If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Local6)   Police now swabbing mouths during routine traffic stops in Daytona Beach to find serial killer (with pics)   (local6.com) divider line 280
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

12850 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Feb 2008 at 1:39 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



280 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-02-06 10:41:22 AM
What. The. fark.

4th amendment, anyone?
 
2008-02-06 10:41:46 AM
Isn't that just slightly illegal?
 
2008-02-06 10:44:03 AM
Yeah, that will go over well.

I would tell them if they want a DNA sample, they would have to get it the old fashioned way, on their knees.
 
2008-02-06 10:45:00 AM
They're going to feel silly when they find out McNulty made the whole thing up.
 
2008-02-06 10:49:03 AM
Total legal if the people getting stopped consent.
 
2008-02-06 10:50:02 AM
TOTALLY legal, that is.
 
2008-02-06 10:52:29 AM
KaponoFor3: Total legal if the people getting stopped consent.

Unfortunately, I doubt too many of them are aware that they don't have to consent or are too intimidated to do so.
 
2008-02-06 10:53:59 AM
Rabid Bunnies: Unfortunately, I doubt too many of them are aware that they don't have to consent or are too intimidated to do so.

Probably, but courts have never said that ignorance of the law (or your rights) is a defense
 
2008-02-06 10:54:48 AM
FarkinHostile: Yeah, that will go over well.

I would tell them if they want a DNA sample, they would have to get it the old fashioned way, on their knees.


Thread over. You win.
 
2008-02-06 10:56:18 AM
KaponoFor3: Rabid Bunnies: Unfortunately, I doubt too many of them are aware that they don't have to consent or are too intimidated to do so.

Probably, but courts have never said that ignorance of the law (or your rights) is a defense


You know, except for that whole Miranda thing.

I can't see this really holding up in court, though.
 
2008-02-06 10:59:59 AM
Sir_Farkalot: I can't see this really holding up in court, though.

Perhaps, but they can keep doing it until it gets that far, which very well might be their plan from the start.
 
2008-02-06 11:06:59 AM
Fellows: Sir_Farkalot: I can't see this really holding up in court, though.

Perhaps, but they can keep doing it until it gets that far, which very well might be their plan from the start.


Yeah, but from my extensive "CSI", "The Closer," and "Law & Order" watching experience, I've learned that if they get the guy based on faulty evidence (like illegal or at least suspect search and seziures), none of the evidence they collect after that is of any use. What they need is a sassy Blonde or Ex Marine with anger issues to coerce him into confessing.
 
2008-02-06 11:11:45 AM
wow. how do even think that this is a good thing to do? i'd laugh at the cop so hard if they ever tried something like that
 
2008-02-06 11:13:46 AM
I can't see this really holding up in court, though.

Perhaps, but they can keep doing it until it gets that far, which very well might be their plan from the start.



That's all well and good, but don't think for one second they will throw away all of those DNA samples from the innocent citizens they have. They will store them and compile a library.

I can almost believe that is their true intention in the first place.
 
2008-02-06 11:15:13 AM
Sir_Farkalot: You know, except for that whole Miranda thing.

I can't see this really holding up in court, though.


Two different things -- Miranda is required to be given pre-interrogation, whereas consent is definitely a valid defense to an unlawful search and seizure
 
2008-02-06 11:20:07 AM
FarkinHostile: That's all well and good, but don't think for one second they will throw away all of those DNA samples from the innocent citizens they have. They will store them and compile a library.

I can almost believe that is their true intention in the first place.


Dingdingding!

Wait till they realize that the serial killer sold his car last month and now takes the bus.
 
2008-02-06 11:23:31 AM
Sir_Farkalot: Yeah, but from my extensive "CSI", "The Closer," and "Law & Order" watching experience, I've learned that if they get the guy based on faulty evidence (like illegal or at least suspect search and seziures), none of the evidence they collect after that is of any use. What they need is a sassy Blonde or Ex Marine with anger issues to coerce him into confessing.

Unless of course, the cop concludes you have alcohol on your breath.
 
2008-02-06 11:31:47 AM
Halt! Ihre Papiere bitte!

/Yea. I went there.
 
2008-02-06 11:45:24 AM
my compliance is completely dependent on what the cop is using to swab my mouht with


/runs
 
2008-02-06 11:56:51 AM
KaponoFor3: Sir_Farkalot: You know, except for that whole Miranda thing.

I can't see this really holding up in court, though.

Two different things -- Miranda is required to be given pre-interrogation, whereas consent is definitely a valid defense to an unlawful search and seizure


This is what you said:
Probably, but courts have never said that ignorance of the law (or your rights) is a defense

All I was saying is that some court said that ignorance of your rights WAS a defense, and one valid enough that now cops have to inform you specifically of your rights (and make sure you understand them) before anything you say is admissible in court.

I understand that illegal search and seizure is a different issue. It didn't look like YOU did.

I still think that a good lawyer could probably get the DNA evidence collected at a traffic stop thrown out, though.
 
2008-02-06 12:07:03 PM
Sir_Farkalot: I understand that illegal search and seizure is a different issue. It didn't look like YOU did.

LOL -- OK. I thought it was clear that I was referring to ignorance of the law with regard to searches and seizures. I may just have a slight idea about the differences of the two.
 
2008-02-06 12:19:09 PM
www.rollingout.com

Does Not Consent
 
2008-02-06 12:57:08 PM
Sir_Farkalot: Fellows: Sir_Farkalot: I can't see this really holding up in court, though.

Perhaps, but they can keep doing it until it gets that far, which very well might be their plan from the start.

Yeah, but from my extensive "CSI", "The Closer," and "Law & Order" watching experience, I've learned that if they get the guy based on faulty evidence (like illegal or at least suspect search and seziures), none of the evidence they collect after that is of any use. What they need is a sassy Blonde or Ex Marine with anger issues to coerce him into confessing.


The legal parlance you are referring to is called "the fruit of the poisonous tree". Coerced confessions can be a violation of 5th Amendment rights as well. Either way, you're building yourself an unwinnable case.

FarkinHostile: I can't see this really holding up in court, though.

Perhaps, but they can keep doing it until it gets that far, which very well might be their plan from the start.


That's all well and good, but don't think for one second they will throw away all of those DNA samples from the innocent citizens they have. They will store them and compile a library.

I can almost believe that is their true intention in the first place.


I can't make a THIS big enough. The article said they were using the kits on hookers, now do you really think after Shooty McAsshole gets caught the PD is going to look the other way and destroy all the "evidence" they gathered against people they know are breaking the law?
 
2008-02-06 01:11:43 PM
So when are they going to be able to put the DNA in a computer and come back with what the guy should look like so we can stop this?

Shouldn't they be able to tell the guys race from the DNA, or does it take too long to get those results back?
 
2008-02-06 01:22:16 PM
Comic Book Guy:

I can't make a THIS big enough. The article said they were using the kits on hookers, now do you really think after Shooty McAsshole gets caught the PD is going to look the other way and destroy all the "evidence" they gathered against people they know are breaking the law?


They clearly say they have a DNA profile of him, so why the hell would they be collecting DNA from women? Unless they're just taking it from men using the hookers, and even that is extremely out of line.

What happens if they stop you, ask, and you refuse?
 
2008-02-06 01:29:52 PM
serpent_sky: They clearly say they have a DNA profile of him, so why the hell would they be collecting DNA from women? Unless they're just taking it from men using the hookers, and even that is extremely out of line.

Hoping to get a hit off a mixture of DNA; then question her about her clients.
 
2008-02-06 01:32:58 PM
serpent_sky: They clearly say they have a DNA profile of him, so why the hell would they be collecting DNA from women? Unless they're just taking it from men using the hookers, and even that is extremely out of line.

If you read the article it says:

The DNA kits are also being used in prostitution stings in the area
 
2008-02-06 01:42:44 PM
They're going to feel silly defending themselves in a gigantic class action lawsuit.
 
2008-02-06 01:44:04 PM
Comply, citizen.

/that is all
 
2008-02-06 01:45:18 PM
I have three words for them:

get. a. warrant. (or subpoena is it?)

/I am not a lawer, but I've seen one on TV
 
2008-02-06 01:45:28 PM
FTFA: ""I can tell you that we are working really, really hard," Chitwood said."

Asking for a dollop of spittle every time you pull someone over is "working really, really hard"? That's some mighty fine police work there Lou.
 
2008-02-06 01:45:32 PM
Papers please
 
2008-02-06 01:45:53 PM
Dead for Tax Reasons: wow. how do even think that this is a good thing to do? i'd laugh at the cop so hard if they ever tried something like that

That's a tazerin'
 
2008-02-06 01:46:07 PM
Dear Leo's

DIAF

Thank you,

America
 
2008-02-06 01:46:51 PM
you would have to be a total douchebag to comply with such a request, it's as stupid as consenting to a lie detector test.
 
2008-02-06 01:47:00 PM
They may also just be looking for any way to ID the guy, with no thought to ever having a trial. You know, he gets ID'd and then just sort of ends up as alligator food.

/at least it would be a happy ending
 
2008-02-06 01:47:26 PM
OnlyM3: Papers please

Papiere gefallen
/Zeig!
 
2008-02-06 01:47:33 PM
Jesus Christ. No Gattaca references yet?
 
2008-02-06 01:48:12 PM
YOU WANT TO KNOW HOW I DID THIS ANTON? I NEVER SAVED ANYTHING FOR THE SWIM BACK!

/gattaca. coming soon to a future near you.
 
2008-02-06 01:48:18 PM
This isn't even close to Constitutional. Citizens will not feel free to leave during the stop, regardless of their knowledge of their right to do so. Additionally, the coercive aspect of a traffic stop antecedent to a completely unrelated investigation where a police officer wants you to turn over a part of your person is not to be underestimated. Even if the stop proceeds consensually beyond the issuance of a ticket, there's no way consent to that sort of search can be valid, all things considered.

Run the samples recovered from the crime scene against all other samples you have and can legally run. Determine the killer's ancestry and look for any obvious deformities that would show up in his person.
 
2008-02-06 01:48:25 PM
Luckily, the serial killer who reads this story can't possibly move out of, or stop driving in the immediate area.
 
2008-02-06 01:48:36 PM
A serial killer? In Florida? Unpossible!
 
2008-02-06 01:48:58 PM
umm.. what part of secure in our person do they not understand..
// Bill of Rights last seen living in a van down by the river.
 
2008-02-06 01:49:09 PM
I'm not a big fan of the ACLU, but this is one case where'd I welcome a lawsuit from them. A DNA dragnet is waaaay beyond the pale.
 
2008-02-06 01:49:13 PM
What happens if they stop you, ask, and you refuse?

They wave you on?

Ha ha, just kidding, they get threatening, lie about the law, and ticket you for something ticky-tac if you don't roll over like a little biatch.
 
2008-02-06 01:49:32 PM
Don't swab me bro!!

/Yay, Patriot Act for everyone!!!
//Enjoy!
 
2008-02-06 01:50:41 PM
Wouldn't it be great for them to find him and have a judge throw out the evidence because of an illegal search?
 
2008-02-06 01:51:20 PM
should teach em when a serial killer gets off on a 'technicality' of the violation of his rights...that's insane.
 
2008-02-06 01:51:20 PM
sepent_sky - They clearly say they have a DNA profile of him, so why the hell would they be collecting DNA from women? Unless they're just taking it from men using the hookers, and even that is extremely out of line.

What happens if they stop you, ask, and you refuse?


They also said they believe he has a wife or a girlfriend. So, that could mean they have found some female dna at a scene. Thus, if they find her, she can lead them back to him.

As far as what happens when you refuse, I don't know. It's just one more thing I am adding to my list of "Reasons why I am never going to Florida." It's right after those palmetto bugs.
 
2008-02-06 01:52:32 PM
Another important question here is will they destroy the evidence after the killer is caught? Also, will they run everyone's DNA through a database and solve other crimes?
 
Displayed 50 of 280 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report