White House Seeks to Expand DNA DATABASE...

USA Today ^ | 4/15/2003 | Richard Willing

[michaelje]

WASHINGTON

[tracer]

It would appear that the WH doesn't read newspapers:

FBI Lab Under Fire for DNA, Bullet Analysis

By John Solomon, The Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Reformed after controversy in the mid-1990s, the FBI crime lab is dealing with new wrongdoing by employees that has opened the door to challenges of the lab's science in scores of cases involving DNA and bullet analysis, internal documents show.

One FBI lab scientist, who connected suspects to bullets through lead analysis, has been indicted after admitting she gave false testimony, and a technician has resigned while under investigation for alleged improper testing of more than 100 DNA samples, according to records and interviews.

In addition, one of the lab's retired metallurgists is challenging the bureau's science on bullet analysis, prompting the FBI to ask the National Academy of Sciences to review its methodology, the records obtained by The Associated Press show.

FBI Lab Director Dwight Adams said detection of the problems illustrates that reforms are working.

"The difference is these are being caught and dealt with swiftly. Our quality assurance program is in place to root out these problems, incompetence and inaccurate testimonies," Adams said. "These weren't fortuitous catches; they were on purpose."

Defense lawyers are already mounting challenges in high-profile cases handled by the two employees and are questioning the FBI's project to build a national DNA database that will help law enforcement identify suspects based on their genetic fingerprints.

"We all have assumed the scientists are telling the truth because they do it with authority and tests. And as a result, FBI scientists have gotten away with voodoo science," said Lawrence Goldman,president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

The Justice Department's internal watchdog is investigating FBI lab technician Jacqueline Blake for allegedly failing to follow proper scientific procedure when analyzing DNA in at least 103 cases over the past few years, officials said.

The officials said they have found that the technician failed to compare the DNA evidence with control samples, a required step to ensure the accuracy of tests. Blake resigned from the FBI lab recently.

Blake's work has become an issue in a prominent case in New Jersey, where five police officers are challenging blood evidence she analyzed that was used to convict them of federal civil rights violations in the death of a prisoner.

FBI officials have already taken steps to protect the national DNA registry in light of the allegations against Blake and separate revelations of problems in DNA analysis at the Houston police crime lab.

In Blake's case, 29 DNA samples that she placed into the database were removed and are being reanalyzed. The review so far has not found any instances in which her DNA analysis was inaccurate, and those samples have now been re-entered, Adams said.

FBI officials recently banned the Houston police lab from entering new DNA samples into the national registry.

[Black Agnes]

Doesn't have to be LEO's doing it. Can be some sneaky criminal planting evidence that *he* wasn't the one that did the crime. You leave DNA everywhere and it's not that easy to destroy (RNA is however but that's another story). The glasses you drank from at the restaurant last night, the kleenex you sneezed in & threw away...use your imagination.

[tracer]

The date of the AP story is today.....

[webstersII]

Just wait until Johnny Cochran hears about this. There are thousands of potential clients currently in jail who were convicted on DNA evidence.

[Wolfie]

What are you gonna do, vote Democrat? LOL!

[Black Agnes]

Depends on if they were convicted before or after the pcr kits became widely available. Give it time. 50years ago nobody would have thought that j.q. bubba could run a meth lab in his basement, this science technique is no different.(why do you think prosecutors don't want scientific types on the jury?)

[APBaer]

I think that it could be an improtant law enforcement tool. Why, if the FBI had Richard Jewell's DNA *before* the Olympic Park bombing I have no doubt that they would have solved *that* case.

[dirtboy]

I don't see it that way at all. I see it as giving the government an additional valuable tool to do its job, which is to secure our individual rights from those who would deprive us of these rights, including criminals.

Well, then, why stop with just people arrested but not convicted? Let's have EVERYONE submit a DNA sample. And their bank records. And let's allow cops to stop cars and search our homes whenever they want, without a warrant or probable cause. I bet we could REALLY put a bite in crime then.

Have you ever stopped to consider where your train of thought is heading?

[dirtboy]

What are you gonna do, vote Democrat? LOL!

Keep it up. One of these days I will walk from the GOP if it keeps up this nonsense. Might even start to build a new political party that has the interests of citizens at heart rather than corporations and political overlords.

[Black Agnes]

PCR is doing for genetic material what the invention of the printing press did for written material-making copying easy, inexpensive, and accessible.

[Black Agnes]

Let me give you a real life example of how PCR can 'mislead'. I work in a bioinformatics lab. We use this stuff all the time. We do protein analysis and use information from the Human Genome project and private sequence vendors. Once upon a time we got in a new upate to our sequence database and being good little employees we mined it to look for new possible drug targets. We *did* find a 'new' protein. Perplexed the hell out of us. Couldn't imagine what this particular type of protein was doing in that particular (human) tissue sample. Looked, mumbled, hypothesized, mumbled...Decided to see if this particular protein was similar to anything in any other organism genomes. (Many ongoing projects to sequence other organisms besides humans). Bingo! We got a 99.99% match (not bad considering sequencing errors are not all that uncommon in initial raw data). But it was in some sort of fish. Did a bit more poking and turns out it was a fish commonly used in Sushi. Turns out the tech doing the procedure to begin with had had sushi for lunch and hadn't washed his hands properly. (Don't even ask about e. coli contaminants in the human genome database data...although they're screened out these days because we compare proteins to other organisms that are sequenced & commonly appear in our 'environment' as it were...just didn't do the compare to sushi fish...)

[APBaer]

Charlie the Tuna,
a/k/a the Big Kahuna
now doing 10 to 20 in the can.

[Black Agnes]

*LOL* Something like that.

[inquest]

I wish the article said plainly whether they're proposing to keep the DNA from those who aren't convicted.

From the article: "DNA profiles from juvenile offenders and from adults who have been arrested but not convicted would be added to the FBI's national DNA database under a Bush administration proposal."

[kesg]

It seems to me that your main complaint about DNA databases is that they can be abused. In that case, the solution seems to be to legislate against the abuses instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. We don't refuse to give policemen guns just because some policeman commit crimes or torts with these guns. Same principle.

Nor do I see a Fourth Amendment problem with building a DNA database (I question whether the Fourth Amendment even applies to this situation), but even if it was a problem, the solution is to allow people to opt out. I certainly don't see a DNA database as any infringement on our liberty, as opposed to something that can actually enhance our liberty.

[APBaer]

"legislate against the abuses"

Duh.....
Do you think there was no legislation forbidding
those lab technicians from faking trial evidence?

[Protagoras]

Nor do I see a Fourth Amendment problem with building a DNA database (I question whether the Fourth Amendment even applies to this situation but even if it was a problem, the solution is to allow people to opt out.),

The law being discussed makes it mandatory for people arrested. (suspects)

It is the only thing I addressed. The fourth amendment concerns unlawful searchs and seizures.

[kesg]

Your DNA can be copied like a xerox machine by a process called PCR. DNA is hardly foolproof evidence anymore. Even fingerprints are harder to copy than DNA.

Are you contending here that DNA evidence is unreliable? Needless to say, if DNA evidence is unreliable, then that fact would be a good argument against a DNA database. However, I am unaware of anyone who seriously argues that DNA evidence is unreliable. The mere fact that DNA can be copied goes to authenticity and chain of custody issues that our courts are prefectly capable of handling.

[mabelkitty]

I smell a third party issue.

This database, as well as HIPPA, will change the country if it is allowed to go unchecked.

I don't trust the Supreme Court to shoot this down.

[Protagoras]

FBI's national DNA database under a Bush administration proposal."

This is another constitutional problem. The constitution does not give specfic authority to the federal government to compile such a database, therefore it is reserved to the states, or the people. They can do it if they like, and share it if they like.