Prop 69: Expand DNA Collection
Supporters of Proposition 69 on the November ballot say it will pave the way to widespread use of what they call the fingerprint for the 21st century, but opponents say it will lead to invasions of privacy.
Friday, September 3, 2004
Cut: (Labnat) At the Sacramento County Lab of Forensic Services, criminalists work through a backlog of old cases, spinning biological samples in a centrifuge to eventually extract D-N-A…(centrifuge sound) It’s a hit and miss job as investigators scour old samples in an attempt to connect them with a suspect. (fade out sound) Linda Thompson’s sister was raped and murdered in 1978. She got a call 23 years later that DNA evidence identified a man who was already in prison. Cut: Linda1 (:13) “DNA is the greatest tool for finding the truth and the truth is out there. And there are so many families who are waiting to get the call that I got Proposition 69 would expand D-N-A collection, adding to a database of genetic information by requiring all convicted felons, and eventually anyone arrested for a felony crime, to provide a D-N-A-laden mouth swab. Backers like Governor Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Bill Lockyer say such evidence would make district attorneys’ and juries’ jobs easier. And they say increased court fines imposed under the measure would fund the additional efforts. Opponents, including chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union, call the D-N-A collection effort a dangerous expansion of government power. Democrat Mark Leno chairs the Assembly Public Safety Committee and says Prop 69 offers a false sense of security. Cut:LenoProp (:22) “For us to have privacy invaded in such an invasive way, for the arrest of something we may have/have not done? For what purpose? Both supporters and opponents of the measure have set up websites to state their concerns. SOC Note for hosts: Prop 69’s supporters’ website is dnaYES.org. The opponents’ website is protectmyDNA.com. The source for both of these is the League of Women Voters.