Arthur Lee Whitfield had served 22 years of a 63-year sentence for rape when he

Question

Arthur Lee Whitfield had served 22 years of a 63-year sentence for rape when he was notified that he had gained the right to use DNA fingerprinting to establish his innocence. Luckily, biological evidence had been saved from his jury trial, and DNA fingerprinting showed that this DNA did not match that of the rapist. However, this DNA did match that of another inmate who was serving a life sentence for an unrelated rape conviction. in response to Whitfield s and similar cases, both law enforcement agencies and criminal defense attorneys are advocating that all individuals who are arrested submit samples for DNA fingerprinting. Some are even pushing to require DNA fingerprinting of all citizens, citing the potential to resolve many cases and exonerate people wrongfully convicted of crimes. However, many civil libertarians insist that this constitutes illegal search without reasonable cause. Furthermore, others insist that the government cannot be trusted with such a wealth of information because it might be accessed by hackers or used for purposes other than that for which it was intended. Should the government require all citizens or those who are arrested for any reason, to submit samples for DNA fingerprinting? Or do you believe that it would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution?

Explanation / Answer

the solution to this is simple. DNA fingerprinting is the procedure where the DNA is matched of the suspects and the victim. Moreover there is no need to have such databases been made and kept and waste lot of economy on the same for every citizen. as per the bioethical issue how can you target every individual to be a criminal.

since the DNA fingerprintng require a blood drop, stan, hair follicle or any cell of the body, it will be advisable not to keep the records of it but to perform the experiment by taking the sample when in need. DNA is that information which cannot be hacked as it is specific for an individual and cannot be changed or altered. hence if there is anyone who wishes to prove that he/ she is not the culprit can always give the fresh sample for fingerprinting so that it can be tallied with the victim's/ crime place findings.

hence keeping the government rules in mind, there should be no storage of live culpripts but the samples collected from the crime sites/ victim's body after rape should be preserved safely in the form of DNA which can never be copied due to its high complexity which cannot be altered by anyone.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.