DNA Technology and How it Has Impacted

¶ … DNA technology and how it has impacted the American criminal justice system. The research was conducted utilizing secondary resources, such as testimonies from DNA experts and published resources. It was discovered that, despite challenges faced by the technology, DNA has positively affected the criminal justice system by allowing for the successful capture and prosecution of criminals, as well as exonerating those who were wrongly imprisoned.

PREFACE STATEMENT

Overview of DNA

DNA as an Investigative Tool

Inception of the National DNA Index

ANTICIPATED RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS

PREFACE STATEMENT

This research is an investigation into the way DNA technology has affected America's criminal justice system by detailing its uses, as well as the challenges that still lay ahead. Utilizing secondary resources including the testimonies of several experts in the field, including the Director of the Virginia Division of Forensic Science, the Executive Director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence and the Assistant Director for the Laboratory Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as well as published resources from other experts, I sought to answer the question of how DNA has imapcted America's criminal justice system.

DNA and its Impact on the Criminal Justice System

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND BACKGROUND

Statement of the Problem:

The topic of this paper is DNA technology and the American criminal justice system. The purpose of this research is to show that DNA evidence has positively changed the judicial system, despite the challenges it continues to face. My intent is to use this research to better understand the importance of DNA technology to be able to promote its use both pre and post conviction.

Background:

For one to fully understand the impact DNA has had on the criminal justice system, in the United States, it's imperative to have a general knowledge about DNA and the history of DNA's use in the system. This section presents an overview of DNA, as an introduction to the topic and concludes with the historic development of the use of DNA as a means of genetic forensics or criminal profiling.

Overview of DNA:

DNA is organized as two complementary strands that are linked together with bonds that can be separated. Each strand of DNA is a chemically linked chain of nucleotides, which are made up of a sugar, a phosphate and one of four kinds of nucleobases, often simply referred to as bases. These bases are: adenine, thymine, guanine, and cytosine, abbreviated as A, T, C, and G. Furthermore, these bases only pair up properly with one other base, A with T, C with G, and vice versa, on their complementary strand ("DNA").

The order these pairs occur in is relevant. A + T is not the same as T + A. However, since there is only one possible mate for every base, naming only the base on the conventionally chosen side of the DNA strand is sufficient to describe its sequence. Splitting the double strand down the middle via a chemical reaction performs replication. The two single strands then seek out their proper mate from a 'soup' of the four bases. As each base only has one correct mate base, each single strand replicates the double strand perfectly, unless a mutation occurs ("DNA"). It is the unique arrangement of the components of an individual's DNA that the judicial system has turned to help identify criminals.

DNA as an Investigative Tool for Law Enforcement:

DNA, as one of law enforcement's investigative tools, was first introduced into the courtroom in the late 1980s. It was used not only to convict criminals of crimes, but also to free those who had been wrongly imprisoned. "By mid-1999 more than 60 people had been released from American prisons following post-conviction analysis of DNA evidence. Many of them had already served a number of years behind bars" (Langeneckert).

When creating a DNA profile, a sample of the individual's cells is first collected. This typically comes from blood, tissue or saliva. From this sample, a DNA molecule is removed and purified. It is then cut and processed to reveal the individual's unique pattern. Once this pattern is established, it can then be compared with DNA samples from the crime scene, in criminal cases (Langeneckert).

Initially, the reliability of DNA evidence was questioned, however, by the end of the 1990s, a number of advances improved the consistency of the data. These advances included comparing a greater number of sites on the DNA molecules and rendered a DNA match effectively 100% conclusive. In addition to the advancements that allowed for increased reliability, enhanced technology began to allow for much smaller sample sizes than ever before. Even the smallest "amounts of saliva, such as those found on the rim of a coffee cup or the back of a postage stamp, were enough to be analyzed and used as evidence" (Langeneckert). These advancements saw DNA profiling become more and more commonly used in the American justice system.

The Inception of the National DNA Index System:

As mentioned, by using DNA, forensic genetics can identify individuals involved in criminal cases, such as murder or rape. To establish a DNA 'fingerprint' that is unique to the individual, the DNA is first extracted from the chromosomes in the nucleus of a cell, from the sample that was collected. The DNA is then cut into fragment utilizing any one of a group of special restriction enzymes. These enzymes cut the DNA only at specific cutting sites. It is this pattern of cutting sites that is inherited from one's parents and is the beginning of the creation of a genetic profile (Levine).

Recognizing the value of collecting DNA information for investigative purposes, the Federal Bureau of Investigations launched a program in October of 1998, known as the National DNA Index System (NDIS). This nationwide computer database seeks to capitalize on the crime-solving potential of DNA by allowing states to submit samples of DNA from criminals and unknown persons at crime scenes. These can then be cross-referenced to help prosecute criminals. Only three months after its inception, the NDIS had been used approximately 200 times to solve crimes (Langeneckert).

The database increased as all fifty states joined the system. However, "although all states had laws requiring at least some convicted criminals to provide DNA samples, many did not have the resources needed to collect and process them" (Langeneckert). For this reason, the NDIS has not grown as quickly or been used as efficiently as its creators had hoped.

Despite the early success of the program in capturing hundreds of criminals, less than one-third of the states were submitting their DNA samples to the NDIS. To complicate matters further, there was a backlog of more than 400,000 DNA samples that had been collected, but still had not been processed. This is in addition to 200,000 samples that needed to be retested due to advancements in technology (Langeneckert). This delay in using the database to its fullest has delayed the full effectiveness of forensic genetics.

LITERATURE REVIEW

This literature review will document the findings of experts in the field of DNA technology and its use in the criminal justice system, as well as its shortcomings.

Dr. Paul Ferrara, Director of the Virginia Division of Forensic Science notes that DNA technology has advanced significantly over the past two decades. DNA evidence has evolved from being simply used for identification purposes to being used extensively in all phases of the American judicial system. From the investigative stage, through arrest and prosecution, to even post conviction, DNA technology has changed the face of the criminal judicial system.

The use of DNA to convict the guilty and exonerate those who are innocent is a powerful technological tool. Some of the more compelling stories of criminal capture, thanks to DNA evidence, have received media attention. In 1999, New York City authorities used DNA evidence to link a man to 22 sexual assaults and robberies that had terrorized the city. Both Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Fort Collins, Colorado authorities used DNA evidence, in 2002, to solve a series of rapes and a murder that had been perpetrated by the same individual. DNA evidence also provided the breakthrough authorities needed to solve the 'Green River' killings that had been unsolved for years and had previously cost $15 million for the investigation (Coble).

Even the American government has realized the importance of supporting this judicial system tool. Representative Howard Coble noted, there is ( ... ) no question that the current federal and state DNA collection and analysis system needs improvement. In many instances, public crime labs are overwhelmed by backlogs of unanalyzed DNA samples. In addition, these labs may be ill equipped to handle the increasing influx of DNA samples and evidence.

Ferrara agrees, as well, that the forensic science laboratories of today are facing a significant crisis. The increased demands and reduced resources are hampering the true potential of DNA technology. Evidence often languishes, because of this challenge. And, those whose fates are in the balance must remain on tenterhooks waiting for results that are slow to come.

The stories of innocent people being held or victimized needlessly due to the wait for DNA evidence to clear their good names are disturbing. Raymond Holder was accused of raping a 12-year-old girl and arrested on August 25th, 1993. He asked for a DNA test to prove his innocence. It took nine months for the DNA results to exonerate Mr. Holder (Ferrara).

In another example of how delayed test results affect innocent people, on August 31st, 1998 a woman was raped and stabbed. The Virginia Division of Forensic Science received a victim's rape kit, physical evidence, and on November 13th, they received a suspect's blood sample. The suspect, Christopher Banks, was being held on the rape chargem but was due to be released. As such, efforts were made to expedite the testing. On January 6th, 1999, as Banks appeared in court, the test results were still not ready and he was released.

Eleven days after he was released, Banks raped and killed 22-year-old Jemma Saunders. When the results from the August 31st, 1998 rape were finally completed, by February 3rd, 1999, the results showed a match between the semen from the (first) victim and Christopher Banks (Ferrara).

According to Posner, in October of 2004, Congress passed a bill to overhaul the criminal justice system that included expanding the use of DNA testing and better equipping labs. The legislation authorized $1.8 billion, over the course of five years, for a variety of programs. These included $755 million to clear up the backlog of approximately 400,000 samples and other evidence in rape case, in an effort to track down assailants.

$500 million of this money will also be used to "help crime labs conduct DNA analysis, educate examiners and assist forensic analysis programs" (Posner). This money will also go to require states to have independent investigations, in order to safeguard against negligence or wrongdoing, before they receive any federal funds. In addition, states will received $25 million, over a five-year period, to help offset costs associated with analyzing DNA of death row and other convicted criminals who claim their innocence.

This section of the legislation is in honor of Kirk Bloodsworth, a Maryland man who was wrongfully convicted of raping and murdering a nine-year-old girl in 1984. He was imprisoned for eight years, two of those years on death row. In 1993, he was America's first death row inmate to be exonerated thanks to DNA evidence (Posner). According to Innocence Project, a New York City group that specializes in DNA cases, "since 1989, 143 state convicts have been exonerated after DNA tests cast doubt on their convictions" ("Justice Dept."). The Innocence Project these exonerations included 12 people who had been on death row. In addition, the Innocence Project was counsel for these appeals in 65% of these cases (Nowak). These startling figures have led 34 states to pass legislation to make it simpler for a convict to petition the courts for DNA testing.

A 15-year study by Samuel Gross of the University of Michigan Law School, in Ann Arbor, came to the conclusion that the use DNA forensic evidence has also exposed a staggering level of wrongful convictions, in the American judicial system. The study analyzed 328 cases where convictions were overturned between the years of 1989 and 2003. This study suggests that should DNA evidence become a routine tool in robbery cases, tens of thousands of people may be exonerated ("DNA Convicts"). DNA testing on convicted criminals is quite obtrusive for the victims. As some of the case that are being appealed are almost twenty years old, some of the victims are now elderly. In the case of rape convictions, victims are being subjected to having to give DNA samples as well as having to answer personal questions about their sex lives ("Justice Dept.").

This trend to appeal with a request for DNA testing has been sweeping the criminal courts. However, not only innocent prisoners are trying using DNA to become exonerated, but guilty criminals too are using this fairly new technology. According to William Moschella, the assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, "The creation of a new post-conviction (DNA testing) remedy can readily result in abuse by convicted criminals" (qtd. In "Justice Dept."). He continues summing up that these criminals motives are simply to buck the system and to also continue to retaliate against the victims of the crimes they've been convicted of. These abuses of the tool are tying up crime labs, across the nation, and causing even further trauma to the victims.

Christopher Asplen, the Executive Director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence, understands that the safety of America's streets and neighborhoods is directly related to how efficiently and effectively the criminal justice system is able to integrate DNA technology. Asplen, as part of the 22 member Commission that includes: scientists, judges, defense attorney, prosecutors, law enforcement officials, a victim advocate, and a bio-ethicist, has worked to maximize the value of DNA technology in the criminal justice system. One of the most noted impediments to this goal, he notes, is the limited law enforcement training and education on how to properly identify, preserve and collect biological evidence that may contain a DNA profile of the perpetrator. Limited training resources, coupled with ever-changing technology, "results in a failure to take full advantage of the power of DNA" (Asplen).

In addition to the abuse of the system that some criminals will conduct and the lack of training programs for law enforcement officers, there are other problems that are due to the legal profession and their lack of education in the world of science. Justice Ian Binnie discussed, in 2003, the challenge that faced judges everywhere - the rapidly advancing technology of DNA evidence. He noted that criminal law is increasingly relying upon complicated technological tools, such as DNA sequencing, as evidence. For this reason, judges must have a solid grounding in scientific method, which traditionally they do not. Binnie expressed the need for a scientific literacy across the legal profession (Cosh). Judges, prosecutors and defenders who are not well versed when it comes to the topic of DNA evidence cannot provide unequivocally fair justice.

Despite the challenges that come with the abuse of appeal to DNA testing by criminals, the lack of training for law enforcement officers and the lack of scientific training in the legal profession, according to Representative Howard Coble, "very seldom do we find a law enforcement tool that benefits everyone involved in the criminal justice system equally. DNA is that tool." Coble feels strongly that DNA testing benefits prosecutors, defendants and victims by providing unquestionable evidence of guilt or innocence. In addition, it can provide closure to families who have lost loved ones to crime. Coble sees DNA profiling as the future of investigations.

According to Ferrara, DNA technology has evolved and been so refined that it now has overcome many of its early challenges. Today, DNA evidence offers "an unparalleled degree of individualization, robustness and sensitivity without compromising personal medical information and privacy" (Ferrara). This has inspired a new level of confidence in the American judicial system, as unbiased scientific evidence is now used to determine guilt or innocence.

In Virginia alone, the use of a DNA database has proven to be an efficient and effective method of finding the perpetrators of crimes, especially repeat offenders. Out of 894 cases, where crimes were investigated using DNA evidence, 344 or 38.5% were committed by offenders they already had in their database that had prior felony convictions. DNA evidence assisted or solved 54 sex offenses, 27 homicides, 6 assaults, 10 robberies, 1 rape/homicide, 2 abductions or car jackings, and 214 burglaries/breaking and enterings/larcenies (Ferrara).

Dr. Dwight Adams, the Assistant Director for the Laboratory Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation also noted the significant advancements in DNA technology for casework since it was first used in England in 1985. He used the case of a college professor, who was murdered to make his point how valuable DNA has become for law enforcement and has been able to work in tandem with more traditional methods of investigations, such as fingerprinting.