Winston-Salem Police Chief Scott Cunningham believes the benefits of the DNA Database Act of 2010, which was signed into law by Gov. Beverly Perdue on July 15, far outweighs the concerns raised by civil liberties groups like the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina.
“We believe that this law will assist the Winston-Salem Police Department and all police departments in the state to clear cases that are pending,” Cunningham said in an e-mail.
The law requires state law enforcement officials to collect DNA from cheek swabs taken from suspects arrested for a broad spectrum of offenses — everything from murder to cyberstalking. Collected DNA is compared to a statewide DNA database to identify suspects wanted in other cases, “and thus allow us to charge people for other crimes they committed,” Cunningham said.
Jennifer Rudinger, executive director of the ACLU of North Carolina, said the improved ability of law enforcement to clear cold cases could come at the expense of citizens’ constitutional protections.
“This new law creates an end run around the Fourth Amendment and flies in the face of the presumption of innocence by allowing law enforcement to take DNA without a search warrant from all individuals who are arrested —but not convicted — of many felonies and even some misdemeanors,” said Rudinger.
The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution guards against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Cunningham acknowledged the legitimate privacy concerns pertaining to the new law, but cited built-in safeguards that protect the rights of arrestees.
“This law may eliminate a person from even being charged or going through the trial process if the evidence isn’t a match,” Cunningham said. “This alone is a very worthwhile and beneficial reason to implement the law. It is our system’s belief that it is better to let 100 guilty [people] go free than imprison one innocent person. This law can add clarity to the issue and possibly avoid convicting an innocent person.”
Other built-in safeguards include a provision in the law that if a suspect is found to be innocent, their DNA profile is removed from the state database and destroyed.
The new law takes effect on Feb. 1, 2011. In the meantime, the Winston-Salem Police Department will explore the various facets of the new law to ensure it exercises the best possible procedures to safeguard the rights of all citizens, Cunningham said.
5 comments:
Woefully incomplete. What happens to the DNA profiles of innocent people shared with other jurisdictions?
Stumped?
Brian,
In response to your query about my blog post on the DNA collection law:
The statute reads as follows:
"The State Bureau of Investigation shall remove a person's DNA record, and destroy
any DNA biological samples that may have been retained, from the State DNA Database and
DNA Databank if both of the following are determined pursuant to subsection (g) of this
section:
(1) As to the charge, or all charges, resulting from the arrest upon which a DNA
sample is required under this section, a court or the district attorney has
taken action resulting in any one of the following:
a. The charge has been dismissed.
b. The person has been acquitted of the charge.
Page 4 H1403 [Ratified]
c. The defendant is convicted of a lesser-included misdemeanor offense
that is not an offense included in subsection (d) or (e) of this section.
d. No charge was filed within the statute of limitations, if any.
e. No conviction has occurred, at least three years has passed since the
date of arrest, and no active prosecution is occurring."
There are strict provisions for the sharing of DNA profiles in the SBI database. The law isn't clear on this point, but common sense would dictate that the state wouldn't share sensitive DNA information with other states unless there was a conviction.
So the law may be woefully incomplete, but my reporting is not.
Sincerely,
Keith
Keith, I think you meant Roch.
Keith, meet Roch Smith Jr.
Post a Comment