1. 42 USC Sec. 14135a, this is “The DNA analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000.” This Act was followed by the Debbie Smith Act, A.K.A. “The Justice For All Act of 2004”. The Debbie Smith Act was mainly a GRANT of almost one billion dollars to collect DNA samples for a massive DNA Data Bank called CODIS located at the FBI.
2. 18 CFR, Part 28 (28.12) which is where the Attorney General promulgates the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Policy.
3. The BOP Policy itself.
4. The Legal Resource Guide for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Sec. 1-E (Internet Search)
Note: Larken Rose also provided research concerning the above 1-4.
No other law can be found relating to the DNA sample draw. 42 USC, 14135a says anyone convicted of a felony is required to provide a DNA sample prior to his/her release from prison.
On Jan 14, 2009, the medical staff at Texarkana BOP did take a DNA blood sample from me utilizing a standard FBI DNA sample kit. After the taking of blood, the medical P.A. wanted two index finger prints as part of the DNA draw. I did conditionally accept to provide the prints if I could be shown my obligation to do so. No one could provide a law that produced a duty or liability to do so. At this point I felt that I had fully complied with the law to submit to DNA sample. However, because I did not provide the prints anyway, I was written up and disciplinary action was taken, which I appealed through administrative process all the way – to the Warden, to Regional, and then to Central, Washington, D.C.
I was approved for a half-way house to be released on June 2, 2009. I was approached on or about May 23 to provide fingerprints for another DNA sample, just ten days prior to my half-way house release date, which I again conditionally accepted upon showing liability to do so. I was again written-up and my half-way house release was pulled.
My Good Credit Time (GCT) release date was July 24, 2009. However, since May 23 until Aug. 7, 2009, I have been given 12 written disciplinary reports with increasingly harsh punishment. To date, more than half my GCT days has been removed and the staff tells me they will indeed take all 326 Good Time Days making my release date full term on June 19, 2010. I have also been removed from the general population and put in the “Hole” which is the Special Housing Unit (SHU). Here you live in a 6 x 9 ft. concrete room 24/7.
Here, you might ask, why not just give the fingerprints and get out of the there? Please remember, the law says nothing about fingerprints for a DNA sample. Look up “signature” in any good law dictionary. Also, keep in mind that Scripture says the “life is in the blood”. I believe the DNA Act codified at 42USC, 14135a was actually written by Congress in sort of a reverse manner. It looks like Congress wrote a law giving law enforcement including the FBI, BOP, et al, the permission/right to steal or take personal/ private property (blood) just because they want to. In this case, to produce a massive DNA Data Bank run by the FBI. So, here is the deception. The FBI DNA Sample Kit says “Note: Fingerprints are required. Sample will not be accepted without legible prints.”
Remembering what you read about “signature”, the fingerprints are the authorization for government agency theft into a legal transaction. The fingerprints authenticate the document. At the same time, those fingerprints are a waiver of your right to interest in that private property – your blood. If a person waives his right to the property then he has no say in what that property is used for and for how long. This is the very reason fingerprints cannot be required in the law. If they were required by law then there would not be a voluntary waiver of right or to authorize the taking thereof.
The FBI DNA Sample Kit requires fingerprints, the BOP is trying to conform to the Sample Kit which is not law, and in fact the kit refers to 42USC 14135a as its authority. My conclusion is that the FBI and possibly Congress never thought anyone would uncover this little scam. The fingerprinting by law enforcement of any kind is such a common occurrence that it took someone looking at the process as a commercial activity to discover what is really going on.
Waiving a right to property is the same as giving up Title, and I choose to not give up the title to the life that is in the blood. There are many cases such as the Kincade case that deal with the 4th and 5th Amendments and, in all cases, the Act is upheld. Now keep in mind that after the inmate gives his waiver of interest, there is no longer a 4th or 5th Amendment issue, is there? I actually believe the Courts chuckle when someone waives his right to property then wants to complain about it.
I truly believe the BOP’s only interest in this issue is to continue collecting the grant money provided by DNA samples. However, because the BOP has actually damaged me by committing crimes such as USC 18 Sec. 141, 142, 145, 872 and straight up extortion, both civil and criminal suits can be brought up. Court documents can be requested that have been filed in Simkanin v. Roy - Case #5:09cv-00074-DF-KFG from U.S. District Court, Eastern Texas, 500 N. State Line Ave., Texarkana, TX 75501.
I can be reached at: Richard Simkanin c/o 30383-177 SHU, F.C.I., P.O. Box 7000, Texarkana, TX 75505
Thank you in advance for your concern, help and prayers.
In His service,
Richard Simkanin