|
The answers to these questions have profound effects on the nation’s prosecutors.
While there is no definitive answer to the first question, in 1998, there were an estimated 70,000 submitted rape kits untested. And the second question was at least partially answered in 2000, when Congress enacted the DNA Backlog Elimination Act. This legislation appropriated a total of $50 million to the Department of Justice to assist the nation’s DNA analysis labs with staffing and structural needs. Additionally, Attorney General Ashcroft directed that a minimum of $10 million of assets forfeited to the Department of Justice be redirected to DNA backlog reduction. In sum, the federal government will be giving $60 million dollars to state and local labs to accomplish DNA backlog elimination.
In response to the third question, the FBI is also taking steps to enhance its management of DNA information. In the FBI’s national databank, the Combined DNA Index System or CODIS, there are 900,000 convicted offender profiles. In fiscal year 2003, the FBI intends (if funding permits) to increase its capacity to accommodate and then enter 50 million profiles into CODIS. Other plans include upgrading the software to enable the system to make more frequent searches of all of the databanks for a match.
Questions four and five are directly relevant to local prosecutors: “What additional tools are needed to assist sexual assault victims,” and “What can be done to insure that a ‘John Doe’ rapist is held accountable?”
There are approximately 150 state and local DNA analysis labs in the country. Virtually 100 percent of the crime scene samples that are submitted involve evidence that will be used in a state or local criminal prosecution. Approximately three out of four of these cases involve sexual assault, and the remaining case is an attempted or completed homicide. Is your office ready? Are you ready?
APRI addresses key issues for local prosecutors in its courses entitled Basic DNA and Advanced DNA and in its courses entitled Understanding Sexual Assault. Prosecutors need to be prepared for an increasing number of “cold hits” as the labs tackle their backlogs and as DNA testing becomes more pervasive and routine. Often, protocols guiding investigations and victim notification must be developed. For example, law enforcement should be encouraged to obtain defendants’ statements of denial that may be contradicted by the DNA. Victim advocates should be encouraged to help prosecutors educate sexual assault victims about DNA evidence and the role it may play in their cases. This understanding can empower victims to make statements and testify more competently.
Statutes of limitation upon sexual assault prosecutions have been undermined effectively with the development of DNA. Norm Gahn, an assistant district attorney in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, was the first prosecutor in the country to author and seek issuance of a “John Doe” warrant based upon the defendant’s DNA description. Since then, courts in a handful of states have upheld the lawfulness of those warrants. APRI teaches about these warrants at our DNA courses and our Understanding Sexual Assault. Additionally, APRI maintains a survey of the “John Doe” warrant cases and copies of the various forms used by different prosecutors.
Testifying on behalf of NDAA, J. Tom Morgan, district attorney for DeKalb County, Georgia, stated, “Training in the use of DNA evidence in a criminal investigation or a trial is crucial.” APRI’s DNA Forensics Program and Violence Against Women Program are attempting to fill this need. A Basic DNA course will be offered in July, and an Advanced DNA course is planned for September. We expect to offer Understanding Sexual Assault at least four times in 2003. And, of course, APRI provides technical assistance whenever we are asked. If you have questions, please contact us by phone (703) 549-4253 or e-mail dna@ndaa-apri.org or vawa@ndaa-apri.org.
|
