DNA evidence has become increasingly critical in the fields of criminal defense and prosecution (not to mention the deciding factor in numerous Law & Order judgments). A jury’s claim to reasonable doubt is effectively crushed by DNA evidence of irrefutably matched samples; additionally, thanks to DNA testing, there have been 261 post-conviction exonerations in the United States since 1989. A national DNA database storing the DNA of every United States resident would, of course, be invaluable to society. Armed with the DNA of every American, criminal investigations would be speedier, require fewer resources and result in fewer wrongful convictions. With the increased likelihood of conviction, crime rates might even drop. It is unlikely, however, that the United States will have a well stocked, non-criminal DNA database anytime soon. As one letter to the editor of the New York Times recently proclaimed, “Such sensitive information is prone to misuse, and one should not have such blind faith in the security of government access to it.”
America’s civil liberty fanatics, if such a phrase is not too oxymoronic, throw up their ACLU membership cards in protest at the mention of universal DNA databases. The ACLU’s website responded to nationwide increased DNA logging with this statement: “This trend not only represents a grave threat to privacy and the 4th Amendment, but it also turns the legal notion that a person is ‘innocent until proven guilty’ on its head.” For most Americans, their rights are understandably sacrosanct; however, logging and recording DNA from convicted criminals, who have served their time, appears to pose no moral quandary.
Earlier this week it was discovered that a September 2009 audit from Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen disclosed that as many as 12,000 convicted sex offenders had failed to turn in their DNA samples to the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. This prompted the usually catatonic correctional bureaucracy to act, and the samples of approximately 7800 sex offenders who had slipped through the cracks were quickly sought out and secured. However, many police hours and administrative hours continue to be spent securing the remaining samples.
While it is incumbent upon all of us to protect everyone’s rights, does the government have the right to secure DNA samples from convicts, who have served their time? In a democracy, we sometimes must uphold the rights of those we abhor the most in order to strengthen the unequivocal force of the Constitution and therefore, our own. When this manhunt was on, were there any letters to editors or legislators in protest?
Sex offenders are among the most maligned members of society: With iPhone apps that allow you to see how many registered sex offenders live in your neighborhood, society has decided that their crimes are so heinous that they have lost not only a supposed constitutional right to their DNA, but to privacy and the much beloved American right to be left alone.
I certainly and fully appreciate the argument for informing people that convicted rapists and pedophiles live next door to them, but the term sex offender, while most associated with these two categories of criminal, extends well beyond them. We must consider the people who fall into this crack in our justice system.
Consider Max Keith; as an 18-year-old high school senior, he came up behind an openly gay fellow student in the school cafeteria, stuck his hand down the back of this kid’s pants and fingered his rectum. The student reported him. Max was suspended for the rest of the school year, not permitted to walk with his graduating class, and was maligned by the entire student body. Though the victim claimed to be satisfied with the school’s response, the District Attorney charged Max with indecent assault and battery. If convicted, Max faces five years in prison and a lifelong membership on the convicted sex offender registry. What Max did was undeniably vicious, but should he pay for it his whole life? He and others in similar situations are labeled sex offenders. Do we defend his right to DNA privacy as vigorously as we defend our own?
The complex questions swirling about DNA databases and their intersection with American’s right to privacy are important ones. The question of when an American is no longer entitled to privacy rights may be even more important. Americans are wrongly convicted every day, and many slapped with the heavy duty life-time label of “sex offender.” What of these harshly convicted people? What of the Max Keith’s, who commit some impulsive and thoughtlessly homophobic yet viciously homoerotic act because of their cretinous 18-year-old brains? I don’t pretend to have the answers to these issues but I do think that we should all consider the broad ramifications of them.
Dennis O’Reilly ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in economics.
