DNA identification is one of the most powerful tools of modern crime-fighting, providing evidence that can greatly help catch and convict the guilty – and clear the innocent. But our state Assembly seems bent on keeping the tool out of New York’s law-enforcement hands.
In this year’s installment of a now-annual ritual, the Assembly is once again moving toward allowing only a minor expansion of the state’s DNA database – the smallest it can manage without risking public ire.
Speaker Sheldon Silver is giving a thumbs-down to a bill to mandate the taking of a DNA sample from anyone arrested in the state. Instead, he’s considering a bill to require sampling from anyone who’s convicted of a felony (already required) or a misdemeanor.
The US government is far ahead of New York: Starting later this year, anyone arrested or detained by a federal officer will have to give a DNA sample. When fully implemented, this should add a million new samples a year to the FBI’s DNA databank- plus another million over time from states taking DNA on arrest for major felonies. (Mayor Bloomberg supports New York adopting the federal DNA rules.)
DNA profiles are the 21st century’s fingerprints. Even when perps leave no prints at a crime scene, they often do leave DNA – especially in cases of violent crime. But the key is to match DNA from a crime to DNA already on file – hence the need for as large a DNA databank as possible.
Most crimes are committed by a relatively few repeat offenders – but our legal system often can’t convict them on any given crime (especially on the full charges, which are usually plea-bargained down).
Getting a DNA sample from every arrestee is thus a tremendous help in fingering bad guys for serious crimes (and putting them away) after they’ve been arrested for minor ones.
For that reason, New York launched its own DNA database in 1994. But the Assembly drags its feet on every measure to expand the program – either simply refusing to vote on DNA bills, or bogging down in debate over discredited claims that sampling is a privacy violation.
Silver’s lawmakers did permit a limited expansion of New York’s database in 2006 – mandating sampling of all offenders convicted of felonies, but still excluding most convicted of misdemeanors.
Even that change helped tremendously. From 1994 to the end of 2007, the program had put a name to 4,142 crime-scene DNA samples. Nearly a third of those “hits” came in 2007 – the first year after the broadened sampling.
The problem: Most offenders convicted of misdemeanors are still excluded from DNA sampling. Yet many are serial criminals – they’ve simply managed to plead down to a misdemeanor that doesn’t qualify for mandatory sampling. So they get arrested and released over and over again without being matched with serious-crime-scene DNA.
Consider the case of John Royster. He was convicted for jumping a turnstile – an offense that didn’t mandate DNA sampling. Three months later, he raped his first victim, leaving DNA at the crime scene – but since his DNA wasn’t in the databank, there was no match. He was caught only after he’d committed three more rapes and a murder. Protecting Royster’s privacy gave him the chance to rape three more women, leaving two with permanent brain damage from the severity of his attacks, and killing the third.
Right now, New York has good DNA samples from some 18,000 violent crimes for which the perp remains unidentified. That’s 18,000 rapists, robbers and murderers walking our streets. And the number rises each year, because more new crimes are added to the database than are solved through it.
Opponents claim that sampling is a privacy violation; that’s nonsense. Scientists have proven that DNA obtained through a saliva mouth swab is “junk”: Like a fingerprint, it contains no biological information other than personal identification.
Of course, many of the critics are defense lawyers – whose job is made more difficult whenever DNA is in evidence. (Actually, DNA is a defense lawyer’s dream – if his client is innocent. Hundreds have been freed with DNA evidence.)
Here in New York, the critics are now willing to agree to sampling of all convicted criminals – but only in exchange for laws requiring videotaping of all confessions, and for a new “innocence commission” to investigate cases of falsely accused defendants. Both measures are full of trade-offs, including cost. They need careful consideration – not rushed passage into law as the price for enhancing an anti-crime measure that can only help the innocent.
The Assembly’s delays here are unconscionable. Each year, thousands of New Yorkers become victims of violent crimes that we could be preventing – if only the lawmakers would act.
It makes sense to take both a DNA sample and a fingerprint upon arrest, starting now. Too many legislators are abdicating their sworn duty to protect the vulnerable and defenseless – needlessly exposing the public to mortal danger. Their inaction prolongs criminal careers by letting perps conceal their identities and avoid detection.
Gerald J. Turetsky is the chairman of the Committee on Civil and Criminal Justice at the Respect for Law Alliance, Inc.