Harlan Levy: Caught Up in DNA's Growing Web

[John F. McMullen]

>From the New York Times --

Op-Ed Contributor
Caught Up in DNA's Growing Web
by Harlan Levy
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/17/opinion/17levy.html?ex=1300251600&en=f87e0
2b26e708399&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss>

THE announcement this week that DNA from a paroled violent felon
working as a bouncer matches that found on plastic ties used to bind
a murdered graduate student highlights DNA's power to implicate
people already in state databases.

Fifteen years ago, as a Manhattan homicide prosecutor, I was an
aggressive proponent of taking DNA from convicted murderers, rapists
and other violent felons so we could catch them when they committed
crimes again. I even quit my day job to write a book likening the
identification of criminals through DNA to the voice of God speaking
on earth.

I still firmly believe in the power of DNA to catch the guilty and
exonerate the innocent. This week's developments seem likely to
vindicate that faith again. But for all this technology's promise,
proposals by some to extend DNA databanks far beyond convicted
felons, and even to the general population, go too far.

In the early 1990's, state legislatures did what many early
proponents of DNA urged: they passed laws to take DNA from those
convicted of murder, rape and other violent felonies. Then they
enacted laws to take DNA from most convicted felons. Misdemeanor sex
crimes were next, a logical, intelligent measure.

But the proposed next steps in DNA collection were more problematic.
In 1998, New York City's police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed
that DNA be taken from all arrestees. And Gov. George Pataki has
sought to take DNA from people convicted of any misdemeanor, without
proof that such offenders are more likely than the general population
to commit violent felonies or sex crimes (the kinds of offenses where
DNA evidence is most useful).

And the buzz today among prosecutors, judges and defense lawyers is
that proposals to take DNA from the entire population are next.

What, if anything, is wrong with this picture? DNA databanks do help
apprehend dangerous criminals (and thereby prevent crime). But most
people aren't violent criminals and never will be, so putting their
DNA on file exposes them to risks that they otherwise wouldn't face.
First, the people who collect and analyze DNA can make mistakes
(witness the Houston Police Department Laboratory, whose slapdash DNA
procedures led to at least one wrongful conviction). Second, people
can be framed by the police, a rival or an angry spouse. Third, DNA
is all about context; there may be innocent reasons for a person's
DNA to be at a crime scene, but the police are not always so
understanding.

Indeed, with a universal national DNA databank, innocent people may
be embroiled in criminal investigations when their DNA (a single hair
or spot of saliva on a drinking glass) appears in a public or private
place where they had every right to be.

Even if we get past those objections (do you trust the government
with your DNA on file?), the practical barriers to universal
collection loom larger still. In a nation with no institutionalized
national identification cards, photo files or fingerprinting, just
imagine requiring all citizens and residents to report to the local
registry for DNA collection.

So the advocates of universal testing will urge the collection of DNA
at birth. Aside from the atmospherics of registering newborns (don't
you know that children are our future ... criminals), rapid
technological advances suggest that we will not be using the same
methods to analyze and store DNA results 20 years from now, when
those grown babies begin committing crimes.

[snip]

Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>

----- End forwarded message -----
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]