Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The bill of rights is far more important than this one case. The police (and the crime lab) in Phoenix have a documented history of lying to make cases of public interest go away. That’s dangerous and should concern you. The bill of rights doesn’t go into the trash because a crime is heinous. Some things are worse than unsolved crime, like not having a bill of rights. No one is defending rape. This case could have been solved without violating the bill of rights.
Sorry - I'm not buying that, and yes I live in the Phoenix area. And I rather doubt that you are the constitutional expert that you thing you are. You are clearly hoping the accused goes free for reasons that I can't possibly understand.
If the warrant was bad (and it was bad), then the DNA will be tossed & the perp will walk - this case will go to the supremes - just based on the fact that DNA collection via a general warrant with no specific suspicion or evidence towards a specific person.
The Phoenix PD even undermined their own case regarding "access to the patient" by posting an army of officers at every entrance when the news story broke. If the facility was "secure", and no one except employees had access to the patients, then there was no need for cops everywhere.. Bottom line, the facility was not secure & "it must have been an employee" was just a guess, thats not enough of a basis for a warrant.
The British used "general warrants" - we had a revolution over it & created a bill of rights to prevent the government from issuing warrants like that. So it's definitely a big deal, and a real problem.
The Phoenix crime lab had several “experts” claiming this guy’s gun was a 100% ballistics match to the bullets found at several freeway shootings. Then they had to let him go, and pay him.
The tests may or may not be reliable, the police and prosecutors aren’t anywhere near 100% reliable.
The payout for the wrongful accusation was only a couple of months ago..
who got fired?
who got reprimanded?
who had any negative actions taken against them for lying?
The Phoenix crime lab had several “experts” claiming this guy’s gun was a 100% ballistics match to the bullets found at several freeway shootings. Then they had to let him go, and pay him.
The tests may or may not be reliable, the police and prosecutors aren’t anywhere near 100% reliable.
The payout for the wrongful accusation was only a couple of months ago..
who got fired?
who got reprimanded?
who had any negative actions taken against them for lying?
No one.
That’s a problem.
sorry, but that's just a red herring, and factually unrelated to the nursing home issue. As has been pointed out to you, parental DNA testing is pretty much a slam dunk.
Again, I ask why you are so eager to allow the accused to go free?
The bill of rights is far more important than this one case. The police (and the crime lab) in Phoenix have a documented history of lying to make cases of public interest go away. That’s dangerous and should concern you. The bill of rights doesn’t go into the trash because a crime is heinous. Some things are worse than unsolved crime, like not having a bill of rights. No one is defending rape. This case could have been solved without violating the bill of rights.
Sure, it could have. Eventually. Meanwhile; the probability was strong that the sexual predator who had impregnated this woman was a person employed in the healthcare industry.
Case in point; the man arrested was not only still working in healthcare but was still working at Hacienda ... and was on duty when he was arrested. In a facility that specializes in caring for severely disabled persons under the age of 45, many of whom are nonverbal.
As far as we have been told; the letter of the law was followed with the proper warrants & court orders in place. Biological evidence does not just get taken to a crime lab like drugs or guns or would; there is a chain of custody involved that ends at usually a state or federal forensics lab.
What other methods of investigation would you suggest; given that voluntary dna analysis would have been less viable in court than the evidence collected under a warrant?
Sure, it could have. Eventually. Meanwhile; the probability was strong that the sexual predator who had impregnated this woman was a person employed in the healthcare industry.
Case in point; the man arrested was not only still working in healthcare but was still working at Hacienda ... and was on duty when he was arrested. In a facility that specializes in caring for severely disabled persons under the age of 45, many of whom are nonverbal.
As far as we have been told; the letter of the law was followed with the proper warrants & court orders in place. Biological evidence does not just get taken to a crime lab like drugs or guns or would; there is a chain of custody involved that ends at usually a state or federal forensics lab.
What other methods of investigation would you suggest; given that voluntary dna analysis would have been less viable in court than the evidence collected under a warrant?
I do not think that DNA given voluntarily would be a problem as long as the chain of evidence was preserved.
I do not think that DNA given voluntarily would be a problem as long as the chain of evidence was preserved.
Yes; the chain of custody has historically been the most contested factor in appeals for convictions resulting from DNA evidence. The reason I said that a voluntary DNA sample might be less viable is because I couldn’t actually find any precedent setting cases involving improper chain of custody after a warrant was obtained.
I think if an agency goes to the trouble of securing a warrant, that they will be less likely to goof up with the evidence; as far as what I can find, at least.
Still wish I knew what the poster meant by “This case could have been solved without violating the bill of rights.”, because he’s insinuating that a court ordered DNA paternity test is a violation of rights.
Yes; the chain of custody has historically been the most contested factor in appeals for convictions resulting from DNA evidence. The reason I said that a voluntary DNA sample might be less viable is because I couldn’t actually find any precedent setting cases involving improper chain of custody after a warrant was obtained.
I think if an agency goes to the trouble of securing a warrant, that they will be less likely to goof up with the evidence; as far as what I can find, at least.
Still wish I knew what the poster meant by “This case could have been solved without violating the bill of rights.”, because he’s insinuating that a court ordered DNA paternity test is a violation of rights.
If you look at the history of DNA cases, the supremes have said that it's okey-dokey to follow a suspect around until they discard something & obtain DNA from the trash. That's ok because the police actually have a small number of suspects that they have developed some sort of suspicion about. They could have obtained this suspect's DNA by that method. No one gets involuntarily probed by the government.
The warrant was unreasonable because there was no suspicion attached to each person searched. The police were fishing. They had "a large number of suspects" - according to them, and they used this warrant to conduct an unreasonable (forced) search of everyone's DNA. They didn't have a reason beyond "someone in this room did it", which is great logic if you're a 2nd grade teacher - but not enough evidence for a government agent to obtain a warrant.
The standard for a warrant application is that the person asking for it has a "reasonable and articulable" suspicion that the individual (not the group) committed a crime - and that it's "more likely than not" to produce evidence of a crime. You can't obtain a warrant to search a group of people. If you can't narrow your scope down to one person, you don't have reasonable suspicion - you're fishing & taking a shortcut.
In this case, you had visitors, family members, nurses, aides, and an untold (but large) number of people who were expected to be in the building, and an unknown number of people who could have easily entered the building through multiple unsecured doors. The police knew this DNA test was a long-shot, because they both asked for the public's help and posted officers at all the doors when the story broke. So even the "someone in this room" theory didn't hold water.
This case will go to the supremes & they'll likely tie themselves into a pretzel trying to both keep the "perp" in jail and preserve some semblance of the bill of rights - but they won't be able to say it's fine to authorize a warrant against a group of people- because that is by definition a "general warrant" and there's over 200 years of legal precedent against that very thing. The most conservative justices are the least likely to tolerate this kind of shortcut, because it's so clearly and plainly not allowed under the bill of rights.
As stated by justice Scalia, (in a DNA case)
"“Solving unsolved crimes is a noble objective, but it occupies a lower place in the American pantheon of noble objectives than the protection of our people from suspicionless law-enforcement searches. The Fourth Amendment must prevail.”
This is why abortion exists. Also, this is such an insane bizarre story that it makes you lose faith in humanity.
Ironically enough, this man was a married "Christian."
Quote:
Originally Posted by gentlearts
So, what is to become of the baby? If this happened to my daughter, I’d consider it a blessing to have the baby, but of course, I don’t know the family circumstances.
A child conceived through rape of an incapacitated person is a blessing?
No, it's abhorrent and repugnant. The child is a product of a crime and was involuntarily thrown into a life that will be very difficult. You know, considering the mother is incapacitated and the father will be in jail for a very long time.
Sorry - I'm not buying that, and yes I live in the Phoenix area. And I rather doubt that you are the constitutional expert that you thing you are. You are clearly hoping the accused goes free for reasons that I can't possibly understand.
That poster seems to have bias against vulnerable patients, to the extent they should not be protected against abuse because it might upset some staff worker. The poster also doesn't seem to understand that chaperones in doctors offices are there for the protection of both the patient and medical personnel.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
