Do you think DNA fingerprint evidence from a person convicted of a misdemeanor “going too far”? Explain why or why not.

2 answers:

7 0

Answer: no
Explanation: whatever needs to be done to solve a crime, take those steps. fingerprinting is not going “too far”. dealing with misdemeanor crimes you have to be careful to not miss any evidence. if you were to not collect a fingerprint, you may miss out on finding the suspect. fingerprints can be a win, loose situation. either way, you should always try to get one if you can if it means it may lead you to the suspect.

slavikrds [6]3 years ago

6 0

Answer:

Definitely not. Misdemeanors may range in severity levels (taking into mind that your location may classify crimes differently from others). There are common misdemeanors, such as vandalism, trespass, reckless driving, etc... and there are more serious & severe crimes such as domestic violence charges, assault and battery, shoplifting. All of these are misdemeanors, yet some of these charges likewise assault or domestic violence charges is still classified as simply a common misdemeanor. Your question pertains to using DNA evidence for convicting lawbreakers. Let's keep in mind that DNA evidence is sought to be extremely accurate and reliable meaning with DNA evidence, you will most-definitely be able to prove a point. It's good to have a trust-worthy source that us humans can depend on when trying to prove something that may be detrimental or glorifying. This will help limit the amount of false-charges, especially of more severe misdemeanors (as such assault and battery) and actually show that the system we use, is organized, attested, and safe. No matter the crime justice should be served, and that justice should steam from a fair, and accurate, yet strict system.

You might be interested in

Anyone become my big sister please <br><br><br>myself Aditya Sharma age 16 standard 11 arts

laiz [17]

Answer: Never

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Question 40(Multiple Choice Worth 2 points)

Galina-37 [17]

Answer:

Judicial independence is important because it guarantees that judges are free to decide honestly and impartially, in accordance with the law and evidence, without concern or fear of interference, control, or improper influence from anyone.

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

Good morning guys! And I hope y’all having a great day brainless just updated there terms&services

Dafna1 [17]

Answer:

that's really how it should be just because it's really cruddy when people put in random junk for points

3 0

3 years ago

Do you think the DREAM Act would have been an effective approach to the immigration issue? Explain your answer

stellarik [79]

The DREAM Act would permit certain immigrant students who have grown up in the U.S. to apply for temporary legal status and to eventually obtain permanent legal status and become eligible for U.S. citizenship if they go to college or serve in the U.S. military

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What source of law controls Snowden’s prosecution? Explain your answer.

Katarina [22]

Answer:The Espionage Act

Explanation:

Snowden was sued for theft of government property and violation of section 793(d) and 798(a)(3) of the ESPIONAGE ACT.

The crime under these sections carry possible sentence of 30 years imprisonment. He can not be charged the crime of TREASON since it(treason) requires individual(s) waging war against the United States or a act of aiding United States' enemies.

The word 'Espionage' means the practice of spying to get information about the activities of foreign government(s).

Section 798(a)(3) forbids intentionally communication of confidential files to an unauthorized individual(s). The United States Supreme Court recognize the fact that employees of the government working with National security are in a POSITION OF TRUST that LIMITS THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT to DISCLOSE INFORMATION.

6 0

3 years ago