THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (8086)	4/10/2002 12:13:18 PM
From: jcky	Read Replies (1) of 21057

Life is never simple. I really don't understand the hesitancy (or shall I say fear) in implementing another tool in expanding the body of evidence for, or against, a defendant. < If a new test showed a non-matching DNA sample, would that alone prove innocence? It would seem to be powerful exculpatory evidence, but wouldn't it have to be considered in the context of the other evidence? > Of course it should. But there are examples of other tests used in society to determine culpability which has limited application, but nevertheless, serves a useful purpose in the court of law. I'm sure you're aware of ABO blood typing in paternal disputes. Does this test solve all answers in all cases? No. But it does have its application for the right circumstances. Yes. You're telling me that DNA testing has absolutely no, zero, applications in prior convictions. That's silly. You have a much better argument saying that the preservation of previous testable material may be contaminated or subject to degradation from improper storage than pointing to the impracticalities of a new trial. In fact, new evidence demands a new trial.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next