[thedudeabides5]

At home kits have been admitted to courts in California. The tweets claiming these kits are inadmissible is false.

https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2020/04/9727395/rape-kit-at...

A judge determines what's admissible in a court of law. That's why your texts, social media posts, etc are all admissable.

The companies in this space are not trying to fool anyone into not going into the hospital. They are trying to help serve the 80%+ of survivors that never go to the official system.

[dogma1138]

There is no way that these would work in the long term without chain of custody, even if some judge would approve the admission of these it would definitely lead and an appeal and there is no way the higher courts would uphold the tests, keep in mind that at home DNA kits are not even admissible in custody / paternal hearings if they are employed in a state that only require the consent of a single parent then at best they can only be used as a justification for a court ordered test.

At home rape kits is a recipe for disaster for rape victims and the legal system.

[thedudeabides5]

You don't know what 'chain of custody means.'

Chain of custody is about tracking evidence after it's received by the justice system.

Chain of custody is about tracking that evidence after the cop gets it, to audit/avoid tampering.

If you get assaulted, and you bring in soiled underwear in a paper bag, that is admissible in court.

The chain of custody starts when the cop puts that underwear in an evidence bag. Otherwise courts would never be able to admit ANY evidence brought forward by a victim.

[dogma1138]

No, the chain of custody starts when the evidence is collected, specifically from where and by what means without that there is no way to establish a CoC.

With these kits there is no way to verify that the DNA swab came from rape victims body or someone’s toothbrush.

This is the problem with these kits, any use of such kit would require a forensic nurse observing the collection, and that each swab is sealed in an evidence tamper bag and then the chain of custody can be established from that point on.

This is no different than any other physical evidence it either needs to be collected from the scene or forensically proven to be connected to it if it was recovered later or by someone else, and in cases when it does the defense will and quite likely successfully get it thrown out.

[glaive123]

It appears that if they are persevering despite putting countless rape victims at risk, they might have bad intentions.

From the same article you posted:

> Defense attorneys worry that allowing victims to conduct their own rape exams could result in cross-contamination and raise issues of reasonable doubt. “If you want to frame someone, it’s easy to get their DNA onto a swab where you do a sex assault kit, and say, ‘Oh, look, here’s their DNA,’” criminal defense attorney Mark Reichel told the AP. Since they first hit the market last year, there has been a push to ban DIY kits for reasons like this.

Also from the article you posted:

> Northern California has issued a temporary order allowing rape kits to be collected by the survivor, at home, while a nurse walks them through the process via video call

It appears this is temporary.

[nivethan]

This is with a cop parked outside and a nurse over a zoom call. These kits are being used as a last resort in the middle of a pandemic. Chain of custody looks to be a problem and it is mentioned in the article.

[decker]

The article doesn't say anything about the sample being admitted in a CA court, it only quotes a DA being supportive of the home test kit.

[jj345]

Lawyer confirming this. Best and well known example of similar evidence would be Monica Lewinsky’s black gap dress.

[dogma1138]

With Monica’s famous dress CoC isn’t an issue because the CoC of the dress once submitted can be preserved anything before that isn’t important because if it is semen and it’s Bills then Bill needs to have a plausible explanation on how it got onto the dress in a manner that didn’t involve the stroking of his cigar.

With these kits there is no way to validate that the evidence was actually collected from the victim and not from say a toothbrush.

Monica’s dress in this case is well the victims vagina or any other body part that was assaulted and may contain DNA evidence of the assailant not the kit.