May 23, 2008
DNA Not a Panacea
DNA Not a Panacea
DNA is celebrated as "one of the Commonwealth's most important
crime-fighting tools." (Brian R. Ballou, "Huge gains reported at crime
lab's DNA unit," Boston Globe, May 23, 2008) Is it more important than
the integrity of the humans who use it? The same people who gathered
and controlled fingerprint evidence for many years will now use DNA
evidence. Wrongfully convicted
persons know how flawed the former system is. The same justice system
will now have DNA evidence to use against defendants. Will it be
easier or more difficult to overturn a wrongful conviction based on
DNA evidence?
Also celebrated is the "computer network that serves as a national
registry for DNA samples collected from convicted criminals and
arrested individuals." How easy is it to correct a computer error on
credit files? Or the errors about people declared dead by Social
Security computers? One study showed a 40 percent error rate on FBI
computer warrants.
Technology creates benefits and risks. This technology is only
praised for its benefits with no fears of any abuses. What are the
protections from criminal use of this evidence? If Joe Salvati and
Peter Limone were convicted using DNA evidence they would still be in
prison.
Michael O'Keefe, "said the crime lab and the office of the chief
medical examiner have been vastly improved." How improved are the
people who run those offices?
Roy Bercaw - Editor ENOUGH ROOM
See full article at
http://tinyurl.com/68kvup
Huge gains reported at crime lab's DNA unit
Machine speeds process, cuts backlog
By Brian R. Ballou,
Boston Globe Staff
May 23, 2008
DNA is celebrated as "one of the Commonwealth's most important
crime-fighting tools." (Brian R. Ballou, "Huge gains reported at crime
lab's DNA unit," Boston Globe, May 23, 2008) Is it more important than
the integrity of the humans who use it? The same people who gathered
and controlled fingerprint evidence for many years will now use DNA
evidence. Wrongfully convicted
persons know how flawed the former system is. The same justice system
will now have DNA evidence to use against defendants. Will it be
easier or more difficult to overturn a wrongful conviction based on
DNA evidence?
Also celebrated is the "computer network that serves as a national
registry for DNA samples collected from convicted criminals and
arrested individuals." How easy is it to correct a computer error on
credit files? Or the errors about people declared dead by Social
Security computers? One study showed a 40 percent error rate on FBI
computer warrants.
Technology creates benefits and risks. This technology is only
praised for its benefits with no fears of any abuses. What are the
protections from criminal use of this evidence? If Joe Salvati and
Peter Limone were convicted using DNA evidence they would still be in
prison.
Michael O'Keefe, "said the crime lab and the office of the chief
medical examiner have been vastly improved." How improved are the
people who run those offices?
Roy Bercaw - Editor ENOUGH ROOM
See full article at
http://tinyurl.com/68kvup
Huge gains reported at crime lab's DNA unit
Machine speeds process, cuts backlog
By Brian R. Ballou,
Boston Globe Staff
May 23, 2008
Labels:
Criminal Justice,
DNA,
Joe Salvati,
Peter Limone,
Technology,
Wrongful Conviction
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment