State shouldn't expand DNA database

• Published January 12, 2009

Comments (0)

In the minds of courtroom jurors and the general public, DNA samples are a sure-fire source of evidence for use in connecting a criminal to the crime.

Since they burst on the criminal justice scene about 20 years ago, DNA samples have been used to free innocent people from prison and solve crimes once thought to be impossible, bringing closure to longstanding, heinous crimes such as rape and murder.

The federal government and several states are so enamored with the powers of DNA they have opted to start collecting samples, not just from convicted felons, but from individuals at the time of their arrest.

State law in Washington requires DNA samples to be taken from convicted felons, and for some lesser crimes of a sexual nature. But to date, it's not standard procedure when someone is arrested.

That would change if supporters of a bill to be introduced in the 2009 state Legislature have their way. Scheduled to be introduced by Rep. Mark Miloscia, D-Federal Way, the bill would make DNA samples routine at the time of a felony arrest.

A similar bill was introduced in the 2005 session and received a public hearing in a House committee, but that's it.

State legislators would be wise to stick with the current law, rather than expand sampling to people arrested, but not convicted, of a crime. Here's why:

There's a growing body of evidence that the rush to expand the DNA database maintained by federal and state authorities has in some cases has overwhelmed the ability of investigators to process, catalogue and use the information free of error.

The biggest problem appears to be cross- contamination of samples. Contamination of samples has increased as scientists have honed their skills to the point they can obtain a DNA profile from one-billionth of a gram of genetic material, according to a report last year by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, a London-based group that reviews developments in biology and medicine.

Emotions run high on both sides of the issue. Supporters of expanded use of DNA samples point to highly publicized cases where serial rapists or murders could have been brought to justice much sooner — saving innocent lives — if their DNA sample was on file with the state from some previous, felony arrest.

On the other hand, civil libertarians are quick to point out that the presumption of innocence applies to someone arrested of a crime. Take a DNA sample and that person's privacy has been invaded in a way that goes far beyond a fingerprint.

Miloscia's bill would require the Washington State Patrol to remove from the state database DNA markers of anyone who is acquitted of a crime or has his or her charges dropped.

But again, a DNA database that is subjected to rapid expansion and constant removal of samples would be costly and prone to human error.

The state would incur increased costs, if it expanded the DNA sampling program. With lawmakers about to convene in Olympia with a nearly $6 billion budget shortfall staring them in the face, paying for a program to grab and process DNA samples of people at the time of a felony arrest is not a high priority.