Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Presumed innocent?? (Score -1) 203

by Krapangor (#27630577) Attached to: FBI and States Vastly Expand DNA Collection, Databases

A person is INNOCENT until proven guilty, not the other way around.

I think you are a little bit confused about this. If a person committed a crime he is not innocent no matter if this was proven or not. Just because his innocence or non-innocence is not known, he doesn't become magically innocent. The same way a criminal does not magically change his state from innocent to non-innocent just because a judge read his verdict. This is why people are presumed innocent - to avoid hardship for the suspect who are indeed innocent. However, since fumbling in their mouth with a cotton swap can hardly account of "hardship" taking their DNA is a reasonable measure, in particular since it helps fighting crimes.

Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it.

Working...