Radio tonight

I'll be on Desert News Talk Station KNewsRadio.com 94.3 FM with host Christopher Rice tonight at 7:15 PM Pacific talking about the Crime Lab Project. If you get a chance, listen in and call in! http://www.knewsradio.com

Brief notes

I hope you are planning to attend Left Coast Crime 2010 in Los Angeles next March! I'm the Guest of Honor -- along with some guy named Lee Child. You may have heard of him? Yeah, I think he's great, too. Anyway, we'll be there along with Bill Fitzhugh and lots of others, so please register now. And don't forget to sign up for the Forensic Science Day -- it's going to be so cool!

The Crime Lab Project blog is running a Death Quiz -- find out how much you really know about death investigation in the U.S. -- and then tell your friends to take the quiz. Ignoring the dead can cost us our lives.

My Web Master is as overwhelmed with work as I am, so it may be a little while before my schedule on the site shows this, but -- I'm going to have some new additions to my October schedule, including the Southern Festival of Books, October 9-11 in Nashville, Tennessee. Stay tuned for details.

Speaking of Web sites, don't know if I've mentioned it or not, but one of my nieces, Heather Cvar, is a makeup artist, and her recently updated site has some cool photos on it. You can see them at HeatherCvar.com

Artistic ability runs in the family -- her mom, my sister Sandy Cvar, will be one of the print-makers featured at the International Printing Museum's Los Angeles Printers Fair on August 29. And if you go to the Orange County Fair, look for one of Sandy's prints in the Fine Arts Professional Graphics exhibit!

That's it for now. I have a ton of stuff to post here, but it will have to wait while I work on my next book.

Invest Your Forensic Science Reality Check

Two years ago, the U.S. Congress mandated a study of forensic science by the National Academy of Sciences. Founded by a law passed during the Civil War, the NAS provides expert studies of scientific matters for the government.

So many have eagerly (or with trepidation) awaited their report on the state of forensic science in the U.S., and its recommendations on how it might be improved. That report was made public last week. You can read about here:
http://www.tinyurl.com/NASforensic

The report should serve as a reality check to those who believe in the fantasy world version of forensic science. The NAS called for "major reforms and new research," said that forensic science in the U.S. is "badly fragmented," that it is lacking in "rigorous certification programs," that "many forensic science labs are underfunded, understaffed, and have no effective oversight."

And that's just part of the first paragraph of their press briefing.

You may notice that much of this fits in with what the Crime Lab Project has been saying for some time.

Over the next few weeks, I'll be reading the full report from the NAS (you can read it free online, pay for a full-report pdf, buy chapters, or order a hardcover on the NAS Web site). I'll post my thoughts about it here, but I encourage you to read it for yourself. The more people who are informed about the challenges facing forensic science, the better our chances of seeing real change.

Calling All Californians -- Urgent Help Needed for Our Labs

Did you know that in the State of California, there are more minimum requirements set by the state for the training of the person who cuts your hair than there are for those who examine evidence in murder cases?

If you live in California (or are willing to contact a friend or relative there to ask for help for crime labs, please fell free to forward this message):

Legislation to help California crime labs is now on the governor's desk. Assembly Bill 1079 would create a task force to conduct a much-needed review of the state of forensic science labs in the state. AB1079 was passed in the State Senate and Assembly, but Governor Schwarzenegger has thus far refused to sign it into law. We hope to avoid a veto of this important bill, and your help is urgently needed!

Please call, fax, e-mail or write a letter to the governor as soon as possible!

Here's the contact info:

The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger
Governor of California
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633
E-mail via http://gov.ca.gov/interact

Here is a sample letter:

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

I am writing to express my strong support for AB1079, which would create the Crime Laboratory Review Task Force.

California's eleven state and nineteen local crime labs provide a wide range of forensic science services. However, there are no universal standards for certification for criminalists in California nor is there a mandatory requirement that all crime laboratories meet minimum standards. These labs evolved over decades without any statewide planning, review, or coordination to maximize their capabilities and effectiveness.

Our labs play a critical role in law enforcement, justice, and public health and safety. I urge you to sign AB1079 so that we may make the best use of this invaluable asset to our state.


Yours,

[include your name, address and phone number when signing.]

************
Thank you! Please send a copy of your letter or e-mail message to
"contact [[@ ]] crime lab project.com"
(remove all brackets and spaces in anything between the quotation marks, and don't include the quotation marks, either.)

If you want to read the legislation itself, please click here to see the original version -- or to see it as amended, click here and search by Bill Number for AB1079.

Getting the Big Picture re DNA and Cold Cases

Those who learn forensic science from TV may be shocked to hear that simply having a DNA match does not necessarily solve a case or lead to a conviction.

An article in yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle tells how the hard work of a cold case unit in San Jose paid off in solving the 1980 rape and murder of Bettina Sailer, a young German woman who was traveling and working in the U.S. before her death. It gives a good look at how DNA helped -- but was only part of what was needed to bring an accused to trial.

The article presents a solid case for the need for local jurisdictions to commit to investigation beyond the leads that DNA can provide. Funding DNA is important. However, your local lab can come up with DNA cold hits, but if no resources are devoted to assigning homicide detectives to do further investigation in these cases, convictions are unlikely.

Please do this now -- you'll help crime labs

As many of you know, I'm concerned about the many problems created by the lack of funding for public forensic science in the United States.

I've just received this message from Beth Lavach, lobbyist for the Consortium of Forensic Science Organizations, about pending legislation that would help fund forensic science in the U.S. -- please lend your immediate support! Responding only takes a few minutes, and you can do a great deal of good by helping out.



As a result of the strong support and efforts of Senators Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Richard Shelby (R-AL), the forensics community has an opportunity to expand and improve its technology, training and facilities. Senator Mikulski is the Chair of the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Shelby is the Ranking Member.

Because both Senators recognize the importance and value of forensic sciences in the advancement of justice for all citizens, they have approved appropriations of $40 million for Coverdell grants and $151 million for DNA testing and backlog in the Senate Appropriations Bill. The proposed Coverdell funds are more than twice as much as has ever been included in the nation's budget. The DNA figure represents an increase as well.

It is even more encouraging to learn that Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE), a longtime supporter of forensics has joined with Senators Mikulski and Shelby to include additional funding in the authorization bill and, just as important, make the grant application and management process easier for state and local agencies.

While we in the forensics community have much to be pleased about, the real effort has just begun. It's time now to develop a grassroots effort to insure these welcomed beginning steps are made into law and will be just the first steps in an ongoing program.

Forensics needs your help. Each and every one of you!

Step One - contact these Senators and express your appreciation for their support.

Step Two - we need to get these bills through the House of Representatives before they become part of the final spending package. Contact Rep. Alan, Mollohan (D-WV) the Chairman of the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. His support and vote are absolutely essential and you can play a major role in making him aware of the need for backing this funding proposal. Time is critical. This legislation is making its way through Congress as we speak. Get on the phone and or e-mail these legislators. Do all three and urge your colleagues to do the same. Do it now. It's up to the members of the community to make this happen. Thank the Senators for the work they have done and ask Congressman Mollohan to fund at the same level or above!

Sen. Barbara Mikulski
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Ph: 202-224-4654
Fax: 202-224-8858
Mikulski.senate.gov


Sen. Richard Shelby
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Ph: 202-224-5744
Fax: 202-224-3416
Shelby.senate.gov


Sen. Joseph Biden
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Ph: 202-224-5042
Fax: 202-224-0139
Biden.senate.gov


The Honorable Alan B. Mollohan
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Ph: 202-225-4172
Fax: 202-225-7564
www.house.gov/mollohan

Calling all Californians

Please take a minute to go over to the CLP Forum and read the post "AB 1079 - A New Crime Lab Bill in California" and then take another minute to use the links on that post to contact your Assembly member in the California legislature.

It's important! Assessing the forensic science needs of the state is the first step in making sound plans.

Feel free to forward this message to every Californian you know.

On my way to the Alamo

The American Academy of Forensic Sciences meetings are in San Antonio this week, so I'm off to Texas for a few days.

I love these meetings, although due to my obligations for the Crime Lab Project, I participate in them a little differently than I did a few years ago. And because I'm trying to finish a book and have a speaking engagement here in California next weekend, I won't be able to stay for the entire meeting.

But while I can, I'll enjoy the company of some of the most dedicated men and women I have the honor to know. I hope you'll continue to ask your legislatures to give them better funding for their work.

I'll catch up with you here whenever I can!

A Backlog Story: Part 2

If you're just tuning in -- you may want to read yesterday's post first.

So the Worthington case brought attention to the Massachusetts State Lab's DNA backlog, which stood at around 1000 cases in 2005.

Now, before I go further in this story, let's take a brief look at the word backlog. Every jurisdiction comes up with its own meaning for this term, and you should be aware of some factors that influence how labs define them.

First, they differentiate between "cases" and "samples." For DNA, a single case can include dozens (or dozens and dozens) of samples to be processed, or very few samples, down to one -- depending on what kind of case it is, how much biological evidence was available, and whether the people collecting the evidence were trained (at all, or well) and if they are feeling encouraged/discouraged about their lab.

Second, labs talk about two types of backlogs: 1) Those for cases -- items to be processed from crime scenes, victims, and those taken from suspects. 2) Those for databases -- the DNA samples taken from anyone required by that state's laws to submit them. That can range from those convicted of specific violent felonies to those convicted of any felony. (Some states, including California, have plans to eventually include felony arrestees, although this will doubtless face some court challenges.) This second group is where DNA "cold hits" come from -- a DNA match in a case when there is no previously known suspect.

Third, in an effort to control backlogs, labs may limit what may be submitted to them. This seems to have been the case in Massachusetts. An Associated Press article by Theo Emery, published across the country in May, 2005 (I saw it in the Houston Chronicle on 5/8/05), said

...The [Massachusetts] state crime lab is so understaffed and underfunded it has to ration how many tests law enforcement agencies may submit...

Each month, the state's 11 district attorneys are allowed to submit only four DNA samples.

"All the DAs are ludicrously handicapped in the number of cases that they can present to the lab," said Geline Williams, executive director of the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association....

Some might say (I would be one) therefore, that this 1000 case backlog was actually artifically lowered. If you are behind on what's submitted, that's one number. If you refuse to allow more than 4 samples from each county into the flow, we're missing the real number -- add in all the cases in those counties that could benefit from DNA analysis and which are not in the chosen 4 samples.

Finally, labs do not have a set criteria for what constitutes a DNA sample that is "backlogged." Some will say 30 days. Others will say 90 days. Or more. There's no universally agreed-upon definition.

But by any of these definitions, Massachusetts law enforcement agencies that use the state lab had been waiting for results in 1000 cases. For each of those cases, someone who should have been held might be committing other crimes. Someone who was trying to investigate the crime had to use more time-consuming (and perhaps less reliable) methods of investigation, victims and their families waited for answers, and in all likelihood, some people who were innocent were under suspicion or denied their freedom.

In 2005, the state DNA lab operations had 12 analysts and their equipment squeezed into an 840-square-foot space. Six to nine months was the standard turnaround for cases submitted to the lab.

The Massachusetts Legislature realized that these were undesirable conditions, and increased the funding of the lab from $6.2 million in fiscal 2005 to $16.2 million in fiscal 2007. They also created a new position in government -- Undersecretary for Forensic Sciences, part of the state's Office of Public Safety. This position was to provide oversight for improvements at the lab and the state medical examiner's office.

Keep in mind that no one gets money the day the Legislature takes a vote. But everyone seems to agree that things started to change for the better. Governor Romney sought additional money to build larger, more modern facilities, and a few months ago -- last August -- a new 12,000-square-foot addition was made to the lab. The lab itself has been in the process of being revamped.

Then on January 12, reports of an announcement from the State Police sent another kind of shock wave through Massachusetts: Robert E. Pino, a civilian administrator, was accused of delaying reports of matches in the state's CODIS system with evidence tested in eleven Massachusetts "cold case" rape cases. These delays meant the cases could not be prosecuted, because while delayed, the Massachusetts 15-year statute of limitations expired. Also, according to the Boston Globe,

...In four cases, Pino prepared reports to police saying that tests linked DNA recovered at crime scenes to suspects, when, in fact, they had not. Pino did not mail all four reports, and no one was arrested because other officials discovered Pino's mistake....

All of this is still under investigation and while Mr. Pino has been suspended, it is important to note that no charges have been filed. Also, the reported problems were not in the actual analysis of DNA. According to a story in the Boston Globe, his union, the Massachusetts Organization of State Engineers and Scientists, has defended him:

The union representing a suspended DNA database administrator at the State Police crime laboratory yesterday blamed any delays or DNA mismatches at the lab on a longstanding problem of understaffing and inadequate funding.

The FBI is currently auditing the lab. The state has started work on its own investigation into what went wrong, and how future problems may be prevented -- one apparent problem: "The administrator alone appeared to control the reporting of DNA test results to police and prosecutors." Other officials have expressed concern that defense attorneys will react with a flood of motions challenging convictions.

If rapists are allowed to be free, if new attacks could have been prevented, if rape victims are denied justice because a lab employee didn't do his job, and if there is no reasonable explanation why he didn't do it (such as an overwhelming workload that one person couldn't reasonably cope with), this is a grave matter and there should be consequences for those responsible. And the lab does need to remedy any problems in its system of oversight that may have allowed such problems to occur.

I don't intend to speculate on Mr. Pino's possible guilt or innocence regarding these allegations. But I do hope that Massachusetts State Senator Jarrett T. Barrios has been misquoted. According to the Globe, he said these developments were especially alarming because of the money recently given to the lab, and added:

"The public has a right to know why their dollars, apparently, have been misspent."

Say what? Misspent? You've had an understaffed lab operating out of a broom closet for a dozen years, a thousand or more cases not even being analysed, and if one man screwed up in the way some claim he has, then all the money has been misspent????

The Massachusetts District Attorneys Association has said the lab has dramatically improved overall in recent years. It would be good to know how many cases have been successfully handled by the lab, how much matters have improved. Because I imagine if you talk to the victims and families of victims of those crimes, no one will feel that the money invested in the lab has been misspent.

I think the Senator owes the other workers in the lab an apology.

A Backlog Story: Part 1

Despite what you see on TV, most crime labs are under-funded. You've probably received that message if you've been reading here for a while.

Labs aren't just a little bit short of change when it comes to buying new gadgets. A great many of this country's forensic scientists are working in tiny, inadequate spaces and using outdated equipment and technologies. Their labs can't properly store or track evidence and are having trouble paying enough to their staffs to retain them. The labs are trying to cope with overwhelming backlogs -- untested evidence piles up quickly, rates of solving crimes slow.

Why does this happen? Those who make decisions about spending tax dollars on law enforcement and criminal justice usually don't make labs a priority. There are a variety of reasons for this, some understandable, others god-awful, but the only thing that seems to make a difference in priorities is public pressure. Unfortunately, the problems of labs are a reality that most people don't seem to grasp. (This is exactly why the Crime Lab Project got underway.)

Sometimes, one case makes a difference to a lab, can help the public to see the reality.

The January 6, 2002 high profile murder of fashion writer Christa Worthington in her Cape Cod home was such a case. Although there was DNA evidence at the scene, the case went unsolved. You can see from this 2003 story by CBS that theories abounded -- as did books and stories that "fictionalized" the facts and further scandalized -- but law enforcement hoped for help from DNA:

District attorney Michael O'Keefe says recently revealed DNA evidence shows that within hours of her death, Christa Worthington had sex [with] - for now, a mystery man.

"It's DNA of an unknown male that's consistent with someone having had sexual relations with the victim," says O'Keefe. "And it's that DNA that we seek to match."

Frustrated for three years, in 2005 investigators even tried collecting -- on a voluntary (and controversial) basis -- DNA swabs from local men to look for a match. Part of the controversy stemmed from the fact that the lab was already backlogged. Before any of the hundreds of volunteered samples were tested, the match came through a sample collected in March 2004, in an earlier effort to eliminate suspects. The match was to Christopher M. McCowen, who has since been convicted of the murder.

When the public realized that the sample of McCowen's DNA had been sitting untested in the state lab for almost a year before the crime was solved, a hue and cry went up that was heard across the country. The price of backlogs had been brought home: a violent criminal had been left free -- and free to possibly commit other crimes; the innocent were forced to live under a cloud of suspicion; the family, friends, and community of the victim were left without answers.

There was little mystery about the cause of the delay. The under-funded crime lab didn't have the resources to process all the evidence submitted to it. The legislature declared it was a shame (without always owning up to the fact that it was a shame partly of their own making) and an outrage and they would have no more of it -- they voted millions more dollars to the state lab.

But as events proved last week, the lab's troubles weren't over.

Fingerprints and ships

There's good news and bad news, as they say.

The good news is that port security is taking another step forward along U.S. coasts, and one measure of that is increased identification requirements and background checks for those driving trucks into and out of port facilities. This hasn't come about without argument, but that's not the bad news.

The bad news is that all across the U.S., we aren't putting the resources needed into fingerprinting. The result is that thousands of criminals who could be identified by prints are not being caught, the ones who are being arrested are too often not fingerprinted, and the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and State Department do not have fingerprint systems that are interoperable.

Any background check is only as good as the database it's checked against. Think about this -- if the person driving a truck into a port committed a crime involving explosives and was not fingerprinted, the usefulness of background checks and identity checks is limited. If police departments believe they can no longer afford to collect fingerprints at crime scenes, if several incompatible systems are being used, then we're missing important information in these databases.

Photo above courtesy of Digiology, from morguefile.com

Seattle is the place to be in early February

There will be a great line-up at Left Coast Crime 2007 for anyone interested in forensic science. I talked about this in a post here a couple of weeks ago, and now I have more details.

The panels will be held at Left Coast Crime on the afternoon of Friday, February 2, in Seattle, Washington at the Renaissance Hotel, 515 Madison Street. The full convention is nearly sold out (the banquet is definitely sold out), but I think there may be a few more spaces left. Click here for more information on the full convention.

If you can't attend the entire event, LCC is offering day registrations for single days. A single day registration for Friday will give you access to all activities, panels, the book dealer's room, a reception and an auction for $75. These are for walk-in registrations, cash or check only.

Here's the line up:

12-1 PM, "CS I Don't Think So,"
Lee Lofland, Dr. Doug Lyle, Eileen Dreyer, and Jan Burke (m)
We'll be talking about crime labs in fiction and reality, the Crime Lab Project, and current events in forensic science. I'm on this panel with three of the most entertaining (and knowledgeable) people you'll find in the world of crime fiction. I'll tell you more about them soon, but in the meantime, you can read about Eileen, Lee, and Doug at their Web sites.

1-3 PM Washington State Patrol Crime Laboratory Presentations.
Two sessions, one from 1-2, the next from 2-3, with breaks and time for Q&A. These are real-life forensic scientists, and we are so grateful to the WSP lab for sparing them to us to talk about their work. You'll have a chance to hear from:

• Larry D. Hebert, Manager of the WSP Crime Laboratory Division. He oversees the operation of the Patrol’s seven crime laboratories. Mr. Hebert has testified in 419 criminal trials during his 33-year career, and has expertise in controlled substances, firearms, and crime scene investigation.
• Jean C. Johnston, Manager of the the WSP's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) Program. A DNA specialist, she has worked on hundreds of forensic cases in her 28-year career, including the Green River Murders.
• James A. Tarver, Manager of the WSP Seattle Crime Laboratory. A deputy sheriff and crime scene investigator, senior criminologist, and forensic document examiner for the Fresno [California] County Sheriff’s Office for 29 years when, after retiring from that position, became employed by the Washington State Patrol (WSP).
• George E. Johnston, WSP Quality Assurance Manager. Mr. Johnston joined WSP in 1980 in the Seattle Crime Laboratory where he specialized in trace evidence examination and crime scene investigation. One of the major events in his 29-year career is the time he spent working on the Green River Murders as a crime scene investigator and in the laboratory analyzing thousands of pieces of trace evidence.

3-4 PM William Haglund, forensic anthropologist. I wrote a few things about him in an earlier post, but you can read an article about him here. An amazing man, and this is an opportunity not to be missed.

4-5 PM "Using the Law Realistically," Kate Flora, Aaron Elkins, Anne Jayne, Twist Phelan, Leslie Budewitz (m) As the LCC program page says: "If you watch too much TV, you'll believe DNA results can be gotten in hours, from arrest to trial takes a matter of days, weeks at most, cops never abuse their power, and all labs are shiny and bright (or moody and blue) and run perfectly. Okay, then there's the real world. Experts in forensic science and law talk about what it's really like." These authors are well worth listening to!

So, I hope you'll join me in Seattle!

Fun with the CLP News Y- Files

Those of you who know about my involvement in the Crime Lab Project may know that twice a week (most weeks), I produce an e-mailed newsletter, the CLP News. (It's free, and if you'd like to receive it, just send a blank e-mail to CLPNews-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.)

Every now and then, I come across something especially odd, and I put it in a special section of the CLP News known as the Y-Files -- so named because real life is sometimes weirder than the X-Files.

In the past, it has featured stories on

• a determined retired fireman doing construction work, who stubbornly tackled the task of digging out a blocked chimney -- where he found a skeleton "with fake fingernails"
• a man who (on April Fool's Day, of all things) accidentally dialed 911 from the cell phone in his pants (the pants wer tight, the cell phone had a feature to dial 911 if you held down the 9), and unwittingly broadcast to a police dispatcher the plans he and a friend were making for a little B&E at a local business
• the man who set fire to his house to get his visitors to leave
• the family that kept grandma in an air-conditioned room, propped up in a chair, "watching" TV for a few years after she had died, because "that was her wish"
• the fellow who warned police (who showed up after he had fired shots toward his neighbor's house) that they shouldn't jump to conclusions about his mother's body being in his freezer.

Today, though, we had the rare felicity of two stories with a fashion theme. One was of the young man in Ohio, who with his mother's help, stole a 30-inch baby boa constrictor by wrapping the snake around his neck like the feather kind of boa, and hiding it with his jacket. You'll love to read how they were caught.

The other concerned a bomb -- fortunely discovered by the workers at a Sheboygan Falls Wisconsin laundry facility before it exploded -- apparently a customer who had other plans for it accidentally left it in his clothing.

This is the sort of thing you just can't put into books without a hell of a lot of set up.

William Haglund at Left Coast Crime

Just realized I haven't posted anything here since Sunday! Ah, the holidays!
I'll warn you now, then, that new posts may be a bit thin between now and New Year's Day.
Little late, huh?

Which does not mean I'm out of exciting news. If you'll be at Left Coast Crime in Seattle in February, I'll see you there. One reason you haven't heard much from me lately is that -- in addition to a zillion other things I've been up to -- as part of my work for the Crime Lab Project, I'm helping LCC to coordinate some of the forensic science programming. This will take place on Friday, so plan to arrive in Seattle in time for Friday's events!

I think those of you who are interested in forensic science are in for a treat -- not only are people from the Washington State Patrol's Crime Lab going to be there, we've also got some terrific (and entertaining) authors lined up for panels, and I'm especially pleased that forensic anthropologist Dr. William Haglund has agreed to speak at the convention.

Dr. Haglund served as the Director of the International Forensic Program for the Physicians for Human Rights, and is now the senior forensic consultant to the program. His first mission on behalf of PHR was in 1993. He also worked as the Senior Forensic Investigator for the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. For more than a decade, he has been at the forefront of investigations into genocide and war crimes which span the globe -- Cyprus, Guatemala, Honduras, Nigeria, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Somalia, and many other countries.

Prior to leaving for full-time work on international cases, he worked as the chief medical investigator the King County Medical Examiner's Office. During his 16 years there, he did extensive work on the investigation of the Green River serial killings.

Those of you who have a copy of Bones will see his name in my acknowledgments. I've been to his presentations, and promise you that this is one of those not-to-be-missed events.

Why I Keep Bugging You About the Crime Lab Project

Blake was ten years old when he was brutally murdered in July.
His stepmother, Chynna, was also killed. She was 26.
They lived in a suburb in Indiana.
The police found lots of evidence.
It hasn't been tested.
The state police lab is backlogged by over 2600 cases -- the wait for processing evidence averages nine months.

You can read more about them and the wait for evidence here.

You can make a difference. We can help labs so that families don't have to wait.

DNA Awareness Month

This month is DNA Awareness Month here in California, and what most of us are becoming more aware of is that a hell of a lot more cases might be solved if there wasn't such a big logjam in the vicinity of Richmond, courtesy of Sacramento and a few stingy counties. Before I lose those of you don't live in California, let me point out that this problem could easily be the obstacle to solving crimes in any state in the U.S., so if you live in the U.S., this could affect you.

DNA 101 -- it's not enough to find DNA evidence at a crime scene. To be of use, that evidence, once processed, creates a profile that has to be matched to a suspect's DNA profile. If no suspect is known, then there is only one place where a match may be found: in a DNA database. The FBI's national database is known as CODIS. You can see some fairly recent statistics on it here.

CODIS has two indexes. The Forensic Index is made up of DNA profiles from crime scene evidence. The Offender Index is made up of DNA profiles from samples taken from known individuals, mostly individuals who were in custody for violent crimes.

So a DNA Offender profile from a man in prison for a breaking and entering case in California might match the Forensic profile for a rape and murder case in Maine. In fact, this kind of thing is happening all over the U.S. -- cases from one state find a match to an offender being held in another. In July of this year, over 144,000 cases waited for a match in the FBI database.
Needless to say, you'd like to get a match before the offender is released, before the statute of limitations runs out on the crime, before you mistakenly hold an innocent person in custody for the crime, and before the offender harms new victims. (Sadly, mostly due to backlogs, what happens is that the word "after" has too often replaced the word "before.")

Each state has its own laws about Offender DNA collection -- whose DNA must be collected. Some require it only of violent sexual offenders, others collect only from those held for certain felonies. Some take samples from all felons. And as I've mentioned previously, many states can't keep up with the workload when it comes to DNA sample collection or evidence processing. Hell, some aren't even fingerprinting all arrestees.

But sample collection isn't a problem in California.

Processing the samples is. In this, California is not unlike other states, except as a matter of degree.

Some other day maybe I'll go wild on the civics lesson and talk about California's ballot proposition system, but for now, I'll just say that we passed a law that has greatly increased the number of convicts who must submit samples of their DNA for inclusion in the database, and eventually (in 2009, if it isn't shot down in court) it will require all felony arrestees to do so. Counties are supposed to help pay for this by forking over $1 of every $10 collected in misdemeanor fines. Not all of the counties are cooperating, so there's a huge shortfall.

Richmond is where the California Department of Justice's Bureau of Forensic Services is located. This is where the processing of Offender DNA samples (basically, taking the swabs, processing them by certain protocols, and creating DNA profiles which are then loaded into the FBI's database) takes place.

According to a recent article by Henry Weinstein in the Los Angeles Times, "the starting salary at the Richmond lab is $3,100, compared with $4,600 a month at the Los Angeles Police Department laboratory and $4,200 a month at the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department." And in a story on this backlog in the Riverside Press-Enterprise, Paul DeCarlo reports, "Their counterparts at the San Bernardino County sheriff's scientific investigations division, who enter DNA profiles of most Riverside County cases as well, earn about $8,667 per month."

You don't have to be taking calculus to do the math. Few analysts stay in the Richmond lab for long. Higher salaries are offered by cities and counties in the San Francisco Bay area, too.

And without the monies from the misdemeanor fines, the samples can't be sent out to private labs.

Since Prop 69 passed, over 2600 cases have been solved. That's victims and families with answers they've long awaited. That's suspects taken into custody and off of the streets. Law enforcement and prosecutors believe the number of "hits" could be greatly increased, if our nearly 300,000 sample backlog was diminished.

Some of our government officials get the picture. Others don't.

If you live in California -- or anywhere else in the U.S. -- before you vote for any candidate, ask where he or she stands on issues like these. Ask candidates how they plan to demonstrate their support for forensic science.

Imagine what would happen

if in every election in every state in the U.S., crime lab backlogs were a major issue.

They are a big issue -- at least, the DNA backlogs are -- in Wisconsin's Attorney General's race.

But what if you asked any candidate for your local city council, or anyone who sought election to a post as a county supervisor or state legislator, "How committed are you to insuring that forensic science is fully supported in our community?"

By that, you would explain, you mean specifically that your local police department would have what it needed in the way of equipment and training to process a crime scene and collect, preserve, and store evidence. A way to accurately investigate everything from traffic accidents to homicides. That dusting for fingerprints would be done at every burglary scene, unidentified suspects' latent prints entered into the state and national database, as well as those of all arrestees, and your local law enforcement able to access the FBI database through IAFIS. You would say that you mean that rape victims would be treated with sensitivity, and rape kits processed immediately. Your lab would be given adequate facilities, would be fully staffed, and well-equipped. Your local or regional death investigators fully qualified, and given all they needed to do their jobs. Death certificates issued within 30 days in all but the rarest cases. Lab turnaround the same. And that if your community lacked the resources, that your representatives would raise a hue and cry for state and federal funding for these needs.

What if every member of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate had to tell you, the voter, that he or she supported full funding of the Coverdell Act and other forensic science legislation?

You need not only imagine what would happen. Give it a try.

More forensic science mythbusting

We all picture it this way -- the suspect is brought into the police station and "booked and printed." Everyone taken into custody for a felony gets fingerprinted, right? And then this set of fingerprints is entered into the national database, so that if this person is using an alias, using someone else's identity, or is wanted for other crimes, we know immediately, right?

Wrong. Throughout the country, a shortage of qualified staff, unclear assignments of responsibility, and inadequate equipment make it entirely possible that someone taken into custody can leave it without being fingerprinted.

For example, from "Fingerprint law could help police, hurt jailers," in yesterday's Louisville Courier-Journal:

...because many jailers have not fingerprinted everyone booked at their jails, fewer than half of the more than 300,000 people arrested in Kentucky last year are entered in the state and national databases....

Think about the implications for a moment. Studies have shown that "as many as half of criminals who commit violent crimes have nonviolent criminal histories...." That means that the guy taken into custody on a drug possession or vandalism charge could be the one who committed a rape or a robbery. Who knows how many crimes went unsolved as a result of more than 150,000 suspects passing through Kentucky jails without being fingerprinted? How many background checks for employment, child care, or adoptions failed to show arrest records?

There had been some disagreement over whether arresting officers or jails had the responsibility for fingerprinting those taken into custody, but a state law just went into effect to clarify the matter -- jailers have responsibility. And Kentucky provided Livescan electronic fingerprinting units to all 74 of its jails. But the jails are complaining -- they don't have the trained staff available, and no funds were allocated to help them pay for more staffing.

Lest you think this is a problem only in Kentucky -- on May 8, 2006, a Des Moines Register story, "Audit report points to holes in fingerprinting at Polk County jail," indicated that

Twenty percent of arrests by Polk County sheriff's deputies weren't reflected in state fingerprint records, according to the audit's sampling. The figure was 24 percent in Pleasant Hill and an "extremely high" 40 percent in Des Moines, where police arrest more than 4,000 people each year.

The missing fingerprints were linked to arrests on charges such as robbery, theft, domestic abuse causing injury, drug possession, harassment, drunken driving and assault with a dangerous weapon, among others.

On the CLP Forum, you'll find a similar story from Florida: CLP Forum: Private Jail Company to Resume Fingerprinting in FL county

Interoperability, as previously mentioned, is a big problem with fingerprint databases, but any database needs entries in order to be of value. Forensic science works largely by comparison of an unknown example to a known, so entries make a difference. The assistance law enforcement receives from fingerprints/latent print examination is enormous. Fingerprints are believed to be more individual than DNA as identifiers -- fingerprints can differentiate identical twins, DNA cannot. And it is far less inexpensive and time consuming to process fingerprints than it is to process DNA.

Do you know your local situation? Does your state have clearly defined guidelines, an auditing system, equipment in place, and the trained staff needed to keep up with the demand?

Ask. Find out if your local newspaper has looked into this issue.

You may save a life.

Keep those phones calls and e-mails coming!

Those of you who want to help crime labs, medical examiners' offices, and other public forensic science agencies can still make those phone calls and send e-mails. Click here to see more about that in my post of this past week. I said "today" in that post because I had word from the CFSO that the U.S. Senate has started dealing with this part of the budget, and it's hard to predict how many days we have once they do -- so it's important not to put this off.

Congress is still working on the budget, and so it isn't too late to contact your U.S. Senators to let them know that you want the Coverdell Act to be fully funded. These funds are not earmarked, so they can go to grant applicants any state, the District of Columbia, or the U.S. territories. Best of all, they can be used for what the labs need most -- whether that's computers for tracking evidence, DNA backlog reduction, latent prints equipment, or other assistance.

The Coverdell Act of 2000 passed unanimously -- this is not a partisan issue. Let's ensure that labs get the funds they need. Please take the time to call or e-mail your senators, and to ask others to do the same.

I want to thank all the bloggers, writers, readers, and other supporters of the Crime Lab Project who have done so -- please keep spreading the word!

Staffing and backlogs

"Funds Help Crime Lab Cut Backlog by 10,000 Cases" by C.S. Murphy in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette is well worth reading. It will give you some insight into the challenges facing crime labs and some of the ways they are being met.

We need to ensure that qualified staff are employed in medical examiner’s offices, coroner’s offices, law enforcement organizations and crime labs at a level that can meet those agencies' workloads. The price of not doing so is enormous: the innocent imprisoned, the guilty free to harm others, hazards and health threats unidentified, children endangered, families left without answers. Forensic science affects us in ways we don't always realize.

For example, we need to ensure that enough trained fingerprint examiners are available to keep up with the need for their work in background checks for would-be foster parents, those seeking to adopt, those who will work with our children in schools, on playgrounds, and other places. To check the backgrounds of those hired to drive trucks laden with hazardous materials over our highways. Trained examiners must be available to process prints taken at jails and as evidence. These are just some of the ways in which fingerprint examiners are of help to us.

But hiring and keeping staff ranks as one of the biggest challenges for public forensic science.

Here's just one story that will give you some idea of the difficulties labs face:

“GBI lab loses key analysts to Army,” by Rhonda Cook, was published on May 10, 2006 in the Atlanta Journal.