|
Is it just me, or is it not blatantly obvious that this wasn't such a good idea???
Quote:
Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Damn. A few questions.
1. How often is this used and what other classes of people have been singled out in a similar way? Do they do this to area red-heads when they're suspects?
2. Who are they kidding when they say, "investigators exhausted traditional law enforcement techniques before turning to the DNA testing?" If they were looking for a cop killer, best believe they'd have their man already.
3. What do they do with the DNA sample after they have crossed you off the suspect list? Does it go straight to their archive so that they have DNA on as many black men as they can get?
4. Why do they call it "voluntary?" If you refuse to submit, doesn't that make you an automatic suspect? I don't think that word is ever appropriate for this type of thing.
TM
|
I should have posted this on the Criminal Procedure Board. While I agree with TMs questions, my head is spinning now.
__________________
KRUSTY
So he's proactive, huh?
EXECUTIVE
Oh, God, yes. We're talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.
MEYER
Excuse me, but "proactive" and "paradigm"? Aren't these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important? Not that I'm accusing you of anything like that.
|
