Government should not have our dna

The news brings almost daily affirmation of the potential of forensic science,
generally, and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) profiling, in particular, to aid criminal investigations and exculpate the wrongfully convicted. The case of Jerry
Buck Inman, a registered sex offender in Florida and resident of Tennessee, is
illustrative. In June 2006, he was arrested in Tennessee in connection with the
kidnapping, rape, and murder of a Clemson University student in South Carolina after DNA evidence collected at the crime scene was matched to his pro-
files in DNA databases maintained by the states of Florida and North Carolina
(FDLE 2006).
The ability of DNA evidence to place persons at crime scenes with near
certainty is broadly accepted by criminal investigators, courts, policymakers,
and the public. In response to this premise, numerous law enforcement agencies
have established “cold case” units to use forensic evidence to investigate longunsolved serious crimes (Kirsch 2006) and have instituted policies calling for
the collection and preservation of forensic evidence from many types of crime
scenes. Court systems are generally accepting of the probative value of DNA
evidence (Palermo 2006). As a result, legislators in all 50 states have established
DNA databases and have gradually widened the categories of offenders and suspects whose DNA profiles may be stored. Despite that, the public safety benefits

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.