Image Image

  Nostalgia ain't what it used to be

Wednesday, 17 January, 2018
Image

Katie's Law (final part of two)

Date: 01 June, 2010

By: Chief

To read part one

Imageelcome back. Picking up where we left off --

A national big brother

It is most regrettable that here in the land of the free there does exist a national DNA database. The God Damned thing is funded and managed by the supreme idiots themselves — the FBI. Also known as the bureau of Fumblers, Bumblers and Incompetents. It is called the Combined DNA Index System.

Now if you want to attempt to have your DNA record expunged — federale arrests only (not military or state arrests) have fun. Assuming you can afford the legal expenses of course.

I can hear the agents of Fumblers, Bumblers and Incompetents shouting:

'Constitution'? 'What Constitution'? 'We don't need no stinking Constitution'.

Welcome to the Brave New World or 1984. Take your pick.

It ain't perfect

DNA testing or samples which are taken based upon law or judicial order or for whatever reason are not perfect.

The biggest problem stems from the procedures used to:

Consider the Thomas Jefferson affair. It is alleged that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with slave Sally Hemmings which produced offspring. In 1998 a DNA study was conducted and the results were (quoting ezinearticles.com):

"Unfortunately, it is impossible to know at this stage whether Jefferson was the father of the children of his slave. This is of particular historical importance, given the stature of Thomas Jefferson in American history, and one which has certainly received its fair share of media attention in recent years. However, with a number of reports suggesting the evidence to be inconclusive, it's impossible to be sure at this stage whether or not that relationship existed."

A more up to date case happened in Australia. Quoting CentreRight:

"NSW Health discovered the error in its "cold links" system while conducting a review earlier this year. The system matches DNA evidence collected at a crime scene with people on the state DNA database. The review found NSW Health's DNA laboratory mistakenly linked a man to a break and enter because of human error[.]"

That incident occurred in 2008.

It should also be noted that the FBI, based upon historical record going back several decades, have no problem whatsoever tampering with evidence. Here is another story and a yet a third story for y'alls enlightenment. Sleep well.

If you have never heard of the:

read up on them here and here. The courts put those rules in place in an attempt to thwart police from tampering with evidence. It hasn't worked (heavy sigh).

In other words DNA evidence is not at all foolproof. And those who think it is are simply — fools.

A Janus in Congress

Well, truthfully, most members of Congress would do Janus proud. Two faced rabid curs that they are.

And Teague has been saying a lot about Katie's law. After all, he is the main mover and shaker on this abortion. Quoting his now deceased web site:

" 'Katie's Law simply allows law enforcement to treat DNA evidence left at the scene of a crime as they do fingerprints', said Congressman Harry Teague. 'The fact is that the science has advanced and we should allow law enforcement to use all the technology available to them to better identify criminals and keep them from walking the streets'."

It gets worse. Again quoting Teague's web site:

"DNA under Katie's fingernails helped the police develop a DNA profile for her killer and this profile was included in the national database where all DNA samples are kept. Three years later in 2006, the New Mexico DNA database finally matched the unknown profile to Gabriel Avilla who had been arrested for several other crimes, including a felony burglary in November 2003. Katie's Law was not enacted in New Mexico until January of 2007. If New Mexico had required a DNA sample for Avilla's felony arrest in November 2003, investigators might have solved Katie's murder sooner and caught Avilla before he was able to roam the streets for three years."

Oh, okay Harry, which is it? The above two quotes do not jive. Is it:

"Katie's Law simply allows law enforcement to treat DNA evidence left at the scene of a crime as they do fingerprints[.]"

Or is it:

"If New Mexico had required a DNA sample for Avilla's felony arrest in November 2003, investigators might have solved Katie's murder sooner and caught Avilla before he was able to roam the streets for three years."

Hmmm. The silence is deafening.

Well let us take a look at the email I received from dear Harry. Maybe we can get a straight answer from this elected bounder? Fair warning — I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Quoting Teague's email:

"After DNA solved Katie's case, Katie's mother and father, Jayann and David Sepich, advocated tirelessly for Katie's law, requiring arrestee DNA collection and matching in New Mexico. The law was implemented in 2007. Jayann and Dave didn't stop with New Mexico - 21 other states have also passed laws requiring arrestee DNA collection.

"I want to take this life saving New Mexico law national.

"Arrestee DNA collection prevents crime, saves taxpayer money and protects the innocent. So, I decided to introduce bipartisan legislation in Congress that would incentivize the other 28 states that haven't already done so to pass Katie's Law. [. . .]"

My, my, my. It appears that dear Harry lied to us, lied to We the People on his own web site. That is not a good idea Harry, lying to We the People.

My email response to Harry

You know I had to send one. Whether it'll do any good or not remains to be seen. But here, for your enjoyment, it is:

"Dear Congressman,

"Re: Katie's Law

"I am outraged that you 'decided to introduce bipartisan legislation' to make this 'New Mexico law national'.

"I am further outraged this legislation 'incentivize[s] the other 28 states that haven't already done so to pass Katie's Law'.

"Incentivize? There is no such word in the English language. However a root word could possibly be 'incentive'. Hence an incentive to 'the other 28 states that haven't already done so to pass Katie's Law' could quite easily be construed as:

"1. Blackmail,

"2. Bribery, and/or;

"3. Coercion.

"How utterly disgusting of you.

"Additionally, there is *no*:

"1. Express,

"2. Enumerated, or;

"3. Explicit --

"grant of power within the Constitution which would allow Congress to enact such an abomination.

"What you seek to do is utterly beyond the pale and *Unconstitutional* to boot. It is a state issue and a state issue only.

"Furthermore your bill cannot 'prevent[ ] crime'. Only the person considering to perform an illegal act can do that.

"What if the person arrested for an alleged crime is acquitted at trial, the charges are dropped (dismissed) or the arrested person is found factually innocent? How is their 'Arrestee DNA collection' removed from each and every database? Who pays for such removal? Just because a court orders it does *not* mean it shall happen.

"How does your bill 'protect[ ] the innocent'? Again I say: Only the person considering to perform an illegal act can do that. Though as the old saying so clearly states: 'I would rather have a gun in my hand than a cop on the phone'.

"Once again, how about the 'innocent' or acquitted arrestee? How are they protected by this atrocity? By the look of things I would say — they are not.

"And please do not give me your 'Well I believe' or words to that effect. I do not care. You are an employee, no less and certainly no more.

"Kill this bill and do it now Congressman."

I think it is safe to say that not only does this bill have to go — so does Harry.

"No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session" (attributed to the late, great Will Rogers).

(Return to the top)