| McDonaldsGuy said: With DNA evidence there has never been a person wrongfully convicted. 15 years ago I would agree but not today. And they are not out of society dude. Are Richard Matt and David Sweat out of society? Charles Manson was able to nearly get married - is that your idea of getting out of society? Prison is a vacation these days. |
http://lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jul/25/man-wrongly-convicted-after-dna-mix--awarded-15-mi/
The rate at which DNA testing is now overturning convictions should give an idea how 'fool proof' the system is. The majority of people are still convicted without DNA evidence.
http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/seeking-second-chances-without-dna-48082
DNA cases may perhaps account for only 5 to 10 percent of innocence claims
http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes-wrongful-conviction/unvalidated-or-improper-forensic-science
DNA does not solve the problem. In fact, experts estimate that only 5-10% of all criminal cases involve biological evidence that could be subjected to DNA testing. In the other 90-95% of crimes, DNA testing is not an option
