Expanding+the+DNA+Debatabase

Alyssa Piechocki Sonja Mack English 112 Section E 6 Feb 2012 Expanding the DNA Debatabase In a perfect world—or on an episode of //CSI//—after a crime is committed, a team of highly specialized forensic scientists would swarm the scene, collect perfectly preserved pieces of evidence, run back to their laboratories and examine their finds. They would always process their abundant quantities of DNA evidence right away, and upon entering the results of the latter into a computer database, discover who the bad guy is. Unfortunately, our world is not perfect and determining the identity of a perpetrator is not so simple. Nonetheless, strides are being made in the process of making these identifications, which is why support for a recent proposal by the State of New York is crucial. Although the above //CSI//-like scenario takes place in a perfect world, it is not science fiction entirely. The computer database that stores the results of DNA samples really does exist; however, it is currently not being used to its potential. Often times, DNA evidence is collected from a crime scene, run through the computer database, but due to a lack of DNA samples in the system, the evidence does not generate a match. The bad guy is not identified and, for obvious reasons, this is a problem. Currently, those convicted of a felony or one of 36 misdemeanors under penal law must provide a DNA sample. That is less than //half// of all convicted criminals. The DNA databanks need to expand to include more. New York’s Warren County District Attorney Kate Hogan agrees that it is not enough. “ DNA samples are taken from only 48 percent of convicted offenders. That's akin to a doctor saying, 'I have medicine that I know can cure an illness, but I can only use it with 48 percent of my patients,'" Hogan said. Recently, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo proposed that the state expand their DNA databank to include all misdemeanor convictions under the penal code and all felony convictions under other statutes like traffic and business laws, for example. In other words, if an individual is convicted of driving under the influence, that person would be required to submit a DNA sample. The DNA sample would then be tested and the results recorded in a computer database such as CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) to later be compared to evidence found at any crime scene. New York expanded their databank slightly in 2006 when they made some misdemeanors DNA-eligible. Since then, DNA profiles from shoplifting and criminal trespass convictions have matched to 332 sexual assault cases, and profiles from petty larceny convictions have been linked to 48 murders and 220 sexual assaults. And in New York alone, the existing DNA databank has helped solve 2,700 crimes and exonerated 27 people. The State of New York is clearly taking a huge step in the right direction. By increasing the parameters to include more minor crimes they are solving and preventing more serious crimes. To victims and their families awaiting the identity of a murderer or rapist, this is invaluable. And to citizens less at risk of becoming victimized, this is has the potential to be lifesaving. Studies show that individuals are often habitual offenders of serious crimes, such as rape, who have been convicted of lower-level misdemeanors. If DNA samples are made mandatory for those individuals when they are convicted for the misdemeanors the first time, the heartache spared could very well be momentous. Especially with a traumatic crime such as rape, DNA evidence is able to lift some of the burden of having to testify in a courtroom off of the victim. DNA speaks for itself, as it is nearly impossible for two people to have the same genetic information. In New York there has never been a “false positive,” or a misidentification of DNA from one person as the DNA of another. While it is not 100% positive proof of one’s guilt, as with any piece of evidence, it surely is the best and most reliable clue out there to date. In addition, DNA samples have become much less invasive over the years. It is easier than taking a sample of blood. Today, a sample can be obtained by simply swabbing the inside of the mouth. The intrusiveness of New York’s proposal will undoubtedly be called into question, so it’s important to understand that the procedure itself is not the problem. Those in opposition to the DNA databank expansion will likely argue that it is an invasion of privacy and an insult to civil liberties. While genetic material is indeed very personal, the collection of it for the greater good takes precedence over the matter. Not only that, but people give away extensive amounts of private information every day to outside agencies like insurance brokers and mortgage lenders. People already trust the private sector with their information; they can most certainly trust the public authority of the police. The DNA samples would be protected and only used in the detection of crime, so the innocent civilian should have no reason to worry. Governor Cuomo and the State of New York deserve support on this issue. By expanding the DNA database they are creating more samples of genetic material to be compared to, and thus providing the means to solve cases, prevent, crime, and exonerate the wrongly accused. They should be applauded for paving the way to a safer future and a more fair justice system. It is my hope that the rest of the nation follows in their footsteps and, state by state, begin expanding more databanks to include all misdemeanors and felony convictions. Our world is far from perfect after all, so every step goes a long way.