DNA Code
Only a small fraction of our total DNA makes us different from
gorillas,
chimpanzees and other primates. An even smaller fraction makes one
person
different from the next. It's these differences that forensic DNA
experts use to
identify people and determine the source of biological
evidence such as blood or
semen found at a crime scene. DNA testing is
powerful, sensitive and effective
in pointing to the guilty and absolving the
innocent. To date, 67 convicted
felons have been exonerated nationwide based
on DNA evidence. The vast majority
of those have been rape cases. But DNA
testing as it is now performed raises a
question as to whether the public
should fear that an innocent person may be
wrongfully convicted or a
legitimate suspect excluded from consideration. Should
we be concerned that
the government can order the collection of one's DNA for
purposes of
identification, much like a set of fingerprints? DNA contains much
more
personal information than a fingerprint. Recognizing the importance of
DNA,
our government sponsored the Human Genome Project in 1990 to determine
the
sequence of DNA sub-units within each of our 46 chromosomes. The
complete
sequence will be deciphered within the next few years. With this
information,
there will be dramatic advances in many medically related areas,
giving doctors
the ability to predict illness, make better diagnoses and
perform gene therapy
to correct sometimes deadly genetic defects. DNA online
With the development of
specialized machines, it is now relatively easy to
make millions of copies of
any gene and determine its sequence. With the same
equipment, we can determine
the genetic composition of anyone who becomes a
suspect in a crime. This
information can be incorporated into a local, state
or national database for
future use. In 1998, the FBI laboratory brought its
National DNA Index System
online. DNA profiles from convicted offenders and
crime scene evidence submitted
by forensic labs are combined into a single
national database. As a result, DNA
evidence found at a crime scene in New
York can be used to identify a suspect in
Virginia if a matching profile
is found. New York City Police Commissioner
Howard Safir has proposed
that all those convicted of any crime be required to
submit a specimen of
their cells for analysis and that their DNA profiles become
part of the
state's database. The city's mayor, Rudolph Giuliani, has gone even
further
and endorsed the idea of collecting DNA samples from everyone at
birth.
Both say the benefits associated with increased testing are well
worth the cost
to 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 perfect
science? Forensic DNA analysis is held in
such high esteem that it has developed
a reputation of infallibility. But is
it really the perfect science or can
analysts make mistakes? A mistake could
cost a suspect his liberty or even his
life. This almost happened in England,
where a DNA test matched an innocent man
to a burglary crime scene. Based on
a test using six genes, he was deemed the
likely source of the crime scene
evidence. He matched the evidentiary profile
perfectly. But in a more
rigorous 10-gene analysis, conducted because he
presented a very strong
alibi, he was excluded as a suspect. Britain's DNA
database is the largest in
the world, consisting of almost 700,000 profiles.
When it comes to
criminal matters, civil liberties in Britain are apparently
less of a concern
than they are in the United States. Most English subjects tend
to volunteer
specimens when police ask them to do so. As with any medical
procedure, one
must weigh the benefits of DNA testing against any potential
downside. There
are clearly a number of ethical and legal issues that must be
addressed. How
can we be sure that someone won't gain access to your genetic
profile and
sell it to a prospective employer or insurance company? It's a
frightening
thought, but political candidates may one day find themselves
compelled to
provide samples of their DNA. Genetic profiles could then influence
the way
people vote. The good, the bad and the ugly Everything we are is in
our
DNA -- personality, behavioral traits, intelligence, the likelihood
of
developing a disease. In other words, the good, the bad and the ugly. To
avoid
the potential for abuse, the government should just retrieve
identifying
information from the samples and destroy the rest. I believe that
while there
are 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 genetic
information doesn't fall into the wrong hands. We all
want to see an end to
violent crime, but at what cost? Should we take samples
from all those arrested
regardless of how serious the charge? Should we test
everyone at birth? Should
we be concerned that governmental police agencies
may soon possess our total
genetic blueprint? With the phenomenon of computer
hacking that now confronts
us, should we worry about database security? What
do you think? Lawrence
Kobilinsky, Ph.D., is a professor of forensic
science and associate provost at
John Jay College of Criminal Justice in
New York City. He is an internationally
recognized expert in the areas of
serology and DNA analysis and serves as a
consultant to the U.S. State
Department. THIS WEEK: Going Mindhunting More About
John Douglas UNSOLVED
FEATURE New Test IDs Victim Linked to Green River Case
Brings to 42 the
Number of Women Accounted For PREVIOUS KOBILINSKY COLUMNS
Building a Case
From a Drop of Blood How Far Should DNA Collection Go? Body of
Evidence
More About Lawrence Kobilinsky KOBILINSKY BOOK LIST LAWRENCE
KOBILISNKSY
EVENTS improve its use as a tool of investigation and adjudication
in
criminal cases. The Commission will address issues in five specific
areas:
(1) the use of DNA in post-conviction relief cases—view published
report, (2)
legal concerns including Daubert challenges and the scope of
discovery in DNA
cases, (3) criteria for training and technical assistance
for criminal justice
professionals involved in the identification, collection
and preservation of DNA
evidence at the crime scene—view published pamphlet,
(4) essential laboratory
capabilities in the face of emerging technologies,
and (5) the impact of future
technological developments on the use of DNA in
the criminal justice system.
Each topic will be the focus of in-depth
analysis by separate working groups
comprised of prominent professionals who
will report back to the
Commission.