this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
57 points (93.8% liked)

Privacy

1321 readers
1 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not sure I buy it. Police need a warrant to get dna evidence from a suspect, but warrants can and often are contested. If the system had any false positives or wasn't a perfect match a good attorney would be able to argue there are no grounds for the warrant.

If the fuzz had other evidence like an unverified alibi or evidence putting the suspect in the area that would probably be enough for a judge to issue a warrant, but if the dna photo was the only evidence I'd say it's dicey at best if tested.

[–] GetOffMyLan 1 points 1 month ago

Exactly. So this just gives them a potential suspect to investigate. Nothing more. Then they investigate them to get what they need for a warrant. This doesn't get the warrant.