~>> The conservative majority on the Supreme Court, ruled 5-4 that criminals
~>> who have spent years, even decades in prison, have no right to have
~>> evidence tested for DNA.

 EC> In truth the Court ruled that such a right can be given by
 EC> the state or federal legislatures, but is not in the
 EC> Constitution.  Can you offer up any semi-lucid reason why
 EC> that is wrong?

 There is no provision in the constitution for presenting
 evidence, nor anything preventing the prosecution from
 withholding evidence. Yet those are coverted by normal court
 procedures. If you had documentary evidence that you were on the
 other side of the world when the crime occured, should you be
 prevented from presenting the evidence?

 EC> And on the Constitutional issue it was 6-3, so all the
 EC> middle swing-votes agreed.

 ~>> "Lock 'em up, they're all guilty!"

 EC> Do you understand what the case was about?  The people
 EC> affected are people who have already been convicted in a
 EC> fair trial.  That is what "guilty" MEANS.

 If he was not guilty how was the trial fair? Oh, it's all a
 game... right?

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... I was a tall person before I used PKZIP...!
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a