-Caveat Lector-

From: Dan S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

http://www.washingtonpost.com:80/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-07/07/072l-070799-idx.ht
ml
-
A Rush to DNA Sampling Vital Police Tool? Affront to Liberty? Both?

By Guy Gugliotta
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 1999; Page A01

   The letter from the Massachusetts Department of State Police arrived
without warning or explanation, ordering Donald
Landry to report to a National Guard armory and give a blood sample for
DNA analysis.

 Landry is a convicted murderer with priors for car theft, breaking and
entering, and armed robbery -- ostensibly the sort of
person whose DNA the police would like to have on file: Somebody is
killed, lab techs run tests on the saliva stain on the
cigarette butt, and bingo -- they match the crime-scene DNA to a career
criminal.

 Except Landry, 61, was paroled 21 years ago, and hasn't been in trouble
since. He's married, has three young children, and
lives quietly as an unemployed roofer about 20 minutes south of Boston.
Not only did he not want to give a sample, but he had
to pay $110 to have it done.

 "I've been out of trouble for so long, and all of a sudden they come
out of the woodwork and do this," Landry said.

 Landry is caught up in a nationwide rush to make DNA analysis a leading
forensic tool of 21st century law enforcement. Four
years after the O.J. Simpson trial, DNA profiling is universally
recognized as a technology that can free the innocent, condemn
the guilty, identify a perpetrator with court-testifiable certainty and
close cases that have languished unsolved for years.

 But DNA's potential has pushed politicians to authorize sampling of
ever larger numbers of Americans. First came sex
offenders, then all violent criminals. Some states, such as Virginia,
take samples from all convicted felons and some juvenile
offenders. Louisiana has passed a law to sample anyone who is arrested
for any crime. New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani
suggested the state sample infants at birth.

 Official enthusiasm for DNA analysis has raised alarm bells among those
worried about abuse of Fourth Amendment privacy
rights: "Some people ask why the government should be allowed to do
this," said Massachusetts public defender Benjamin
Keehn, who represents Landry and six others who challenged the state's
sampling law. "Others say, 'Well, these people are just
criminals.' " But good or bad, he added, DNA sampling "is a serious
expansion of governmental power."

 Although DNA evidence appears to have come of age, there is little law
that covers it. Besides questioning the constitutionality
of DNA testing, the ACLU and other advocates are also worried that many
states fail to destroy samples after DNA analysis is
complete.

 "People who committed crimes should be prosecuted," Landry
acknowledged. "But I also feel that if they're allowed to do this
to me, does it stop with me? Can they take anybody's DNA and put it in a
bank even if they didn't commit a crime? Where
does it stop?"

 DNA is potentially much more invasive than fingerprints, critics note.
Besides establishing someone's identity, analysts can use
DNA to determine whether a person is at risk for certain diseases. And
someday, scientists may be able to identify those with a
genetic disposition toward alcoholism, mental illness and, perhaps, even
rape, murder and a host of other behaviors.

 "DNA harbors our innermost secrets," said Barry Steinhardt, an
associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union, "and
those of our families."

 All 50 states collect DNA samples from some convicted felons, and
legislation is pending in Congress to gather samples from
federal offenders in the District, in the armed forces and on Indian
reservations.

 Most states are using DNA analysis in casework, and 103 crime labs have
tapped into the national DNA database that the FBI
opened last October. With only 184,000 DNA samples on file, the Combined
DNA Index System (CODIS) hardly rivals the
226 million fingerprint cards in the FBI's Criminal Justice Information
Services Division, but the agency believes CODIS's time
will come.

 "Eventually it will include all states, and all felons," said CODIS
program director Steve Niezgoda. "There are 1 million felony
convictions each year in the United States."

 DNA analysis has produced some spectacular results. Since October,
CODIS has registered 600 "hits" on DNA samples.
Virginia has used DNA to solve 60 cases in six years.

 In a recent speech, Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), sponsor of the pending
federal legislation, described how DNA analysis linked a
suspect to four rapes in two Wisconsin cities, resulting in an 80-year
prison term.

 Attorney General Janet Reno asked the National Institute of Justice to
convene a National Commission on DNA Analysis after
she read about several cases in which DNA evidence had cleared
prisoners. The Innocence Project at New York's Cardozo
Law School used DNA evidence to help free eight people from jail.

 Last year the Massachusetts public defender's office and the ACLU
challenged the state's new statute ordering DNA samples
from offenders convicted of any of 33 crimes ranging from murder to
prostitution.

 The seven plaintiffs included Landry, who was found guilty of
first-degree murder in the 1964 shotgun killing of a man. Landry
insisted the killing was an accident, and he was paroled in 1978.

 The plaintiffs won their case at trial but lost on appeal in April.
Keehn, the lead attorney, plans to ask the Supreme Court to
hear the case, but he doesn't hold out much hope. The court has refused
to hear two similar appeals -- one from Virginia.

 "We use the same basic argument [as the other cases]: The fact that
someone has been convicted of a crime in the past isn't
enough to justify this kind of search and seizure," Keehn said. The
courts, however, have agreed with plaintiffs that "once you
have been convicted of a crime, you have a reduced expectation of
privacy," he added.

 But if the initial battle over constitutionality is lost, there are
others to be fought: what to do with tissue or fluid samples after
DNA analysis is completed; whether it is legal to require DNA testing
for anyone arrested for any crime.

 It may be too early to worry about arrestees. The FBI's Niezgoda says
that although 43 states are using CODIS, only 14 are
putting DNA profiles into the database. Many states are still doing
preparatory work or lack the funds, lab facilities or trained
personnel to analyze the samples they have collected.

 Christopher H. Asplen, executive director of the Justice Institute's
Commission on DNA Evidence, estimates that 500,000
samples taken during the last four years are awaiting analysis and that
an additional 1 million to 1.5 million offenders qualify for
testing that has not been done.

 "All of these people should be in the database, but there's no money to
test them," Asplen said. "Nowadays, a rapist gets
convicted and the police take his blood, but they don't analyze it. On
parole he commits another crime, and we get a great
rape-scene sample, but we don't have a profile in the system."

 And besides the known offenders, there also is "a boatload" of rape
kits, bloody rags, cigarette butts, Styrofoam cups and bits
of hair that have languished in police department evidence closets for
years, Niezgoda said. New York City alone has
thousands of rape kits awaiting analysis.

 For these reasons, the FBI and the commission prefer to leave the
question of arrestee testing until later: "States [are] saying,
'We're going to grind to a screeching halt if this happens,' " Asplen
said. "Once we get a system that's up to speed, we can start
doing these other things."

 Louisiana, the only state with a law mandating arrestee testing, has
delayed implementation because it lacks funding and a
proper facility.

 Clearing the backlog is "just a matter of money," Niezgoda said, and
there is $30 million in the Kohl bill earmarked for that
purpose. Asplen believes that by using the money to hire outside
contractors, CODIS could be up to date on offender samples
in 18 months. Without the money, it could take six years.

 Other difficulties would remain, however. Most of CODIS's samples were
filed using an older, slower analytical method than
the technology the FBI is promoting.

 But the conversion will require a lot of re-analyzing, so, Niezgoda
said, the FBI is encouraging states to hang on to their
samples. "The cost of collecting a sample far exceeds the cost of
analyzing it," he said.

 Indeed, Asplen estimates that a private contractor can do a DNA
analysis for considerably less than $50, well below half the
$110 Massachusetts wanted from Landry to collect his sample.

 CODIS requires sampling from 13 "loci" along the human genome, and
Niezgoda emphasized that the loci are "junk DNA,"
useless for any purpose other than identification.

 But according to the ACLU's Steinhardt, no law enforcement jurisdiction
has ever gotten rid of its samples, and there is no law
requiring them to do so. The ACLU, he added, is "urging" the destruction
of samples "to remove the temptation to do other
types of examination."

 Who Gets Tested

 All states require DNA samples from sex offenders. Most states require
samples for offenses against children (40) and for
murders (35). For other offenses, the requirements vary greatly from
state to state.

Offenses for which states require DNA samples

 * States in bold require DNA registry for any felony committed.

 State Assault Robbery Kidnapping Burglary

 * Ala. X X X X

 Alaska X X X O

 Ariz. O O O O

 Ark. X X X O

 Calif. X O O O

 Colo. O O O O

 Conn. O O X O

 Del. O O O O

 Fla. X X O O

 Ga. O O O O

 Hawaii O O O O

 Idaho X X O O

 Ill. O O O O

 Ind. X X X X

 Iowa X O X X

 Kan. O O O O

 Ky. O O O O

 La. X O X O

 Maine X X X X

 Md. X X O O

 Mass. X X X X

 Mich. O O O O

 Minn. O O O O

Miss. O O O O

 Mo. X O X O

 Mont. X X X O

Neb. O O O O

 Nev. X O O X

N.H. O O O O

 N.J. O O O O

 * N.M. X X X X

 N.Y. X O O O

 N.C. X X X O

 N.D. O O O O

 Ohio O O X O

 Okla. X O O O

 Ore. O O O X

 Pa. O O O O

 R.I. O O O O

 S.C. O O O O

 S.D. O O O O

 Tenn. O O O O

 Tex. X O O X

 Utah O O X O

 Vt. X X X X

 * Va. X X X X

 Wash. X X X O

 W.Va. X X X O

 Wis. X X O O

 * Wyo. X X X X



SOURCE: FBI

� Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company

--

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

Having difficulty getting "in synch" with list members?
http://www.onelist.com
Try ONElist's Shared Calendar to organize events, meetings and more!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ISML] Insane Science Mailing List
LIST MODERATOR: DAN S.
To subscribe: http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/isml

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to