[ SECRET POST #2659 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2659 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 062 secrets from Secret Submission Post #380.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Sasuga Jezebel

[whositwhatsit]

It's a huge problem, potentially. Among the reasons:

a) Governments do not always do what they are supposed to do, so even promises to get rid of the info once someone is "cleared" is no guarantee that that actually happens.
b) DNA testing is not actually infallible, must as TV would sometimes lead one to believe otherwise.
c) There is potential for one's DNA to be in the wrong place at the wrong time for COMPLETELY innocent reasons and for that to turn into a wrongful conviction.
d) While totally aware that this is a French case in question, at least from a U.S.-based, 4th amendment perspective, one's DNA is part of one's bodily sanctity and thus protected against unreasonable search and seizure, meaning that the burden is on the GOVERNMENT to meet a certain threshold of cause before being permitted to violate that without an individual's permission. I happen to believe that this is an important protection for people against the government even if a person has never and will never do anything that would make it an issue. I don't know enough about French law to know if this is prosecutorial overrreach or completely within the realm of acceptable actions as far as the current legal framework.