After 13 Years, a Rape Arrest ('John Doe' DNA 'hit')

JSOnline ^ | September 21, 2007 | Derrick Nunnally

[decimon]

Now that we have the technology, or appear to have, to store accurate evidence that theoretically identifies a single individual, the statute of limitations does not mean the same thing exactly.

I agree that the application of the laws should be reviewed in light of improved technology. But I am as wary of this as the other doubtful posters.

It would help this discussion to know what sort of DNA is involved in this case.

[newzjunkey]

While I'm inclined to be glad he's off the street, I find this troubling because as time progresses with these DNA-only warrants, 13 years in this case, it's going to be harder and harder to cross-examine the technicians who performed the DNA testing and ensure the government is legitimately proving its case.

In CA's 2004 general election, we had a DNA database proposed for folks simply arrested for *any* felony. This initiative, Prop 69, passed with over 60% of the vote.

We stand on an increasingly slippery slope.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

I like you more every day! :) You and I have met up on other posts, and we see things through the same eye most times.

I want bad people caught and tried for their crimes. I want them to suffer as much as their victims have; though that NEVER seems to even out, does it?

However, I can CLEARLY see that even a boring Farm Gal like me, one that you wouldn’t pick out of a line-up on any given day, could actually be snared by some form of law enforcement that she may have voted to approve in the past!

It’s scary. I think about this stuff waaaaay too much, LOL! (And, of course, I read waaaaay too my Ayn Rand and George Orwell.)

[Diana in Wisconsin]

I’m certain you’re correct. Having never been a victim of a crime other than a robbery when I wasn’t home, I can’t imagine what she’s felt all these years...though it can’t have been a good, safe feeling.

After we were robbed, I felt that my HOME had been violated, but a wise cop told me that I had no need to be afraid; the perp just wanted things in my home that he could fence for drugs; it wasn’t anything personal.

[wgflyer]

The problem is not the DNA tagging. The problem is due process. When government, or an individual representing it, becomes corrupt then all the wonderful tools used to prosecute bad people become tools to prosecute good people wrongly for political gain. NIfong gave us a great demonstration of this. People must remain ever diligent of their government, no matter how benign they might think it is, but that is not a reason to deny government the tools it needs to perform it’s designated functions. It is, however, a great reason to give corrupt government officials the worst punishment possible.

[ladyjane]

You are wrong about the 3-4 men.

Crystal had the DNA of “at least” four men. Actually the number is higher but for some reason they are afraid to say how many.

A real sperm bank she is. And not prosecuted. Why?

[gracesdad]

As much as I want to see bad guys put away, it seems to me the “government” keeps searching for ways to circumvent protections. MOST of the time, this is to the good, but not always.

[gracesdad]

“MOST of the time, this is to the good, but not always.”

What I meant to say is that when they come up with these new circumventions, the science is usually right, but not always. And there’s so much potential for abuse.

[Dark Knight]

Anybody know what the purpose of a statue of limitations is?

The statutes of limitations do not apply when someone has been charged with a crime. This case is unusual because they were able to have a judge sign off on a “John Doe”. Once that’s done, the “clock” is stopped.

I would imagine the longer times goes on, the problems will be with proving chain of evidence was followed for the evidence of various types. People in LE move, retire, die or become unavailable for various reasons over the years.

DK

[SeaHawkFan]

You are wrong about the 3-4 men. Crystal had the DNA of “at least” four men. Actually the number is higher but for some reason they are afraid to say how many. A real sperm bank she is. And not prosecuted. Why?

Her defense would be pretty simple: "Nifong talked me into pressing charges."

[rednesss]

So if DNA is all it takes to convict someone, then if I wanted to get away with a crime, I would go into a public restroom and collect some samples off of the urinals, plant them where the deed was done, and wait for the UK mentality to take hold here where they want everyone’s DNA entered into a database from birth and voila a match is found. Now the person would be completely innocent but just try proving that, why else would your DNA be on the body huh????

[wgflyer]

That’s a reasonable scenario to worry about. But remember, DNA tagging is just a tool. Tools can be used badly, or with skill. Like I said, due process needs to be scrutinized continually. We don’t really do that in this country much any more unless we have a high profile case (chosen by the MSM) which tugs at the emotions. And then, we often substitute emotion for logic and reasoning, which is as bad as corruption and equally deadly to the wrongly accused.

[ladyjane]

How can she claim Nyfong talked her into pressing charges?

Nifong has claimed under oath that he never talked to her.

[SeaHawkFan]

How can she claim Nyfong talked her into pressing charges? Nifong has claimed under oath that he never talked to her.

Prosecutor or prostitute? Who does one believe? Yhey are both in the same business, f#$king with people.

[ladyjane]

The Duke rape hoax is incredible. The behavior of the Duke president and some of the faculty has been incredible. I thought I knew the worst of it but then I started reading the book by K.C.Johnson called “Until Proven Innocent” and realize that it was a terrible civil rights violation. Why the feds never moved in is unclear. Why Crystal was never prosecuted is unclear.

[SeaHawkFan]

Based on first hand experience, the feds generally have little interest in prosecuting corrupt prosecutors or judges. Career federal prosecutors are generally liberal and won’t prosecute Democrats.

[Publius6961]

Imagine if you were accused of a crime and the people who could alibi you were now dead or had no recollection of the time in question.

All that might have been reasonable and rational 40 years ago, absent any hope of alternative credible evidence, but irrelevant if your DNA evicence is all over victims of violent crimes.

[rednesss]

DNA by itself does not provide any context. I could sneak into your house, collect your DNA, and spread it all over a victim of a violent crime, and they’d find you guilty by your rationale.

[Geritol]

“I would go into a public restroom and collect some samples off of the urinals, plant them where the deed was done, and wait for the UK mentality to take hold here”

The book “Unintended Consequences” has an interesting scene where dna is harvested from the almost innocent and planted where they would never go. Or want to.