I'm so happy for the victims who 15+ years ago reported the incidents to police where I believe there may be just as many victims if not more who were attacked by MN and did not report the incident to police.
However, I couldn't help but hit pause in this story when reading the way MN's DNA sample was collected from him, and I don't doubt his defense is thinking the same.
For example, DNA kit companies such as AncestryDNA, 23andMe, etc., provide a kit user the option whether or not to share their test results in the DNA data base and investigators report they abide by these rules.
I further understand that individual(s) who consented to share their DNA test results and were genetically linked to MN were contacted by investigators, and they pointed to MN as a potential suspect.
Given the suspect's name, authorities began surveilling MN and to obtain his DNA for confirmation testing, they followed him to a Corporate event where they recovered a glass and utensils he was observed using.
And this is where it gets fuzzy for me: IMO, it's one thing to surveil a suspect who wheels his garbage bin out to the street for collection and leaves it on the street all day. A reasonable person has no expectation of privacy when leaving a bin full of their DNA out on the public street.
On the other hand, if you go out to dinner or a catered corporate event, I don't think it reasonable that you would collect your utensils and glassware from the table, stick them in your bag and take them home with you to protect your privacy. Also, you'd probably be charged with theft!
IMO, it's not reasonable to expect another party-- in this case, the FBI, would sneak out your glass and utensils for DNA testing just as it's not reasonable for you to collect your tableware and take it home. In other words, you can't abandon something that is not yours.
It's pretty well established that investigators do not need a warrant to collect a DNA sample from your garbage abandoned on the street-- relying on the property deemed "abandoned" and "no reasonable expectation of privacy" but I think applying the same legal theory to the glassware and utensils here might be pushing the envelope.
It would be devastating to learn this case blown over the collection of MN's DNA without a warrant and/or his consent.
They knew their suspect was a lawyer and this was the best they could do?!
MOO
Nilo’s attorney suggested he may challenge the legality of the FBI’s evidence collection.
“If the government obtained DNA evidence from my client without a search warrant, then the constitutionality of that action will certainly and most vigorously be challenged in court,” Cataldo said.
usaherald.com
