“Your DNA can be used against you in court”

The US Supreme Court refused to appeal the decision of a lower court in Maryland, whose verdict was based on a study of the defendant’s DNA. A prisoner serving a life sentence claimed that the charge was unlawful because he did not sign permission to work with his DNA.

Someone Glenn Raynor was convicted by a Maryland court in 2009 of rape charges. The charge was based on DNA samples of the defendant, which he categorically refused to provide to the police for research. Then the agents after interrogating Raynor collected sweat samples from the chair on which he sat during the procedure and used them to confirm guilt. The match was complete. Raynor, with the help of lawyers, appealed to the US Supreme Court, claiming that the evidence was obtained illegally because he did not give consent to the collection of biomaterials.

The judges refused to consider the case. The motivation is simple: if DNA was obtained without the direct removal of biomaterials, then this is the same way of identifying a person as fingerprints or facial features. The Fourth Amendment to the United States, guaranteeing that items to be seized in a search warrant were not violated.

In connection with this incident, law professor Byron Varnken asks the question : “If the mobile phone of a suspect in a crime is in the hands of the investigation, then the police cannot examine its contents without a special warrant. But then it turns out that the technical device has a higher level of privacy than a person whose DNA was obtained without his consent and without a court decision? ”