<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NYC Uses DNA to Indict Suspects to Be Named Later</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/10/21/nyc-uses-dna-to-indict-suspects-to-be-named-later/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/10/21/nyc-uses-dna-to-indict-suspects-to-be-named-later/</link>
	<description>80beats is DISCOVER&#039;s news aggregator, weaving together the choicest tidbits from the best articles covering the day&#039;s most compelling topics.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:59:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/10/21/nyc-uses-dna-to-indict-suspects-to-be-named-later/comment-page-1/#comment-60372</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:46:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=4581#comment-60372</guid>
		<description>Agreed.  

@Gadfly:  The bounds are meaningless if they are bypassed like this.  


&quot;Indict the profile?&quot;  And then name the suspect later?  Garbage.  The State has enormous resources, a defendant few.   

For sex crimes, 90% of perpetrators are known by the victim.  So why the delay?  Why the need to &quot;sidestep the ticking clock?&quot;   After all, the ticking clock is ... the LAW, is it not?  Why not increase the time?  Or  do away with the statute of limitations altogether?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed.  </p>
<p>@Gadfly:  The bounds are meaningless if they are bypassed like this.  </p>
<p>&#8220;Indict the profile?&#8221;  And then name the suspect later?  Garbage.  The State has enormous resources, a defendant few.   </p>
<p>For sex crimes, 90% of perpetrators are known by the victim.  So why the delay?  Why the need to &#8220;sidestep the ticking clock?&#8221;   After all, the ticking clock is &#8230; the LAW, is it not?  Why not increase the time?  Or  do away with the statute of limitations altogether?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gadfly</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/10/21/nyc-uses-dna-to-indict-suspects-to-be-named-later/comment-page-1/#comment-60367</link>
		<dc:creator>Gadfly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=4581#comment-60367</guid>
		<description>There is a statute of limitations on crimes for a reason and this undermines it. Sex crimes are heinous enough to warrant overstepping the bounds a bit but I am uncomfortable with using it for lesser crimes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a statute of limitations on crimes for a reason and this undermines it. Sex crimes are heinous enough to warrant overstepping the bounds a bit but I am uncomfortable with using it for lesser crimes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk

Served from: blogs.discovermagazine.com @ 2012-02-13 23:02:46 -->
