【NPR新闻】最高法院规定逮捕后可以采集DNA(3/3)
The court ruled Monday that police can routinely take DNA samples frompeople who are arrested but not yet convicted of a crime. The ruling
compared DNA sampling to photographing and fingerprinting suspects when
they are booked.
Hints:
Justices Ginsburg
Sotomayor
Kagan
Marcus Brown
Maryland
Irv Gornstein
Georgetown Law School
Boston University
Tracey Maclin
http://t1.g.hjfile.cn/listen/201306/201306060834312387449.mp3Make no mistake about it, he warned. After today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you're arrested rightly or wrongly. But the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would not have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection.
Joining him in dissent were three of the court's liberals: Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan. The dissent notwithstanding, law enforcement was jubilant at the victory. Marcus Brown, superintendent of the Maryland State Police, said he expects the remaining 22 states to now adopt laws like Maryland's.
I really can't see how other states won't. We view it sort of as the modern fingerprint.
But he acknowledged, as did others, that the DNA tests are used to solve cold cases. Irv Gornstein, executive director of the Supreme Court Institute at Georgetown Law School, spent 29 years in the Justice Department.
I think it's a big deal for governments in general that are trying to solve cold cases because if the court had gone the other way, it would have significantly restricted the current program that's in effect in the federal government and most of the states.
Boston University Law Professor Tracey Maclin called the notion of using DNA to identify arrestees hard to swallow.他警告说，毫无疑问，在今天的决议生效之后，不管你的被捕对错与否，你的DNA都会被取样并输入国家数据库。但那些写下我们的自由宪章的骄傲的先生们，是不会急于张开大嘴来接受皇家检阅的。法院中另外与他同样持有异议的三位开明派是：Ginsburg，Sotomayor和Kagan法官。尽管有反对意见，法律实施部门还是对这个胜利表示欢迎的。马里兰州警方负责人说，他希望其它的22个州能像马里兰州一样，通过这条法律。“我实在看不出来其它州会有多么的不想接受这一法律条款，我们认为它就像是一种新型的指纹记录一样。”但他也认为，正如其他人所说，DNA测试是用来解决一些悬案的。Irv Gornstein，这位在乔治敦法律学校中最高法院研究所的执行主任，已经在司法系统中工作了29年了。他表示：“总的来说，我认为这是政府在寻求解决棘手案件的道路上非常重要的一件事。因为如果法院做出了另一种选择的话，那将会严重限制联邦政府和绝大多数州政府中现有的已经生效的法律程序。”而波士顿大学法律系教授Tracey Maclin则表示，这种使用DNA来判断被捕者是否有罪的方式，实在无法让人接受。
——译文来自: hawkinmoon
页:
[1]