Before the late 1800’s, DNA was never used in court cases. We did not have the equipment readily available. Then, in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, DNA testing started to become very popular. This is when cases started getting overturned from wrongful court convictions. Which meant that the criminal that had actually committed the crime was on the loose in the community still able to do harm. In today’s generation, we still have many wrongful court convictions. Either due to their being little to no DNA evidence in the beginning of their case or the DNA evidence was tested incorrectly or possibly tampered with and that is what lead to the conviction of the wrong person. With the high level of technology we have today and the highly skilled experts in the labs we shouldn’t have any wrongful convictions. While we
When set free and asked what he thought all those years in prison, he said “I just kept waiting and I am happy it’s over”
I believe convicted criminals are not afforded easy DNA access to DNA evidence. The reason for my opinion is that the evidence is closed to the labs and court. Also, the evidence could be tampered with as has happened in some cases. Plus, the labs have cases in priority and don’t have the time or resources to test every “wrongfully” convicted person in the court system.
Some barriers of gaining access to DNA evidence is that it is a secure facility for official personnel that can see and examine the evidence so there is a less chance of it being tampered with. The evidence stays in the labs and the evidence will stay preserved in a safe and protected storage room, unless being presented in court. Criminals don’t have access to it and they have to go through a process to possibly get it retested or in some cases tested for the first
As we learned this week, DNA databases are used by various governmental agencies for several different purposes. We all have seen new magazine shows such as, 20/20 or Dateline, that show the collection of DNA samples from suspects in a case that is compared to those collected at the scene of the crime. But what happens when the sample is an incomplete match, compromised, or contaminated? The answer is the wrongful conviction of innocent citizens. The case that I have decided to highlight, is the wrongful conviction of Herman Atkins. In 1986, Atkins was convicted of two counts of forcible rape, two counts of oral copulation, and robbery in the state of California. It was alleged that Herman entered a shoe store, and raped, beat, and robbed a
The National DNA Index (NDIS) contains over 8,483,906 offender profiles and 324,318 forensic profiles as of June 2010 (Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2010). It has been suggested by Froomkin, a Senior Washington Correspondent, that the FBI is “shifting its resources from forensics to feeding the database” (Froomkin, 2010). This dramatic shift curtails some of the benefits of the CODIS application to the criminal justice system, as the backlogs of DNA samples increase and the statutes of limitations grow nearer and nearer on unsolved crimes.
“DNA Testing and the Death Penalty.” ACLU: American Civil Liberties Union. 3 Oct. 2011. Web. 22 April 2014.
The first case where DNA evidence was used to convict a man took place in Florida in 1988: Andrews v. State, 533 So. 2d 841 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988). Andrews broke into a Florida woman 's home and sexually assaulted the woman at knife-point.
After reading a number of articles, and attending the “Picking Cotton” lecture. I have come to the conclusion that, without the breakthrough of DNA extraction technology. Many people would still be convicted of a crime they never committed.
Keiper L. More states use familial DNA as powerful forensic search tool. Reuters [Internet]. 2011 [cited May 16 2012]; N. page. Available from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-crime-dna-familial-idUSTRE72T2QS20110330.
Abstract; This paper explors the effects DNA fingerprinting has had on the trial courts and legal institutions. Judge Joseph Harris states that it is the "single greatest advance in the search for truth since the advent of the cross examination (Gest, 1988)." And I tend to agree with Judge Joseph's assertion, but with the invention and implementation of DNA profiling and technology has come numerous problems. This paper will explore: how DNA evidence was introduced into the trial courts, the effects of DNA evidence on the jury system and the future of DNA evidence in the trial courts.
Criminal Law declares what conduct is illegal and proscribes a penalty. Although, we rely on our court system to administer justice, sometimes the innocent are convicted (Risinger). Most people would not be able to imagine a person who is convicted of a crime as innocent, sometimes that is the case. Imagine what a variance that is: an innocent criminal. In an article by Radley Balko he asks the question, “How many more are innocent?” In his article, he questions America’s 250th DNA exoneration and states that it raises questions about how often we send the wrong person to prison. The other issue that follows is the means of appealing the court’s decision and who they can turn to for help.
DNA in forensic science has been around for a long time. DNA has had help in solving almost every crime committed. There have been a lot of crimes where people are raped or murdered and the person who did it runs free. Scientists can collect the littlest item they see at the scene, such as a cigarette butt or coffee cup and check it for DNA. People have spent years in jail for a crime they didn’t commit till DNA testing came into effect. People are getting out of jail after 20 years for a crime they didn’t commit, cause of the DNA testing. DNA has helped medical researchers develop vaccines for disease causing microbe. DNA has become a standard tool of forensics in many murders and rapes.
Since DNA technology has been used there has been a high number of individuals convicted, linked or found innocent of a crimes. This technology has helped law enforcement catch suspects that may have never been found without the use of this technology. However, the research reflected that there is a need for clearer interpretations of the DNA results, better equality provided for all regardless of race or class and that errors should be reduced to prevent having cases that need to be exonerated.
the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. National Institute of Justice, 10, 15. Retrieved from, https://www.ncjrs.gov/
"Using DNA to Solve Crimes." U.S. Department of Justice: National Institute of Justice. (September 9, 2014). Web. 29 May 2015.
Most studies have shown that popular opinion holds that without a doubt national DNA databases have proved useful in criminal investigations (Wallace, 2006, pS27). The concept of a national DNA database has raised concern about privacy and human rights as seen through the scope of public safety. All of these concerns are elevated with databases include convicted, arrestee, innocent, and “rehabilitated” offenders (Suter, 2010, p339). Robin Williams of University of Duham (2006) asserts that:
Singer, Julie A. "The Impact Of Dna And Other Technology On The Criminal Justice System: Improvements And Complications."Albany Law Journal Of Science & Technology 17.(2007): 87. LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
The process of gathering evidence largely depends on the role of discretion by the police. Once police have decided to pursue a reported crime, they then begin the process of gathering evidence. To ensure that the process of gathering evidence is lawful, the police must follow the procedure outlined in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), which describes the manner in which evidence can be collected. This act imposes certain limits on the way police can gather evidence and the types of evidence that can be used. The Act is able to protect the rights of citizens by making it a requirement for the police to gain necessary legal documentation, such as search warrants, in order to obtain some types of evidence and thus, protects the rights of ordinary systems. In more recent times, the use of technology has come to play a major role in the gathering of evidence and with this comes complications in the law. New technologies in relation to the criminal investigation process are mainly in reference to DNA evidence, genetic material that can place a suspect at the scene of a crime. The introduction of DNA evidence into the criminal investigation process has been extremely effective in achieving justice, as it is able to secure convictions. Initially, there were some setbacks to the use of DNA evidence