|
A
round-up of wrongful convictions | Rafay
Burns | Steven Truscott
| Tisdale rape | Forensic
labs: Seattle | Forensics:
Chicago | Flawed fingerprinting
| Taking junk therapy to the
tsunami victims | A
forensic science
internet portal is run by Ben Joseph, a Canadian forensic
scientist. He has links to related news clippings and runs a
forum to discuss related issues.
DNA
Doubts over DNA database
UK Times, April 12, 2005
THE England and Wales National
DNA database (NDNAD) has revolutionised policing but could pose
a serious threat to civil liberties, says New Scientist (April
9).
The database holds the DNA
profiles of nearly 3 million people, and in the past decade it
has matched almost 600,000 suspects with crimes. However, some
experts are worried that the database is not subject to public
scrutiny, despite its gradual expansion.
When NDNAD was set up in 1995,
samples and profiles were destroyed if suspects were acquitted.
After a series of changes to the law, NDNAD is now allowed to
keep the profiles and samples of anyone who is arrested, whether
or not they were charged, and those of people who volunteer samples
during a police sweep.
Police statistics show that
hanging on to the DNA profiles of acquitted suspects can solve
crimes: since 2001, more than 7,000 of the 175,000 profiles in
this category have been connected with crimes. On the other hand,
says the magazine's editorial, a database built on profiles of
people who have been arrested at some point is "a haphazard,
discriminatory system". For example, NDNAD contains the
DNA of 8 per cent of adult white men, and 32 per cent of adult
black men. "Does this reflect the real balance of criminals
in the UK, or merely who the police think commits crimes,"
NS asks.
Another concern arises from
samples being used for research into ways of determining ethnicity
from a DNA profile. "In any other area of science such a
project would have to be approved by an ethics committee,"
and would not be done without the consent of those who gave the
samples, says NS. In this case, it requires only the permission
of the NDNAD board. It is currently accountable only to itself,
but last week a parliamentary committee proposed the creation
of an independent advisory board for the database.
Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers
Ltd.
Lawmakers try to expand Nevada's DNA database
By KATHLEEN HENNESSEY, ASSOCIATED
PRESS, April 15, 2005
CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - More
felons would be forced to add their DNA to Nevada's genetic database,
under a bill considered Wednesday by the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
Assemblywoman Valerie Weber,
R-Las Vegas, said she introduced AB382 to help police track down
criminals and make sure they charge the right person with the
crime.
"The bigger the pool,
the more people you have, the better the chance you'll find a
match," she said. "It's a public safety issue."
It's also a civil rights issue
that requires some sensitivity, said Judiciary Chairman Bernie
Anderson, D-Sparks.
"Because we're in a new
area of the law, we want to make sure that we're not taking something
from someone against their will, a violation of their constitutional
rights, which we still kind of think are important," he
said.
DNA samples are collected by
swiping a cotton swab inside the mouth. The samples are usually
collected during intake into the prison system, and then sent
to one of the state's two forensic labs. The labs analyze and
store the material, and make it accessible to a criminal history
repository. Law enforcement officials have access to the repository
and compare samples to evidence found at crime scenes.
Since the database was created
in late 2000, 17,971 samples have been collected. As of March,
the database has been used to make 139 matches.
Weber's bill would require
all people convicted of a felony - including juveniles - to add
their DNA to the database. Currently, the state collects samples
from some adult felons, largely those who committed of sexual
and violent offenses.
Police and attorney groups
immediately raised concerns about casting a wide net. They said
they have to be sensitive to civil rights issues and only take
the samples most likely to yield a match.
Stan Olson, lobbyist for the
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, noted that under Weber's
bill offenders convicted of conspiracy to commit a burglary would
have to give samples.
"Two guys get together,
and say 'Lets kick in the door' and the cops are there. Do we
really need their DNA? No, not right now." he said.
James Jackson, lobbyist for
the Nevada Association for Criminal Justice, proposed an amendment
that would exempt juveniles and limit the new DNA collection
to class D felons who commit crimes with force or threat of force
only.
Weber agreed to the narrower
scope, but prison officials resisted the change, arguing that
the broadest approach would be the easiest to administer, require
little training and would catch all offenders entering the system.
"The way we read the bill
initially was that it covers everybody that would come into corrections.
If that's the case, that keeps it very simple for our staff.
They know exactly what's expected of them, they know exactly
what to do," said Fritz Schlottman of the Department of
Corrections.
Schlottman also raised concerns
that the amendment misses offenders who are serving time for
a crime that doesn't require a sample, but have committed more
serious felonies in the past.
Supporter of the amendment
said there's nothing in it that would keep a prison official
from reviewing prisoners' complete records when determining if
they have to contribute a sample.
There appeared to be no consensus
among lawmakers on the issue.
Assemblyman Harry Mortenson,
D-Las Vegas, said he saw no problem with collecting DNA and no
reason why anyone would object.
"I wouldn't mind having
my DNA sitting around somewhere, as long as I didn't do anything
bad," he said.
Schlottman supported that view,
saying, "We consider it no different than normal fingerprinting.
People get fingerprinted for all sorts of reasons."
Weber's bill would send about
$2 million to the forensic labs in Las Vegas and Washoe County
to cover help alleviate backlogs and upgrade equipment for the
used to analyze and store the samples.
Random DNA sampling questioned
By ALLISON DUNFIELD
and KIRK MAKIN, Globe and Mail, Friday, May. 23, 2003
"Weird. Awkward. Uncomfortable."
"Fearful."
These are words Douglas Campbell,
20, used to described his emotions after police knocked on the
door of his Toronto apartment on Wednesday night and asked him
for a DNA sample.
Mr. Campbell's west-end home
is in the heart of the most intensive part of the police investigation
into the slaying of 10-year-old Holly Jones, who disappeared
on her way home from a friend's house early in the evening of
May 12. On Wednesday this week, police canvassed the west-end
streets where Holly was last seen, asking men "over a certain
age" and who met certain criteria for saliva swabs.
Investigators are not ruling
out as possible subjects those who co-operate any more than they
are ruling them in, Toronto Police spokesman Sergeant Jim Muscat
said at a news conference.
"They're all possible
suspects and it's all a matter of a process of elimination,"
he said.
Sgt. Muscat said several people
refused to provide samples. Mr. Campbell was one of them, saying
he felt somewhat intimidated.
"I felt uncomfortable
about it. . . . If I have doubts about it one way or another
I'm more likely to say no than I am to say yes. People knock
on your door and ask for your DNA? . . . No, brother," Mr.
Campbell said, standing on his porch having a smoke.
He said police were "okay"
about his refusal, "but I felt really uncomfortable. I didn't
trust them."
Police have said samples will
be used for the present investigation and then discarded. But
Mr. Campbell wasn't so sure.
"I was kind of paranoid
that, like, what if they did keep it on record? What if some
scientists decided to keep the DNA and in 20 years used it for
something?"
Experts say such massive DNA
sweeps can have a sobering social and legal price.
Besides eroding civil liberties
and tearing neighbourhoods apart, a sweep - known as a "blooding"
- can compromise the value of any DNA evidence it yields.
"The police think they
are being very clever, but proceeding this way could very well
jeopardize their case down the road," said Sanjeev Anand,
a law professor at the University of Alberta.
Individuals asked to volunteer
DNA samples in a high-profile homicide case may feel they have
no choice, setting up a later court challenge, he said.
"Make no mistake, it is
a form of state-imposed coercion," Prof. Anand said. "Neighbourhood
pressure is a huge ingredient in whether someone actually exercises
their constitutional rights.
"I think that person could
make a very good case that their sample was obtained by coercion.
It becomes a forcible seizure, and police have to establish it
was reasonable. And they can't."
The tactic first surfaced in
England in 1986, when an English baker named Colin Pitchfork
became the first person ever convicted by DNA. Mr. Pitchfork
made the mistake of asking a friend to give a sample on his behalf
during a DNA sweep of his village.
In recent years, the tactic
has been used in Wales and Germany.
While Canada has no history
of mass bloodings, in cases such as the 1995 Christine Jessop
murder reinvestigation, police asked hundreds of local sex offenders
to submit DNA samples.
Alan Borovoy, director of the
Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said a blooding is "an
enormous intrusion into our personal privacy. No matter how it
is dressed up, there is an element of coercion."
However, Mr. Borovoy said it
is too early to judge whether the Toronto Police have sufficient
evidence to justify their sweep. What the case does emphasize,
he said, is a need for a body empowered to review such tactics.
John Dixon, of the B.C. Civil
Liberties Association, was skeptical yesterday about police assurances
that DNA samples will be destroyed. He said it would be no surprise
if they ended up in the new national DNA data bank. "There
is an enormous appetite for DNA samples for that bank,"
Mr. Dixon said.
Prof. Anand agreed.
". . . what if the police
store your sample unbeknownst to you? Fifteen years from now,
if you came upon a crime scene and a hair follicle drops from
your head, all of a sudden there could be serious implications,"
Prof. Anand said. "I hate to say this, but police are notorious
for saying they will destroy samples - and then they don't."
Mr. Dixon said that as a prerequisite
for obtaining a sample, police should have reasonable and probable
grounds to believe an individual is a genuine suspect.
"If it were me, I would
be a refusenik," he said. "The issue of principle is
far more important than whatever transitory gain you may have
from suspending civil liberties."
Rhoan Samueles 26, and his
friend Kevin Smith, 21, said they and their friends were questioned
by police several times but not asked for saliva samples. Mr.
Samueles said he has no problem handing it over if it helps solve
the crime. Mr. Smith was not so sure. He said he would provide
the saliva only so police would know he was "not involved."
© 2003 Bell Globemedia
Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
Truth can never be
told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell
