Fixing Flaws in Forensic Science
By John Terzano
In recent decades, the use of forensic science in criminal investigations has skyrocketed. In the media, TV crime dramas like CSI: Crime Scene Investigation portray forensic evidence collection and analysis as a flawless science that can quickly and accurately identify the perpetrator. Yet time and again, inaccurate or misleading forensic evidence and testimony has helped to convict the wrong person.
Dennis Fritz and Ron Williamson were convicted of a crime they didn’t commit based on microscopic hair comparison - a notoriously unreliable forensic test. Williamson was sent to death row and Fritz spent a decade in prison before DNA testing proved their innocence. Brandon Moon, another innocent man, went to prison for seventeen years after a state forensic crime lab analyst gave erroneous testimony at his trial.
Flawless? According to a recent study, faulty forensic evidence or testimony was a contributing factor in nearly sixty percent of the first 200 DNA exonerations. While a few of those cases involved deliberate misconduct, most problems result from inadvertent errors due to the fact that many areas of forensic analysis involve discretionary interpretations by individual analysts.
Fortunately, there are simple steps that can be taken to ensure the integrity of forensic testing and analysis.
Today, The Justice Project is releasing Improving the Practice and Use of Forensic Science: A Policy Review. The policy review provides an overview of the problems with certain forensic science policies and procedures, offers solutions to these problems, profiles cases of injustice, highlights states with good laws and procedures, and includes a model policy to ensure the objectivity and reliability of forensic evidence.
Substantive, independent oversight is the first step. Forensic crime labs often operate with little or no oversight, and few states have established statutory standards to ensure the objectivity, reliability, and efficiency of forensic testing and analysis. To improve accountability, states should create independent commissions to oversee forensic science laboratories. The commissions would be responsible for implementing standards for laboratory performance, overseeing analyst training and continuing education, and instituting safeguards to ensure accurate testimony.
Often, bias is inadvertent. Information such as details of the crime, names of suspects, and the expected result can impact an analyst’s objectivity. In one study, experienced examiners were given fingerprints they had correctly identified in the past along with made up information, such as that the suspect had confessed. With the additional information, these examiners misidentified seventeen percent of the fingerprints.
Given that, states should require all forensic labs to develop internal structures and policies to prevent unintentional bias in testing and analysis. The use of an evidence control officer, for instance, could manage the flow of information from law enforcement to ensure that analysts receive only the information necessary to test the evidence.
Ideally, all laboratories should be independent from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies to eliminate bias from the process. Instead nearly all state forensic labs are under the jurisdictions of police departments or the attorneys general. As a result, analysts may come to see their role as part of the “crime fighting team” rather than as neutral and objective agents of science. Independence helps labs become neutral environments dedicated to scientific procedures that ensure accurate and reliable testing.
The demands on forensic laboratories and the high stakes involved demand that analysts receive proper scientific training and are certified before they are allowed to perform forensic analysis or testify in criminal trials. Laboratories should also adopt a strong ethical code to help analysts understand the serious nature of their responsibilities and to guide them through the sometimes challenging ethical waters they face.
Of course none of these reforms can be achieved without sufficient funding. In many states, funding for forensic laboratories has remained constant despite a dramatic increase in workload. And low salaries make it difficult for forensic laboratories to hire and retain highly qualified analysts. Salaries must be competitive with other job opportunities to attract the best and brightest applicants.
While forensic laboratories have yielded critical evidence in countless cases, preventable error has subverted justice, convicted the innocent, and jeopardized public safety. Law enforcement, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and the public at large all have a vested interest in making sure reforms are implemented to reduce the risk of mistakes and to elevate the quality and objectivity of forensic evidence and testimony.
Read More About Forensic Oversight
Improving the Practice and Use of Forensic Science
Forensic science can be a powerful tool for seeking truth in criminal trials and investigations, but it is not flawless. A recent study found that faulty forensic evidence or testimony was a contributing factor in nearly sixty percent of wrongful convictions.
This week, The Justice Project is releasing Improving the Practice and Use of Forensic Science: A Policy Review. This policy review provides an overview of the problems that plague forensic science, offers solutions to these problems, profiles cases of injustice, highlights states with good laws and policies related to forensic science, and includes a model policy.
Increasing Access to Post-Conviction DNA Testing
DNA is a powerful scientific tool for proving guilt or innocence, but barriers throughout the criminal justice system are preventing this tool from being used effectively.
Increasing Access to Post-Conviction DNA Testing: A Policy Review is a new publication from The Justice Project designed to foster a dialogue among policy makers and to help states implement better DNA testing procedures and practices. This policy review provides an overview of problems with current post-conviction DNA testing laws, offers solutions to these problems, profiles cases of injustice, highlights states with good laws and policies for DNA testing, and includes a model policy.
Post-Conviction DNA Testing Shouldn’t Depend on Miracles
By now everyone knows that DNA testing is a powerful scientific tool for proving guilt or innocence in our criminal justice system. Often post-conviction DNA testing provides the only evidence that can correct the injustice of wrongful conviction.
But what if all the biological evidence is destroyed while you’re still in prison? What if there is evidence but it’s not discovered until after state-imposed deadline for seeking DNA testing? What if the state denies your petition for testing because you accepted a plea bargain to avoid a harsher sentence for a crime you didn’t commit? And what if you’re indigent and can’t afford an attorney to help navigate the complex legal and scientific issues involved in obtaining a DNA test?
The sad truth is that it often takes a series of miracles to gain access to post-conviction DNA testing. That’s because our criminal justice system continues to place significant obstacles in the way of post-conviction DNA testing that could determine whether the wrong people have been convicted and punished for crimes they didn’t commit.
Today, The Justice Project is releasing Increasing Assess to Post-Conviction DNA Testing: A Policy Review. This policy review explains the problems surrounding post-conviction DNA testing policies and procedures and identifies the best practices for states to adopt to ensure that post-conviction DNA testing contributes to a more accurate criminal justice system and restores public confidence in the system’s ability to correct its own errors.
To date, more than 200 people - including 16 who were sentenced to death - have been proven innocent by DNA testing. In many of those cases, the same DNA test helped bring the real perpetrators to justice.
But seven states - Alabama, Alaska, Massachusetts, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota and Oklahoma - don’t even have laws on the books allowing for post-conviction DNA testing. And those that do have laws fall short of what is needed to ensure that DNA testing can be used effectively to correct the injustice of wrongful conviction.
All but 12 states and the District of Columbia lack statutes requiring the preservation of evidence throughout an inmate’s incarceration. An investigative series this year by The Columbus Dispatch found that “evidence had been lost or destroyed nearly two-thirds of the time that prosecutors agreed to search for it because Ohio does not require evidence to be catalogued and saved.” States should require the preservation of biological evidence throughout a defendant’s sentence and devise standards regarding the custody of evidence.
States should also ensure that all inmates with a DNA-based innocence claim may petition for DNA testing at any time without regard to plea, confession, self-implication, the nature of the crime, or previous unfavorable test results. Nearly a dozen of the more than 200 DNA exonerees initially plead guilty, and 50 purportedly confessed to crimes they did not commit. And because DNA testing technology continues to improve, a defendant’s right to request testing must not be subject to time limitations. If new technology develops that might change the outcome of a test, the test should be performed.
The complexity of the petitioning process also creates an unreasonable burden for a wrongfully convicted person who needs DNA testing to prove his or her innocence. The steps involved in obtaining DNA testing are difficult even for experienced advocates. That’s why states should provide counsel and cover the cost of post-conviction DNA testing for indigent petitioners.
These are just a few of the steps that need to be taken. As with any good policy, the benefits of post-conviction DNA testing statutes outweigh the costs. While improving access to post-conviction DNA testing will require states to incur some initial costs, those costs are minimal and could end up saving states money in the long run.
The federal government recognized the importance of post-conviction DNA testing with the passage of the Innocence Protection Act (IPA) in 2004. The IPA includes the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Program, which authorizes $25 million over five years to help states defray the cost of post-conviction DNA testing. The program is named for Kirk Noble Bloodsworth, the first person sentenced to death to be exonerated by DNA evidence.
In Bloodsworth’s case, the DNA test results not only proved that he did not sexually assault and murder nine-year-old Dawn Hamilton, they also identified the real perpetrator who then confessed to the crime. But it took another series of miracles for that to happen. It was only through a chance encounter that Bloodsworth’s attorney learned that the trial judge had kept some of the evidence in a cardboard box in his chambers. And the attorney paid for the testing out of his own pocket.
Our criminal justice system is too fraught with error to rely on miracles to find the truth. Post-conviction DNA testing serves the interests of fairness, accuracy and public confidence in the criminal justice system, and states should make every effort to facilitate testing for defendants claiming innocence.
A New Website for The Justice Project
Welcome to The Justice Project’s new website!
Along with a fresh, new look, this website has been designed to inform, engage and empower citizens and supporters of The Justice Project (TJP) as we work together to increase fairness and accuracy in the criminal justice system.
Introducing the Justice Newsladder
By John Terzano
I’ve been engaged in social justice advocacy for more than 25 years. In that time, I’ve seen how important a fair and accurate criminal justice system is to our society. When crimes are committed, our system should determine the truth. Unfortunately, time and time again, the system gets it wrong.
Earlier this month, Glen Chapman of North Carolina became the 128th prisoner on death row to be released since 1972. The courts found that detectives committed perjury at Chatman’s trial and withheld potential evidence of his innocence from his defense attorneys. The forensic evidence was so bad that one of the two homicides pinned on Chapman may in fact have been a drug overdose. Chatman, who spent 14 years behind bars, was also a victim of bad defense lawyering.
Chapman’s exoneration doesn’t prove the system works. Just the opposite: It shows how a broken system produces spectacular failures that are bad for defendants and victims alike. That’s why I founded The Justice Project, a national nonprofit organization dedicated to increasing fairness and accuracy in the criminal justice system.
A large part of our work involves educating citizens and criminal justice stakeholders about the serious problems and common-sense solutions in a way that creates an environment for reform. People need to know that these problems are not rare or isolated incidents. Stories like the one mentioned above are reported every day around the country, but all too often they reach a limited audience or wind up lost in the shuffle of other news coverage.
This is why we have helped launch The Justice NewsLadder, a new web site designed to make staying on top of developments in criminal justice reform easier. The Justice Newsladder pulls together daily news articles, blog posts, videos and other media so that real-time information is readily accessible with the click of a mouse. On The Justice NewsLadder, you’ll find information about the problems of unreliable witness identification, false confessions, junk forensic science and more. You’ll also find stories of people taking on the difficult work of making the system better.
In addition, we are launching two state-specific NewsLadders – the Tennessee Justice NewsLadder and the Texas Justice NewsLadder – to provide information about states where we are actively engaged in improving the state justice systems.
You can play an important role in making the Justice NewsLadders an essential tool for criminal justice reform. The format of The Justice NewsLadder allows anyone who signs up to post a link, recommend a link, comment on a story and raise the profile of a story by voting it up the ladder. The more people join and the more information they post to the Justice NewsLadder, the better informed we all will be.
Access to information is essential to understanding the issues and being able to take action to create a more just and humane world. We hope The Justice NewsLadder will help more people understand not only the challenges we face, but also the actions we need to take to achieve a more just and accurate criminal justice system.
John F. Terzano is President of The Justice Project, a nonpartisan organization that works to increase fairness and accuracy in the criminal justice system, with a focus on the capital punishment system. The blog was originally published on The Huffington Post.
Justice Department Holding DNA Testing Program Hostage
By Kirk Noble Bloodsworth
The day President Bush signed the Innocence Protection Act into law was one of the proudest days of my life. The law, part of the Justice for All Act of 2004, included a new program named after me: the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Program.
The program provides federal grants to states to conduct DNA testing that can exonerate the innocent and help identify the truly guilty. At the time, the program’s creation seemed a fitting end to a terrible chapter in my life, my 20-year struggle to prove my innocence after being convicted and sentenced to die for the brutal rape and murder of Dawn Hamilton, a 9-year-old girl I had never met.
Given my life experience, however, I should have known that the struggle for justice never ends. Without adequate funding and the proper implementation, a law on the books is just words on paper, even if the words come from Congress. And that’s how this Administration and its Department of Justice are treating the Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA program.
To date, Congress has appropriated nearly $14 million for the Bloodsworth program. Yet DoJ has yet to approve a single grant application or send the first dollar to states requesting the funding.
Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Today I’ll be at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing where Justice Department officials will try to explain away their failure to carry out this critical program. Based on the history of the IPA, however, it’s clear that DoJ’s failure is no accident. The department has been against this program from the beginning. They opposed it when the House passed the legislation by the resounding vote of 393 to 14. They opposed it when it passed the Senate. And they opposed it when it was signed into law.
Unable to stop the law from being enacted, DoJ is now holding the program’s funding hostage and denying people with claims of innocence the chance to prove it.
It’s simply inexcusable.
Post-conviction DNA testing is a powerful means for ensuring public safety. It has not only led to the exoneration of over 200 wrongfully convicted individuals, it has also confirmed many a suspect’s guilt. When states are denied funding for post-conviction DNA testing, they are being denied the truth.
My life is proof of the injustice that can happen when our criminal justice system makes mistakes and the power of DNA testing to enable those mistakes to be corrected. After my arrest and conviction in 1984, I waited 8 years, 11 months and 19 days in prison, including two years on Maryland’s death row, before DNA testing proved my innocence. Then I waited another 10 years for the prosecution to run the DNA profile of the perpetrator in state and federal databases to find out that the real rapist and murderer was a man on my cell block who was in prison for another assault.
Quite simply, had it not been for DNA testing, I would have died an innocent man in prison.
Mistakes in the criminal justice system are not new. The organization I work for, The Justice Project, has been studying the leading factors of wrongful convictions and advocating for meaningful reform to prevent further miscarriages of justice. Post-conviction DNA testing offers the unique opportunity to correct the mistakes of our criminal justice system while helping it to become more fair and reliable. With states being denied access to the appropriated millions for DNA testing, errors will likely go uncorrected and further mistakes are certain.
I don’t have all the answers to the problems facing our criminal justice system, but I do know that there are other cases like mine out there. I feel a personal responsibility to each state that has been denied this grant money for post-conviction DNA testing. As this program bears my name, I feel it is my obligation to ensure that it is funded and implemented as it was meant to be. No one should have to wait 20 years for justice.
The Department of Justice has the money and the guidance from Congress needed to make the Bloodsworth DNA testing program work. The time for excuses is over.
Kirk Noble Bloodsworth is the first person sentenced to death row in the United States to be exonerated by DNA evidence. He is the program officer of The Justice Project, a nonpartisan organization that works to address unfairness and inaccuracy in the criminal justice system, with a focus on the capital punishment system.
