Interesting People mailing list archives
DNA Evidence Tossed, State Supremes to Take Case
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 18:31:19 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Randall <rvh40 () insightbb com> Date: October 15, 2005 5:41:29 PM EDT To: Dave <dave () farber net> Subject: DNA Evidence Tossed, State Supremes to Take Casehttp://www.knoxnews.com/kns/local_news/article/ 0,1406,KNS_347_4159865,00.html
Legality of DNA match disputed Knox judge halts rape trial, state Supreme Court to hear appeal By JAMIE SATTERFIELD, satterfield () knews com October 15, 2005 A Knox County judge on Friday called a halt to the upcoming trial of Bruce Warren Scarborough, a suspect in several rapes of University of Tennessee students. Criminal Court Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz _issued a stay of prosecution efforts to allow time for an appeal to the state Supreme Court on whether Scarborough's rights were violated when his blood was taken and his DNA profile entered into a _state database that ultimately linked him to a series of attacks on University of Tennessee coeds in _1997. The state's high court has agreed to hear the appeal. The court's eventual ruling will be a landmark decision, as Tennessee's method of collecting blood from felons for use in a DNA database has never been legally tested. Scarborough had been set to stand trial Oct. 31 in one of five rapes of which he is accused. Scarborough, a career criminal, was serving time in prison for the sexual assault of a Blount County woman when, in 2002, a random run through the state's DNA database linked him to the UT attacks. His blood had been taken for DNA analysis when he was sent to prison four years earlier. His attorney, Assistant Public Defender John Halstead, is challenging the constitutionality of that blood collection. Scarborough was not a suspect in the UT rapes when his blood was taken. He also was not a suspect when the DNA match was made. That means police had no probable cause to take his blood, a fact that normally would lead a judge to toss out that evidence as a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from "unreasonable" searches and seizures. But Scarborough had not been singled out for blood collection and testing. All convicted felons are required under state law to submit blood for the DNA database. They can refuse, but doing so will deprive them of so-called good behavior credits and even parole. In a ruling earlier this year, the state Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that the state's method of collecting felons' blood was not unconstitutional. The court opined that prisoners do not have the same privacy rights guaranteed the general public. The state Supreme Court has not yet decided when it will hear the case, but Halstead has said it likely will be January before oral arguments are held. Jamie Satterfield may be reached at 865-342-6308. -- "There comes a time when every man feels the urge to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats."-- H.L. Mencken
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- DNA Evidence Tossed, State Supremes to Take Case David Farber (Oct 15)