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 woman who was raped is a member of the San Carlos Apache Tribe.
Nell has a point. If a custody fight ensues with the rape victim's father's family, the tribe may step in per the Indian Child Welfare Act instead the matter being resolved in a regular court.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 02-06-2019 at 03:44 PM..
It' not about a technical flaw, the court debate will center around the constitutionality of collecting DNA from all male staff members, who had no choice and individually were not under suspicion due to any sort of evidence that they committed a crime.. The argument will center around whether it's illegal search and seizure under the Constitution.
Again, for how long the defendant can argue that? Sooner or later he will leave his DNA on a napkin, trash bin, barber floor, etc.
I don't get how long you can argue about "how" the DNA evidence was collected and get to walk free..
If the evidence to convict somebody is, for example, an illegally tapped conversation, or illegally obtained files from his house, then I see the point, as these evidences would never been able to be used again as they are, let say, 'unique'. You can't go back in time and get a warrant to record that same conversation, or to get those same files.
But DNA is not a 'one time only' evidence. You can argue that a particular DNA sample can't be used on trial because there are issues with its collection or handling. However, that doesn't prevent to use other samples, either obtained within the confines of the law, or by collecting the DNA the suspect and the baby 'shed' all day long.
By your logic, the government would have the "right" to seize everyone's DNA, wth no attached suspicion, and by force if necessary. That just doesn't jive with "the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure".
The government can lawfully pick up your discarded trash & test for DNA, and use those test results as "probable cause" to obtain a legitimate warrant. The government in this case, chose not to do any footwork, investigation, or develop any actual suspects - and took the shortcut of demanding the DNA of "a large number of suspects" - hoping to get lucky, not based on any reasonable, articulated suspicions. "Somebody in this room probably did it" isn't a reasonable suspicion.. It certainly *could* be cause for the police to investigate the "large number of suspects" & even collect a large amount of trash for testing.. Taking the shortcut crosses a line, and a very important one.
The resolution of one criminal case doesn't justify stripping away the rights of 350 million citizens.
There is nothing more personal and private than your DNA - it is *you*. There is data contained in your DNA that could very easily be horrifically abused in a "free market" , much less in a society where many would just love love love the opportunity to sort and discard the "undesirables" from the herd, using a "quick, easy, painless" collection of data as an excuse to make it's collection mandatory.
The government does not have, and has never had the "right" to solve every crime, by any means necessary. There are limits, clearly disclosed in our bill of rights & they were put there by folks who knew that reserving those rights as sacred would absolutely result in guilty men going free. Better that than having "general warrants", as the British imposed on the colonists.
The most damning evidence that there was no reasonable suspicion of any particular individuals were the statements and actions of the police - asking the public for help, posting many officers at all of the doors of the facility (proving how insecure the facility was) & the statements that there were lots of suspects..
Tossing out all the rules because *this* case is heinous means those rules (protections) are just so much bull****. The bill of rights doesn't have any clauses stating "unless the crime was particularly awful & the public wants some blood". The constitution, unlike city-data - protects against mob-rule, lynching, and witch-burnings.
I suspect it will be quite a while before it goes to trial.
Wow, did you see this, at the end of the article? This is the CEO who quit in mid-January. Turns out, he'd been very controversial for a long time, before quitting.
Quote:
Hacienda's former CEO William Timmons kept his job despite years of sexual harassment and bullying complaints.
Wow, did you see this, at the end of the article? This is the CEO who quit in mid-January. Turns out, he'd been very controversial for a long time, before quitting.
Yes I saw that. Lots of issues with that place. Several MDs have also resigned, etc. I used to have a step-daughter (she passed away in 2016) that was in various types of custodial care her entire adult life, and afaik she always was attended to by females. She was not comatose, like the victim in this case, and could communicate okay, but was still at risk for abuse. We need to do better for our most vulnerable.
I live in the Phoenix area, so this case is in the news almost every day.
It would’ve been more than just the male nurses, it would’ve included housekeeping and maintenance as well since they all have access to patient rooms.
It is a slippery slope. I was just watching a 2020 Friday about them catching a serial killer. Towards the end they thought they knew who it was but needed DNA to be sure. So they used DNA from a Pap smear his daughter had gotten at her last exam. Without her knowledge or permission. I am glad they got the guy, but it is a very slippery slope.
Wow!
Now I’m wondering if maybe they didn’t also do ethnicity testing, along with the mothers, to cross reference & narrow it down by race first? Maybe they just told the media they were testing every man to give an illusion of time or to avoid alerting the guy that they were on to him?
It occurs to me that they could have already known that they were looking for a black man (Haitian, in this case) & that there might be more to this story behind the warrants.
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.
