JS 115 Use of DNA to establish innocence I.Announcements a.Final 12/13/ here in MH 324 b.Summary of Validation II. Use of DNA to establish innocence a.Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science b. Innocence project

Summary 1 Validation is a process by which a procedure is evaluated to determine its efficacy and reliability for forensic casework analysis and includes –Developmental Validation –Internal Validation Developmental Validation –Developmental Validation is the acquisition of test data and determination of conditions and limitations of a new or novel DNA methodology for use on forensic samples Internal Validation –Internal Validation is the accumulation of test data within the laboratory to demonstrate that established methods and procedures perform as expected in the laboratory

Summary 2 Validation includes the following types of tests: –Sensitivity –Reproducibility –Inter-laboratory tests –Non-human tests –Mixtures –Stutter studies –Non-probative cases –“ validation of forensic DNA testing to a certain extent can be standardized but inflexible absolute numbers will probably not be accepted”

Use of DNA to establish innocence

Study findings 28 cases tried in 14 states and DC. Illinois, NY, VA, Wva, PA, CA, MD, NC, Conn, KS, OH, Ind, NJ and Texas All 28 involved sexual assault Mid to late 80s Prison time served 197 years, average of 7 years among 28 defendants- Range 9months to 11 years

Evidence presented Eyewitness ID- All except homicides involved victim ID both prior and at trial Defendants presented alibi defense corroborated by friends and family Use of forensic evidence- majority involved non- DNA tested forensic evidence- comparison of non-victim blood, semen or hair Prosecution experts testified on non-DNA evidence strength

Alleged government malfeasance or misconduct 8 cases alleged government misconduct –perjury testimony –Withholding exculpatory evidence –Intentionally erroneous lab tests

Evidence discovered after trial Most cases DNA test results represented newly discovered evidence after completion of the trial DNA testing- Nearly all defendants had tests done by private laboratories. Blood from defendant and samples from victim and evidence- corroborated by prosecution retesting 8 labs RFLP, 17 PCR 2 used both

Preservation of evidence Evidence in some cases had deteriorated to a point where DNA testing could not be performed Chain of custody in some also demonstrate a lack of adherence to proper procedures

DNA laboratory survey 23 % of the 21,621 cases DNA tests excluded suspects FBI report 20% inconclusive and 20% exclusions

Policy Implications Reliability of eyewitness testimony- Need for improved criteria for evaluating the reliability of eyewitness ID Reliability of Non-DNA analyses of Forensic Evidence vs DNA testing- Many cases relied on non-DNA analysis of blood or hair Competence and Reliability of DNA lab procedures- Accreditation (ASCLD-LAB) Preservation of Evidence- Need to preserve and maintaing CoC. Training of DNA forensic Uses-Juries will expect it and prosecutors and defense attorneys must be trained

Innocence Project National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers- NACDL members, Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, co-chairs of the NACDL DNA Task Force and founders of the Innocence Project at the Cardozo Law School in New York have spearhead the plight of the innocent imprisoned. Scheck and Neufeld utilize volunteer law students and attorneys to review hundreds of cases of people who say they have been falsely convicted, usually of rape or murder, and, when appropriate, arrange for DNA tests that may support their claim of innocence. 187 innocent prisoners have been exonerated with new DNA tests and evidence which excluded them as participants in the crimes for which they had been convicted.

Innocence Project

Major accomplishments: Exonerations – 187, since 1992 Access to DNA testing – 37 states allow access for post conviction DNA testing. Federal legislations – –Convicts may apply for post conviction DNA testing + Preserve evidence. –Quality lawyers for the indigent in death penalty cases. –Increased compensation for exonerated. –Independent auditing of crime labs The Innocence Project (

Major accomplishments – cont. Eyewitness identification reform. Independent crime lab audits State crime lab oversight Death penalty suspension (New York). Jury instructions; Eyewitness identifications The Innocence Project (

Post conviction DNA exoneree facts: –Total of 187 post conviction DNA exonerations. –14 were on death row. Since 1989, many people were indicted or arrested, until pretrial DNA test proved their innocence. 21 states have passed compensation laws (although they vary from state to state). The Innocence Project (

Major causes for wrongful convictions (according to IP experience) –Mistaken eyewitness identification. –Misapplication of forensic technology. –False confessions –Jailhouse informants –Bad legal representation. The Innocence Project (

“…The Innocence Project took something very old, a prisoner's claim of innocence, and paired that with something very new, forensic DNA testing. Due to our groundbreaking use of DNA technology, the Innocence Project has helped inspire the establishment of many of the over 30 other organizations dedicated to innocence work throughout the nation”. The Innocence Project (

Innocence Project Implications iew/ iew/ Federal suggestions (Huff, 2004) –“Innocence Protection Act” Enable convicted offenders to prove their innocence through DNA tests. Providing proper legal services for death penalty convictions. Compensation. Raising public awareness.

Innocence Project Implications Psychological (Grounds, 2004) –Some of the exonerates experience “significant psychiatric and adjustment difficulties” (p.178) –Lacking communication skills - stay alone and single. –Lose direction in life. –Lose ability to work. –Lost time.

Innocence Project Implications Social (Huff, 2004) –Loss of public trust in the justice system. –The true perpetrators are still free… –Recidivism.

Summary DNA testing can be used to exonerate those wrongly accused. In the NIJ study 28 defendants served a total of 197 years before DNA testing proved them innocent Policy implications include evaluation of eyewitness testimony, non-DNA evidence analysis, DNA Lab and expert competency, DNA training for prosecution and defense attorneys and preservation of evidence 187 cases have been processed by the Innocence Project group Societal implications are significant

clip ows/burden/view/ ows/burden/view/