Criminal Justice and Technology: DNA

by 

Tabetha Cooper

In criminal cases, DNA is an effective and accurate evidentiary tool that aids in conclusively convicting the guilty or freeing the innocent.  The art of DNA analysis originated in the 1980's and has since become a routine part of all investigations.  

Micah's DNA (Photo credit: micahb37)

Since DNA analysis has aided in solving so many cases, it is now mandatory for convicted person to submit a DNA sample for future comparison.  Since this endeavor has become successful it is now being debated as to whether a person arrest but not yet convicted should be made to submit a DNA sample.  After the sample has been collected it is stored in a database called CODIS where it can be run among other DNA samples found at past crime scenes and stored for use in impending investigations.  This wonderful scientific discovery and its wide spread use has raised ethical questions regarding privacy when comes to mandating the not yet convicted to submit a sample of their DNA.  Upon understanding what DNA is, its use, and hearing arguments on both sides of this issue, I am sure that you will find mandating arrestee’s to submit a DNA sampling to a useful procedure.   

            Deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA is the molecule that represents a person's unique genetic makeup.  It can be found in any cell with a nucleus and is the same within each cell of a person's body.  It has four identifying bases that are sequenced individually for each person (except for identical twins).  The bases are Cytosine (C), Guanine (G), Thymine (T), and Adenine (A).  In 1985, Dr. Alec Jefferys explained how these bases repeat in unique sequences to each individual and how based on these sequences a person paternity, or in the field of criminal justice, involvement in a crime could be determined based upon these sequences. (www.dna.gov)

DNA (Photo credit: Gravitywave)

            In an investigation, evidence is collected in an attempt to identify the perpetrator of the crime.  Among this evidence can be any number of DNA containing cells.  DNA can be found in hair, bone, teeth, fingernails, blood, semen, urine, feces, 

sweat, saliva, mucus membranes, skin cells, muscles, organs, and brain cells.  As it can easily be seen, with the vast array of places DNA can be found, it is quite impossible to do anything in life and not leave a least a trace amount of it behind.  When DNA tested first started in the 1980's it took a large amount of it to get a profile but with the advances in technology within the last twenty-five years all it takes is a very minute amount to get a conclusive DNA profile.  After DNA evidence has been analysis it is compared to known suspect samples in a case.  If there are no known samples it is ran through a DNA database called Combined DNA Index Systems or CODIS.  There, the sample can be compared to known offenders as well as to other crimes that may have the same DNA evidence, linking the two crimes.  CODIS is used in many different jurisdictions from local, state, to federal agencies.  In the event that no match is immediately made an automatic search will be done weekly.  If a DNA match is made during that search, the results will be sent to the agency that submitted the DNA sample for comparison. (www.dna.gov)

English: tSMS DNA sample sequencing: image templates and cleave (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

            Because of the success with DNA evidence, both in convicting guilty perpetrators and exonerating the innocent who have been sitting in prison for years, most states require that offenders submit a DNA sample upon conviction.  According to Berson (2009), courts have continued to uphold the ruling that a convicted person should have to submit a DNA sample.  She goes on to explain that the controversy has now targeted arrestees who have not yet been convicted of a crime.  DNA is collected from an offender by taking a swab from the inner cheeks of an offender's mouth.  It has been debated about whether this is ethical and even constitutional when an offender hasn’t even been convicted of a crime by a jury of his peers.  After all isn’t he still protected by the Bill of Rights?

  DNA can determine more than merely if a person perpetrated or at the very least was at the scene of a crime.  DNA can be used to establish paternity and be used for a number of other medically related things.  Due to the ability to determine these other things it raises the question of intrusion upon privacy.  It can be argued that mandatory DNA samples go against the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  The Fourth Amendment guarantees the protection of privacy of person and possessions against unreasonable searches and seizures and the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination and the privacy of personal information. (topics.law.cornell.edu).

CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On the other hand, as Berson (2009) states, DNA sampling is the same as fingerprinting.  When a suspect has been arrest it is part of the booking procedure to fingerprint him.  If he is later found innocent he has the option of asking for his fingerprints to be taken off the books.  If mandatory DNA sampling was part of the booking process and the suspect was later found guilty he could then ask for the fingerprint and the DNA sample to be removed from the records.  Privacy is an issue because so much information can be received from a DNA sample.  Medical records could be breached.  Most crime laboratories are not concerned with nor equipped to gain medical information.  There is no personal information in regards to physical attributes when DNA results are entered into a database.

With the success that has come from mandating convicted offenders to enter their DNA, a person could only infer that mandating arrestee’s to submit a sample of their DNA would only bring that more results.  With a complete understanding of what DNA is and how it can be used most people have to agree that the more samples that we can compare DNA evidence to the more criminals we can get off the street.  This will make our communities a safer place for future generations.  DNA is a biometric feature as with a fingerprint, it can link a particular person to a particular crime due to the characteristics that make 

it individual to each person.  The difference with DNA evidence is that it can be done more conclusively and with less room for error.

References

Berson, Sarah B. (2009) Debating DNA Collection. Retrieved May 12, 2010, from

http://www.genome.duke.edu/education/seminars/journal-club/documents/Berson2009.pdf  

Foster, R.E. (2000). Police Technology. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall

http://www.dna.gov/basics/

http://www.dna.gov/basics/analysishistory/

http://www.dna.gov/basics/biology/

http://www.dna.gov/dna-databases/

http://www.dna.gov/dna-databases/codis

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights

           

           

Related articles

• Colorado bill to require DNA sample for minor offenses draws criticism in committee
• Felon's DNA sample links him to five Omaha rapes
• Misdemeanor convictions in Colorado could call for DNA swab
• Rape victim on arrest: 'Why'd it take so long?'
• Iowa attorney general backs DNA collection bill
• Houston Burglaries up 22% - Apartments most vulnerable

Read More

Today’s Investigative Special Report – January 14, 2013 “Dealing With Todays Law Enforcement Specialized Investigations” “The “Fingerprints” Of A Child Sexual Assault Investigation”

By Lawrence W. Daly, MSc

Forensic Expert – Senior Author

In 1992 Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld created The Innocence Project which is a non-profit

CRIME SCENE DO NOT CROSS / @CSI?cafe (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 legal organization that is committed to exonerating wrongly convicted people through the use of DNA testing, and to reforming the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. To Date, the Innocent Project has freed 301 wrongfully convicted people, including 18 who spent time on death row. (Wikipedia, 2012)

Like DNA, fingerprints play a very important role in finding if an individual committed a crime. The system needs to examine, evaluate, and analyze just how important fingerprints are to ascertaining the truth. When performing an investigation DNA and fingerprints parallel and corroborate law enforcements findings.

Like the characteristics of a fingerprint there are many aspects of a child sexual assault investigation (CSAI) which parallels it. In fact, there are at least twelve characteristics which will be discussed today which may provide you some insight into the world of science. Let us call them “Daly’s Twelve Investigative Characteristics to Finding the Truth.”

Daly’s Twelve Investigative Characteristics are as follows:

1.      Development – There are four stages of development which parallel a fingerprint. Once identified the officer or crime scene technician (CST) will need to develop the fingerprint by using dusting powder, other methods, techniques, chemicals, and etc.

2.      Registration – Once the fingerprint is identified either it is a partial or an entire hand print, the fingerprint is registered into the Automated Fingerprint Index System (AFIS). In sexual assault cases if the perpetrator is found guilty, he will be required by law to register as a sexual offender.

3.      Crime Scene – Fingerprints are found at a crime scene and are identified by an officer or CST. The investigation of what happened at the crime scene and locating a fingerprint at the crime scene go hand in hand.

4.      Processing – In any CSAI the crime scene is processed, the investigation goes through a development process, and etc.

5.      Identification – Who the individual was who left the fingerprint can be identified if his fingerprints are found in the National AFIS. Once the individual is identified as being the perpetrator who committed the sexual assault his fingerprints will be processed and put into AFIS.

6.      Ridge Units – There are several types of ridges in a fingerprint. In a CSAI there will be many ridge units in the investigation in which the District Detective will have to deal with throughout the investigation.

7.      Classifying – The fingerprint is classified as having certain characteristics. This is what makes the fingerprint useful in a court of law because no one has the same fingerprints. In the CSAI the type of sex crime which is classified as being a molestation, sexual assault, or a rape will become important as the law enforcement officer will need to prove this aspect of the case to prove that a crime was committed.

8.      Medical – The fingerprint can be medically removed from a dead body to identify who he is. In CSAI there is a medical examination the child victim will need to submit to and be processed through.

9.      Difference – Since there are no two fingerprint alike there are also no two sexual assault investigations which will be the same.

10.  Impressions – Sometimes a fingerprint which was left at the crime scene will have specific impressions if the surface of where the fingerprints were left. In CSAI the credibility, reliability and backgrounds of the child victim, witnesses, and perpetrator will be important in what impression the District Detective will be able to uncover about each one of them.

11.  Hidden – There are fingerprints which are defined as Latent Fingerprints which means the fingerprint is sometimes not capable of being seen by the human eye. In CSAI the crimes are hidden behind a closed door.

12.  Detection – A trained CST can locate and detect if a fingerprint is present. When the child begins to act differently or tells her mother or father what the perpetrator did to her, the crime is detected, and the development of the CSAI begins.

Today the need to first explain and understand what characteristics of the CSAI will be the first characteristic which is “Development” which is where the complaint is made that a child was sexual assaulted and law enforcement is called and responds to where the complaint is being made and begins the CSAI.

Development

In the development stage of the initial complaint of a child sexual assault, there are many tasks the first responding officer and other officers will be responsible to perform. There are several stages which can be identified during the development phase:

Initial Stages of Development

1.      First Responder investigates the initial allegations

2.      First Responder requests assistance to establish a perimeter inside and outside the residence/building/vehicle. Makes perimeter large enough to protect potential evidence, including vehicles

3.      First Responder determines two extremely important issues 1. The safety and protection of the child 2. If there is probable cause to arrest the alleged perpetrator

4.      First Responder contacts his immediate supervisor and details the case information to him.

5.      First Responder receives authority to call the Sergeant from the Special Assault Unit (SAU) to relay the incident/event information and to request he send at least two detectives to the scene

6.      Once the two detectives arrive at the crime scene, the First Responder who had been in charge of the crime scene, witnesses, child victim and perpetrator relinquishes his responsibilities to the District Detective

Second Stages of Development

1.      Two detectives respond to crime scene. Upon arrival the First Responder relinquishes the crime scene to the District Detective. The Assisting Detective will provide assistance in all areas of the initial follow-up investigation

2.      District Detective contacts radio and requests a crime scene technician(s) to respond to process the crime scene

3.      The District Detective should create a detailed initial investigative plan, sometimes referred to as a Case Action Plan (CAP), discussing the CAP with the Assisting Detective.

a.       This process should be created ‘mentally’ as the District Detective is responding to the crime scene

4.      Once constructed the District Detective will make assignments to the Assisting Detective, Crime Scene Technicians (CST), and the First Responder and other officers who can remain on the scene and assist

Third Stages of Development

1.      District Detective will contact the complainant and perform the child interview

2.      Assisting Detective will assign officer's on the scene to assist in gathering all of the witnesses for identification and interviews

3.      CST will need to establish if the crime scene perimeter established by First Responder and assisting Officer's is sufficient for the protection of the identification and collection of evidence

4.      CST’s will divide who will do what investigative aspects of processing the crime scene

5.      One of the first responding units stays with the perpetrator if he is at the crime scene. He is either released or taken to jail for processing

Fourth Stages of Development

1.      District Detective collects all witness statements and receives information from the lead CST what the findings of processing the crime scene were

2.      District Detective collects all officer's statement in reference to their investigative responsibility at the crime scene

3.      District Detective makes contact at the jail with the perpetrator or has the perpetrator come in to be interrogated by him

4.      District Detective has any and all evidence taken to the State Crime Laboratory for analyzation

5.      District Detective will perform any investigative step necessary to prove if the crime did or didn't occur

6.      District Detective provides Deputy Prosecutor with either an update on the investigation or provides him with the investigative file for the consideration of filing criminal charges

There are eleven more characteristics of a CSAI to examine and understand how they are parallel or similar to the many characteristic of the fingerprint and the information about the two of them. As I explore these parallels and similarities take the time to contemplate and critically think about the methodology which is being utilized to perform investigative functions which may prove that a crime was or wasn’t committed.

 

Lawrence W. Daly

www.onedaly.com

206-650-0229

onedaly@onedaly.com

Kent, WA

Related articles

• DNA To Be As Common As Fingerprinting
• Breath test identifies bacteria's fingerprint
• Walker, Van Hollen back expanding DNA collection
• Oakland needs more than big-name adviser
• As DNA database grows, more crimes are being solved
• Mass. Bill Would Require Fingerprinting Teachers
• Maltese scientist makes forensic breakthrough
• Abertay University researchers make potentially major breakthrough in fight against crime
• Inkless Footwear Pads
• 5 Creepy New Ways for Police to Intrude on Your Rights

Read More

Today’s Investigative Special Report August 18, 2012 “Dealing With Today’s Law Enforcement Specialized Investigations” “What Role Has Technology Has Had On Law Enforcement”

By

Lawrence W. Daly

In the law enforcement community technology has created new avenues for exploration of the use of mobile telephones to the identification of DNA. The question is has technology separated law enforcement from law enforcement. A twist of words but a major impact which has law enforcement learning how to deal with a one time personal relationship with another officer to an impersonal way of communication.

The individual or group contact amongst law enforcement officers is probably one of the most important aspects of bringing officers together bonding them into a comradery type relationship. The intimacy of a once roundtable where officers would sit and discuss the day’s events has turned into taking police vehicles home, to traveling directly to their district beginning their shift, to texting that they are in service.

The relationship between officers has its own subtleties and nuances which are necessary and beneficial to building positive and successful relationships. The individual and group meetings, presents the officers with the opportunity to engage in telling stories, providing strategic advice, the ability to observe each other in a calm environment where personal information is provided, and so forth.

Each officer is given the opportunity to tell their own story about who they are. The meetings are personal sharing times, discussing other topics such as sports, politics, religion, children, husbands and wives, and so forth. The time expended together is beneficial, positive, fruitful, and socially necessary and needed.

The creation of the mobile telephone has created a division between human contact between law enforcement officers and the public. Instead of meeting one on one with another officer the officer is utilizing calling or texting his neighbor patrol car. When a citizen calls the 911 call center, if the call is a non-emergency call, the call is routed to a non-911 dispatcher, and then forwarded to the patrol car in the field.

The officer then speaks to the citizen, takes the information over the telephone from the citizen. There is no physical one on one contact with the citizen if the criteria fall under a set of conditions. This may create a situation where the officer is capable of saving time and money, but the citizen does not receive the necessary attention that is required in an investigation.

An investigation can’t be conducted by calling someone on the telephone and taking down basic information. If the information is about property damages, thefts, auto accidents, and other incidences which fall under the law enforcement agenciesprotocol and conditions, there are several issues which may occur:

1.      The possibility of fraud may occur if the law enforcement officer takes the crime report by a mobile telephone.

2.      The possibility of misleading information may occur if the law enforcement officer takes the crime report by a mobile telephone.

3.      The possibility of the law enforcement officer missing key information may occur if the law enforcement officer takes the crime report by a mobile telephone.

4.      The possibility of the law enforcement officer missing key physical, biological, and/or trace evidence may occur if the law enforcement officer takes the crime report by a mobile telephone.

5.      The purpose of reporting a crime requires a law enforcement officer to respond to the location so a competent and intelligent investigation can take place. The purpose of the non-emergency dispatcher connecting the telephone call to the patrol officer may be redundant. Sometimes there are no reasons to have the citizen talk to the officer as the non-emergency dispatcher can ask the relevant and material questions and take the report, if it is determined that a patrol officer is not needed.

Granted there are a multiple type of scenarios which can be examined, evaluated, and resolved when the patrol officer should receive a directed call to them while they are responding to the alleged crime. Domestic violence is where the greatest deaths of police officers occur. If the officer can talk to the complainant then the officer will be able to ask the relevant and material questions about what just took place and the necessary officer safety questions which need to be asked and answered prior to the officer(s) arriving at the alleged crime scene can be asked and answered.

According to the San Antonio Kens5 News, “Minutes after a shooting near the Oakland Airport this year, the gunman was on the loose. And police Sgt. Chris Bolton quickly fired off a flurry of text alerts to thousands of nearby residents through a social media tool for law enforcement agencies. "Stay out of area," said one alert. "Multiple shooting victims reported. Medical on-scene. Police are evacuating a nearby, affected business."

Later Sgt. Bolton was able to tell the community that the perpetrator had been located, was in custody and that their safety was no longer an issue. The communication was conducted by texting the residence.

The ability of law enforcement having tools such as Sgt. Bolton utilized can and will be a life saver. The creativity and innovation of the technology law enforcement has access to may make the difference if the alleged victim, witness, and/or perpetrator are possibly being harmed or attempting to elude being apprehended.

Technology has assisted law enforcement in having computers put into all patrol vehicles. This allows the officers the opportunity to type reports, update cases they are investigating, check suspicious vehicles and individuals they may be investigating, and etc.

The new types of techno gadgets have their advantages and disadvantages. In the early 1980’s the argument of the type of emergency lights and sirens were a major discussion and topic of concern. Some of the sirens being utilized by law enforcement and fire personnel were outrunning their sirens. What this entails is the siren being utilized by the emergency vehicle was not being projected with enough distance so citizens could hear the oncoming emergency vehicle. The result were major accidents especially at intersections. Many lives were lost and property damage was extensive.

Law enforcement and fire personnel became cognizant of this problem and began slowing or stopping at intersections in order to allow the sirens to be heard by others.

There are many other examples of how technology has effected how law enforcement handles investigations of crimes. As in any organization it will take years of trial and error, research, adjustments, creativity, and innovation to find what works and what does not work. The new technology which has been developed to date has saved lives and most importantly protected and saved the lives of law enforcement and fire personnel.

As stated early on in this article the need for one on one, face to face, group meetings, and just having coffee with one another can make the difference in promoting a positive and successful morale. Law enforcement agencies must take the time to evaluate, examine, and institute policies which maximize any opportunity to bring the human touch back to the formula.

Lawrence W. Daly           

steppingstones.ws

206-650-0229

ld@steppingstones.ws

Puyallup, WA

Read More