Only a small fraction of our total DNA makes us different from gorillas,chimpanzees and other primates. An even smaller fraction makes one persondifferent from the next. It’s these differences that forensic DNA experts use toidentify people and determine the source of biological evidence such as blood orsemen found at a crime scene. DNA testing is powerful, sensitive and effectivein pointing to the guilty and absolving the innocent.
To date, 67 convictedfelons have been exonerated nationwide based on DNA evidence. The vast majorityof those have been rape cases. But DNA testing as it is now performed raises aquestion as to whether the public should fear that an innocent person may bewrongfully convicted or a legitimate suspect excluded from consideration. Shouldwe be concerned that the government can order the collection of one’s DNA forpurposes of identification, much like a set of fingerprints? DNA contains muchmore personal information than a fingerprint. Recognizing the importance of DNA,our government sponsored the Human Genome Project in 1990 to determine thesequence of DNA sub-units within each of our 46 chromosomes.
The completesequence will be deciphered within the next few years. With this information,there will be dramatic advances in many medically related areas, giving doctorsthe ability to predict illness, make better diagnoses and perform gene therapyto correct sometimes deadly genetic defects. DNA online With the development ofspecialized machines, it is now relatively easy to make millions of copies ofany gene and determine its sequence. With the same equipment, we can determinethe genetic composition of anyone who becomes a suspect in a crime. Thisinformation can be incorporated into a local, state or national database forfuture use. In 1998, the FBI laboratory brought its National DNA Index Systemonline.
DNA profiles from convicted offenders and crime scene evidence submittedby forensic labs are combined into a single national database. As a result, DNAevidence found at a crime scene in New York can be used to identify a suspect inVirginia if a matching profile is found. New York City Police CommissionerHoward Safir has proposed that all those convicted of any crime be required tosubmit a specimen of their cells for analysis and that their DNA profiles becomepart of the state’s database. The city’s mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, has gone evenfurther and endorsed the idea of collecting DNA samples from everyone at birth. Both say the benefits associated with increased testing are well worth the costto the taxpayer.
But do we have anything to fear from universal DNA testing?Many argue that the innocent certainly have nothing to worry about. The perfectscience? Forensic DNA analysis is held in such high esteem that it has developeda reputation of infallibility. But is it really the perfect science or cananalysts make mistakes? A mistake could cost a suspect his liberty or even hislife. This almost happened in England, where a DNA test matched an innocent manto a burglary crime scene. Based on a test using six genes, he was deemed thelikely source of the crime scene evidence.
He matched the evidentiary profileperfectly. But in a more rigorous 10-gene analysis, conducted because hepresented a very strong alibi, he was excluded as a suspect. Britain’s DNAdatabase is the largest in the world, consisting of almost 700,000 profiles. When it comes to criminal matters, civil liberties in Britain are apparentlyless of a concern than they are in the United States. Most English subjects tendto volunteer specimens when police ask them to do so. As with any medicalprocedure, one must weigh the benefits of DNA testing against any potentialdownside.
There are clearly a number of ethical and legal issues that must beaddressed. How can we be sure that someone won’t gain access to your geneticprofile and sell it to a prospective employer or insurance company? It’s afrightening thought, but political candidates may one day find themselvescompelled to provide samples of their DNA. Genetic profiles could then influencethe way people vote. The good, the bad and the ugly Everything we are is in ourDNA — personality, behavioral traits, intelligence, the likelihood ofdeveloping a disease.
In other words, the good, the bad and the ugly. To avoidthe potential for abuse, the government should just retrieve identifyinginformation from the samples and destroy the rest. I believe that while thereare no easy answers, DNA testing is extremely valuable as a crime-fighting tool– as long as safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and ensure that geneticinformation doesn’t fall into the wrong hands. We all want to see an end toviolent crime, but at what cost’should we take samples from all those arrestedregardless of how serious the charge’should we test everyone at birth’shouldwe be concerned that governmental police agencies may soon possess our totalgenetic blueprint? With the phenomenon of computer hacking that now confrontsus, should we worry about database security? What do you think? LawrenceKobilinsky, Ph. D.
, is a professor of forensic science and associate provost atJohn Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City. He is an internationallyrecognized expert in the areas of serology and DNA analysis and serves as aconsultant to the U. S. State Department. THIS WEEK: Going Mindhunting More AboutJohn Douglas UNSOLVED FEATURE New Test IDs Victim Linked to Green River CaseBrings to 42 the Number of Women Accounted For PREVIOUS KOBILINSKY COLUMNSBuilding a Case From a Drop of Blood How Far Should DNA Collection Go? Body ofEvidence More About Lawrence Kobilinsky KOBILINSKY BOOK LIST LAWRENCEKOBILISNKSY EVENTS improve its use as a tool of investigation and adjudicationin criminal cases.
The Commission will address issues in five specific areas:(1) the use of DNA in post-conviction relief casesview published report, (2)legal concerns including Daubert challenges and the scope of discovery in DNAcases, (3) criteria for training and technical assistance for criminal justiceprofessionals involved in the identification, collection and preservation of DNAevidence at the crime sceneview published pamphlet, (4) essential laboratorycapabilities in the face of emerging technologies, and (5) the impact of futuretechnological developments on the use of DNA in the criminal justice system. Each topic will be the focus of in-depth analysis by separate working groupscomprised of prominent professionals who will report back to the Commission.
