They will languish in prison

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that convicts do not have a right under the Constitution to obtain DNA testing to try to prove their innocence after being found guilty.

I was surprised when I heard this. Our entire court system is built around the idea of innocent until proven guilty, and that our courts will eventually do the right thing, that the wrongly accused would have a path to pursue their defense.

Also, as the article explains: "since 1992, 238 people in the United States, some who were sitting on death row, have been exonerated of crimes through DNA testing. In many of those cases, the DNA testing used to clear them was not available at the time of the crime."

Why shouldn't a defendant have access to such testing? It seems a simple matter of fairness. If there is a chance that the wrong man is sitting in a prison cell, that also means that the guilty is walking the streets, endangering the public.

But the bottom line is that this was the wrong case to try to prove this point. There were several factors that affected this decision.

1) The defendant already confessed guilt to the state parole board.

2) His other declarations have not been emphatic about his innocence.

3) He has already served his prison sentence.

So, basically, this defendant was trying to coerce the state to do a DNA test when there was little substantial at stake such as freedom from prison or a looming execution. It would at best save face, a little, and may lead to later civil action. And he was asking for a test when even he himself did not affirm emphatically about his innocence.

I understand why the Supreme Court made this decision. But I feel it does not serve the interests of justice. This was just the wrong case to rule on this issue of DNA access.

I keep remembering the story of Rosa Parks. She actually was not the only one who refused to move from a bus seat at that time. However, the leaders of the civil rights movement picked her case as the one to fight and promote because she was a person of strong moral character. Her character made it all the more apparent that their opponents were wrong.

In this case, this defendant did not display the kind of character that made him worth fighting for on this issue. And because of him, "a small group of innocent people — and it is a small group — will languish in prison.”