Only in America? (from ATSNN)

This story has within the last few days begun to percolate the news wires. A Pennsylvania policeman had hair samples taken without his permission for drug analysis. The constitutional (USA) question seems well settled- in America your hair is subject to search without probable cause or the need for any court order.

Hair lacks constitutional protection

By Sherry F. Colb
FindLawexternal link Columnist
Special to CNN.com
Friday, November 19, 2004 Posted: 1:34 PM EST (1834 GMT)
(FindLaw) -- At the end of last month, in the case of Coddington v. Evanko, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that police officers may constitutionally shave large amounts of hair from a suspect's head, neck, and shoulders, without a warrant, probable cause, or any basis for suspecting that the hair would provide evidence of crime.

The Court (3rd Circuit) went on to state:

The Fourth Amendment guarantees the people the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. But according to the court, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to hair removal.
In so ruling, the Third Circuit followed its own 1982 precedent, In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Appeal of Mills), which held that taking hair samples from visible parts of a suspect's body does not invade any reasonable expectation of privacy. Such investigation therefore does not qualify as a Fourth Amendment "search."

This is probably not new to lawyers and criminals but should be news to others. Human hair along with fingerprints and what else are allowed to be taken routinely in America. There is no probable cause requirement and no constitutional protection. As we have all learned in the last few years DNA may be the �magic bullet� prosecutors had long hoped fingerprints would be.

One other Internet source for this story was found at the time of this post that does not relate back to the same source.

stopthedrugwar.org



[edit on 28-11-2004 by ludite]