Topic Tuesday #46 2013/06/04 - "Book'em Dano"
...And make sure you swab his mouth for a DNA sample.
Sounds a little more ominous now doesn't it? But why is that? First, the news:
Says all I really need to know in that sentence. It passed the high seat by a slim 5:4 margin with a strong dissenting opinion by Judge Scalia. As always, I encourage you to take a look and think about the issue for yourselves.
What I want to look at is what our normal baseline is right now for the "booking process" and the Fourth Amendment.
While going through the booking process, the following should be expected:
- Mug Shots
- Fingerprints
- A search
- Routine questions on background information (name, address, etc.)
If your case begins with a court appearance and not an arrest, you may still be required to appear at the police station for a book-and-release procedure.
Most jails will give out booking information (arrest date, bail, visiting information, the location, the court date, charges and booking number). Generally, you'll be asked for the defendant's full name and birth date. Keep the booking number for future reference.
As you can see, once you are in police custody, very little is sacred. You can plead the Fifth Amendment and maintain your Miranda Rights, however, you are still subject to a physical search, up to cavity search...
A note on Miranda rights, since they are thrown about so readily: 1966 Miranda v. Arizona. The ruling states:
...The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he/she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says will be used against that person in court; the person must be clearly informed that he/she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he/she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent him/her.
Further: On June 1, 2010, in deciding the Berghuis v. Thompkins case, the United States Supreme Court declared that criminal defendants who have been read the Miranda rights (and who have indicated they understand them and have not already waived them), must explicitly state during or before an interrogation begins that they wish to be silent and not speak to police for that protection against self-incrimination to apply. If they speak to police about the incident before invoking the Miranda right to remain silent, or afterwards at any point during the interrogation or detention, the words they speak may be used against them if they have not stated they do not want to speak to police.
The lesson here is say as little as possible until you see legal council, even if you are innocent. Don't be a jerk about it, but better safe than sorry.
OK enough about that, now on to the Constitution. For completeness:
Amendment 4: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I imagine that the issue that is primarily irritating is "the right of the people to be secure in their persons". It's a fine line. You would already have your finger prints put on file, your picture taken (without make up in most cases), and... there is that search...
So what's the big deal about having another piece of data, that identifies you, even better than finger prints and mug shots, go into the database? Oh... there it is. The Database. Big brother is watching you and Hoover is keeping Tabs on you. Well yes. They are. This is a surprise? You get targeted advertisements all the time. Data is being harvested all the time, and the government happily buys it up. They might not know what to do with it, but they have it when they do figure something out. DNA, will just be another field in a growing database.
Lately, there has been an increasing stigma over "big data". Specifically how it is being used. The primary problem is a lack of understanding. I will save big data for another Tuesday. For now, be aware that more rapists, more criminals, more bodies, will be identified and thus be another step closer to justice - whatever that means today.
Think I'm off base? Good, tell me about your thoughts on the matter. Just remember, 'cavity search'. before thinking a DNA swab is illegal.