonable search."

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- A New Mexico woman who wants police to collect DNA as part of their standard booking procedures hopes West Virginia becomes the next state to adopt such a policy.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week, in a 5-4 decision, that law enforcement officers can collect DNA from swabs from inside a suspect's cheek and it does not amount to an "unreasonable search."

The dissenting justices were an unusual coalition of perhaps the Court's three most liberal justices, Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, and its most outspoken conservative, Justice Antonin Scalia.

In West Virginia, DNA swabs are only taken from people convicted of a crime and incarcerated, not those who have simply been arrested. That information is then sent off to the FBI's system of DNA profiles known as the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).

Jayann Sepich, of New Mexico, started the group DNA Saves, a non-profit organization aimed at getting police in all 50 states to collect DNA samples following an arrest of any kind. Twenty-six states have passed such policies.

Sepich also pushed for West Virginia to change its policy in 2008, but proposed legislation never got off the ground. Civil liberty groups cited privacy concerns and feared the practice could lead to increased arrests or government tracking.

Similar bills have been proposed every year since then, primarily by Republican legislators, but have never gotten off the ground.

Sepich said that those privacy concerns are unfounded. A DNA swab doesn't capture the entire DNA strand, but instead just a profile of 13 markers isolated from some 3 billion.

More:
DNA sampling advocate hopes W.Va. policy is changed

WASHINGTON, June 9 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court, in a huge victory for law enforcement, ruled 5-4 last week that taking a DNA sample from prisoners accused of serious crimes does not violate the Constitution.

To the outrage of civil liberties advocates, the ruling was not about defendants who had been convicted of a crime. All 50 states allow DNA sampling of those convicted of a felony. The ruling addressed those who had merely been accused of a serious crime.

The underlying case is fairly stark.

In 2003 a man concealing his face and armed with a gun broke into a woman's home in Salisbury, Md. He raped her. Police were unable to identify him, but they did take a sample of the invader's DNA from the woman.

In 2009 Alonzo King Jr. was arrested in Wicomico County, Md., and charged with first- and second-degree assault for menacing a group of people with a shotgun. "As part of a routine booking procedure for serious offenses, his DNA sample was taken by applying a cotton swab or filter paper -- known as a buccal swab -- to the inside of his cheeks. The DNA was found to match the DNA taken from the Salisbury rape victim."

King subsequently was convicted of the rape.

A Maryland appeals court set aside the conviction, finding that the state act authorizing DNA collection from felony arrestees was unconstitutional.

The narrow U.S. Supreme Court majority reversed the state appeals court.

Writing for the unusual mix of justices in the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said putting a swab into a prisoner's mouth to take a DNA sample, like fingerprinting and photographs, did not violate the Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches.

Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia led the dissent. He was joined by the court's three women -- all liberals -- Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Scalia was so disgusted by the majority opinion he read his dissent from the bench -- something a justice does only when he or she is pretty worked up.

Continue reading here:
Under the U.S. Supreme Court: DNA ruling a big win for police

TRIFECTA -- Gene Police: The Police Can Take Your DNA Without a Warrant
The Supreme Court ruled that the police can collect your DNA without a warrant. How would the Founding Fathers react to this new form of warrantless search? ...

By: Pajamasmedia

Link:
TRIFECTA -- Gene Police: The Police Can Take Your DNA Without a Warrant - Video

Supreme Court Rules Police Can Collect DNA In Arrests
Police are allowed to collect DNA samples from suspects arrested for felonies after a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. DNA greatly improves the justice syst...

By: TheDailyConversation

More:
Supreme Court Rules Police Can Collect DNA In Arrests - Video

Riots in Turkey; Supreme Court says cops can take DNA at arrest; coming problems
Please visit my website: http://www.thestenchoftruth.com Get linked to my blogs, social networking sites and also to my radio show. The radio show airs live ...

By: tenebroust

Here is the original post:
Riots in Turkey; Supreme Court says cops can take DNA at arrest; coming problems - Video

Police allowed to get DNA upon arrest
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled police can take a genetic sample after someone has been arrested.

By: kitvtv

Read the original:
Police allowed to get DNA upon arrest - Video

DNA testing
DNA testing.

By: wish

Excerpt from:
DNA testing - Video

Mod-02 Lec-02 Central Dogma: Basics of DNA, RNA, Proteins
Proteomics: Principles and Techniques by Prof. Sanjeeva Srivastava, Department of Biotechnology, IIT Bombay. For more details on NPTEL visit http://nptel.iit...

By: nptelhrd

Go here to see the original:
Mod-02 Lec-02 Central Dogma: Basics of DNA, RNA, Proteins - Video