[PETA]

Originally Posted by joel

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/us...s.html?_r=1&hp
WASHINGTON — Convicts do not have a right under the Constitution to obtain DNA testing to try to prove their innocence after being found guilty, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

read the rest of the story at that link. it's tamer than the headline makes it out to be.

Wonderful writing as usual from our lovely press. One cannot prove innocence. One can demonstrate the the blood, sperm etc relied upon as evidence for conviction came from a person other than the one convicted. It does not necessarily follow that the person convicted wasn't there and part of the crime... just that his DNA was not introduced into evidence which is probably enough to illustrate reasonable doubt.... meaning one fails to prove the defenant did it... not that one provoed that he didn't. And no, just to nip it in the bud, it isn't semantics. Not guilty does not equal innocent.