Which is most important: public safety or protection of privacy?
This is one of the most significant and controversial
question of our time. In the past decade, incredible advancements in science and
technology have revolutionized all aspects of society. This influence can
especially be seen in our criminal justice system; new technologies have
improved our ability to capture and convict criminals, thereby strengthening
our system of justice.
Although these advancements may increase the accuracy and validity
of the criminal procedure, they come with a cost: protection of privacy.
In a recent case, the United States Supreme Court determined that
criminal suspects could be subject to a police DNA test after arrest – before
trial and conviction. This decision has sparked debates about privacy vs. public
safety around the country, with the primary concern being a continued trend in
compromised rights. Justice Antonin Scalia stated, “the court’s opinion barely
mentions the crucial fact about this case: the search here was entirely suspicion
less. The police had no reason to believe the suspect’s DNA would link him to
any crime”.
This case provided a preview of the controversial debates we
can expect to see in our future. The scientific and technological sectors are rapidly
evolving, and their advances will have wide-reaching implications for the
criminal procedure and suspect rights.
An independent feature film, “Justice is
Mind”, provides an interesting preview; currently in post-production and set to
release this Fall, the film examines the public policy issues that develop when
new technology expands the power of government, at the expense of personal
rights. “Justice Is Mind” takes place in 2026, when
MRI technology can “read your mind”, giving the
government access to your memories, which can then be used against you.
The movie addresses critical ethical
questions, and issues of criminal justice, government power, and individual rights.
Although 2026 is 13 years away, many of these same principles may be applied to
society today. Arnold Peter, a Beverly Hills Entertainment Lawyer and one of
the film’s producers, found the recent Supreme Court decision to be significant.
“The potential implications of the recent
Supreme Court’s decisions are frightening,” says Peter. “It’s not much of a stretch to forcibly tap into a suspect’s mind as
part of the police investigative process.”
Writer/director Mark Lund agreed, stating “This decision by the Supreme Court sets the
legal foundation to the story in Justice Is Mind. Today, it’s the taking of
your DNA, tomorrow it’s your memory. As a filmmaker it’s exciting to be on the
cutting edge of this social discussion, but as a citizen the implications are
frightening…it begs the question, what constitutes personal privacy?”