Top court rejects DNA lab test analyst questioning

[bemildred]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Monday made it easier for prosecutors to use expert testimony about DNA laboratory reports at trial without allowing defendants to confront and question the forensic analysts involved in the tests.

By a 5-4 vote, the high court refused to add to a string of decisions since 2004 that have broadly interpreted the constitutional rights of criminal defendants to confront witnesses against them. The case involved a sexual assault in 2000 in Chicago for which the defendant was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

---

In the decision written by Justice Samuel Alito, the court said that the limited DNA testimony at issue in the case did not fall within the protections of the Constitution's "Confrontation Clause" guaranteeing that criminal defendants "be confronted with the witnesses against him."

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the dissenters, said the ruling significantly confused this area of criminal law.



Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/18/us-usa-crime-dna-idUSBRE85H16Z20120618

[Dawson Leery]

1. Anyone who believes this election does not matter is a fool.

[Bandit]

9. America is filled to the brim with fools

Anyone that believes Republicans would be good for the nations economics is even a bigger fool..

[byeya]

2. DNA forensic testing is not foolproof. It is better than fingerprints but since

a relatively small part of a person't DNA is tested, closely related people can have identical strands
which has convicted innocent people.

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Gee, how many 5-4 votes does that make now from this SCOTUS?

[wwytchwood]

4. fascism rules

30 years + of law practice: these judges are lying thru their rotten teeth

[BadGimp]

5. This is Vote Rigging with the Prosecutorial wing of the Judicial System

This is extremely dangerous imo

[bemildred]

6. It's protecting the right to fake a case now and then, is what it is.

You didn't present the lab work, but you did have someone testify based on the lab work, so you don't have to produce the person who did the lab work, like you would have if you had presented the lab work.

Right.

[benld74]

7. Me no unnerstan hi cort no mor,, me must be stoopids r sumtin rite?!?

[zeemike]

8. Hey we are all stupid now.

That is why when they, one by one, take our rights from us and all we can do or say about it is WTF.

[happyslug]

10. Here is the actual Court Opinion

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-8505.pdf