Thursday, July 09, 2009

"The Worst Law I Have Ever Seen"

video
WHAMMO WAMPLER
Top-notch criminal defense attorney Dee Wampler blasts the Child Witness Protection act as a law designed to thwart rigorous cross-examinations.

*WATCH HIM MAKE HIS CASE ABOVE*

Then read Rep. Bob Dixon's bill yourself HERE.

WATCH THE KY3 NEWS @ 10 REPORT HERE

KEY BYTES:

"The judges I've talked to about it, think, why are we passing something like this?"

"There are a lot of 15 and 16-year-old witnesses that need to be cross-examined and they need to be cross-examined stringently."
"This is an unconstitutional piece of legislation."

"Anyone that's ever walked a mile in the shoes of a person that's been falsely accused will say this is a bad piece of law."
ALSO: Doesn't like new DNA Law
video
"I just don't trust the government"
Wampler doesn't like the new law that requires police to collect DNA from suspects to help solve crimes either. He doesn't trust that authorities will get rid of DNA of suspects if they aren't charged with a crime within 90 days.
*WATCH WAMPLER ABOVE*
Acknowledges, "It may solve a few crimes."
But warns, "So many of the arrests are false . . . The government is a very fearful master."
WATCH THE KY3 NEWS @ 5 REPORT HERE

1 comment:

MB said...

On the DNA profiling, Mr Wampler's got a really good point. If the majority of the people who are arrested are never charged, why would we want to spend our tax dollars collecting & processing we'll have to trash after 90 days (and also have to implement a rigorous system of making sure DNA actually is being discarded when the 90 days are up)?

The issue that was not raised is whether DNA profiling is even a useful tool for solving a crime. Most people really don't understand the science behind the technology very well & a program like this has the potential to increase the number of people who are wrongly charged and/or convicted of crimes.

It just doesn't make sense to be collecting this info on people who haven't even been charged with anything yet. This is definitely a case of not honoring the constitution's guide that we are to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. You don't collect DNA samples from people if you presume they're innocent.