Prosecutors Fight DNA Use for Exoneration

[frustrated_lefty]

By ADAM LIPTAK (NYT)

"Prosecutors acknowledge that DNA testing is reliable, but they have grown increasingly skeptical of its power to prove innocence in cases where there was other evidence of guilt. Defense lawyers say these prosecutors, who often relied on the same biological evidence to convict the defendants before DNA testing was available, are more committed to winning than to justice."

<snip>

"While prosecutors concede that DNA can prove whether someone is associated with a given piece of biological evidence, they insist that is not the same thing as proving whether a defendant committed a crime."

<snip>

"In the McKinley case, prosecutors concede that DNA testing of the sperm found in a rape of an 11-year-old girl shows that it could not have come from the defendant. The prosecutors now say that doesn't matter. "The DNA is a sideshow," said Edward Griffith, a spokesman for the Miami-Dade state attorney's office."

<snip>

"Other prisoners in Florida may never be able to seek DNA testing because of the Oct. 1 deadline. Almost 500 inmates have contacted lawyers and groups that represent potentially innocent people asking for help in reviewing transcripts, finding evidence and making motions. Teams of volunteer lawyers and law students are working furiously to beat the deadline."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/29/national/29DNA.html?hp

I am so disgusted by this, I don't know what to say. Placing a deadline on DNA testing is morally reprehensible. The McKinley case suggests DNA testing, alone, is inadequate to make a case in all situations, but dammit RFLP mapping does not lie!

[dfong63]

1. f*cking hypocrites

this makes it f*cking crystal clear they don't f*cking give a flying f*ck about justice. so DNA is good enough to convict, but not good enough to absolve. may every damn one of those f*cking hypocrites someday be on the receiving end of the same kind of "justice" that they are inflicting others.

[mjb4]

2. you are worth more to repukes in jail

that is why they hate the law and justice...also note how blacks are automatically charge with a felony regardless of what the act is. the baby in the car is a felony..yet a rich white couple just forgot, they got the wet towels out but not the retarded kid.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. This has been going on for years.

A constant complaint from defense lawyers is the difficulty in reopening cases when new evidence shows up, and DNA is no exception. Several jusrisdictions have fought any DNA analysis even though there is blood or semen evidence available and the conviction came before the newer techniques. Of course, prosecutors always fight retrials-- that's their job. Sometimes they fight a bit too hard.

As usual, there are at least two sides to the story, though. There are very few cases where DNA can actually prove guilt or innocence, and most trials depend on DNA as only a part of the evidence. Even honest prosecutors (and they do exist) worry about the expense and other problems of opening a new trial and finding all those old witnesses when there was enough other evidence for a conviction. Their fear is that a retrial will almost always have a weaker prosecution case, and introducing evidence that casts some doubt on what was once a strong case will let the guilty go free.

Unfortunately, there is that large number of prosecutors who simply stonewall. I've had this discussion with defense attorneys, and there are some who are on a mission, and some who just can't accept that they were wrong.

A criminal trial, particularly if it is a gruesome crime, takes a toll on everyone involved. Prosecutors will have spent quite a bit of time with the victim, or the survivors, and will often have an emotional attachment to the case. Sure, they are supposed to be professionally detached, but sometimes they are just human. After months of prep and the actual trial, demonizing the defendant, the thought that they may have been trying the wrong person can be just too much for them.

Not a defense of prosecutorial misconduct-- there's far too much of that around and it should never be condoned. Just noting that even when we try, life is just not always fair.

On edit-- yeah, the deadline here is the point. That deadline is completely inexcusable under any circumstances. Tough on crime my rosy red ass. The only point is to clear the dockets and move that damn assembly line.

It's not justice and it is not right.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

4. I agree and especially in cases wuch as murder where there

is no statute of limitations, evidence that might exonerate whould also not expire.

[Cheswick2.0]

5. and in addition, DAs don't want to screw with their conviction rate

if we go back and look at all these cases, they may suddenly find that they are not such hot shot prosecutors.