US - Supreme Court...Inmates Don't Have a Right To DNA Tests

[Wudge]

"Prisoners do not have a constitutional right to DNA testing after their conviction, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday, even though the technology provides an “unparalleled ability both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty.’’

In the court’s first examination of how to treat the rapidly evolving field of biological testing, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for a majority that said it is up to the states and Congress to decide who has a right to testing that might prove innocence long after conviction.

The “challenges DNA technology poses to our criminal justice systems and our traditional notions of finality’’ are better left to elected officials than federal judges, Roberts wrote in the 5-to-4 decision."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...t_rejects_inmates8217_right_to_have_dna_test/

Courts want finality. They do not want to know about wrongful convictions.

 

[ziggy]

Well I think each state can pass a law if they want to that give prisoners in their state prisons the right.

It is a huge burden on the taxpayers for sure and should be done on a case by case basis and not simply by request or "right".

It was a close decision and although I looked at it at first and thought, WHAT??? - I understand it better thinking of the "floodgates" argument and all of the problems that broad determination could bring.

Locally we need to pressure DAs etc. to do the right thing in certain cases. People need to pay more attention to their community problems than they do Paris Hilton. This doesn't need to be a SC decision, imo.

 

[kgeaux]

Well I think each state can pass a law if they want to that give prisoners in their state prisons the right.

It is a huge burden on the taxpayers for sure and should be done on a case by case basis and not simply by request or "right".

It was a close decision and although I looked at it at first and thought, WHAT??? - I understand it better thinking of the "floodgates" argument and all of the problems that broad determination could bring.

Locally we need to pressure DAs etc. to do the right thing in certain cases. People need to pay more attention to their community problems than they do Paris Hilton. This doesn't need to be a SC decision, imo.

Ziggy, there is at least one free man walking around today who petitioned the courts for YEARS---more than a decade---to test the DNA from the crime scene against his own and HE was WILLING TO PAY!!! He was denied his request repeatedly, and when finally he was able to get permission to test, sure enough it wasn't him.

I really don't understand the court's decision. We need to make every effort to be sure no innocent person is rotting away in prison, sitting on Death Row. Just reading about how many were wrongly convicted makes me believe that we have probably already executed innocent people in USA.

The “challenges DNA technology poses to our criminal justice systems and our traditional notions of finality are better left to elected officials than federal judges, Roberts wrote in the 5-to-4 decision.

And it is disgusting for Justice Roberts to call upon our TRADITIONAL NOTIONS OF FINALITY as a reason for his decision. We used to have a tradition of slavery here, but that was WRONG. I firmly believe it is equally as wrong to deny any man the right to prove his innocence. When the states WON'T allow testing, this decision leaves innocently convicted people with no recourse.