Take DNA Upon Arrest (originally published June 14, 2010)

  



Take DNA Upon Arrest

 published online 06-14-2010
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?id=36047

New York’s civil liberties advocates are manning the barricades in their last-ditch battle against expanding the state’s DNA database. DNA’s opponents are fighting to stop the identification of thousands of repeat offenders (nearly 20,000 by last count) who have committed violent crimes and left their DNA at crime scenes. They cannot be identified because most criminals are not required to provide a DNA sample even after conviction. 

DNA’s detractors argue passionately that the risk of exposing the DNA profiles of those arrested or found guilty of misdemeanors pushes the invasion of privacy envelope too far. Their assertion that they are protecting individual constitutional and privacy rights against further government intrusion is way off the mark. In fact, they expose thousands of future victims of preventable crime to needless brutality.

Concerns that DNA sampling in criminal cases violates privacy have been conclusively rebutted by science.  Specifically, DNA samples from inert (“junk”) DNA retrieved from a saliva swab provide only identification in the form of a “biological” fingerprint. Federal and state appellate courts have found that taking a DNA sample upon arrest raises no constitutional issues.

DNA is another highly accurate form of identification that is analogous to taking fingerprints upon arrest. Seven million DNA profiles have been taken nationwide without a single case of improper disclosure. New York, like most states, provides criminal penalties to prevent such misuse.

DNA databanks are rapidly expanding in many states. New York provides for taking DNA samples from convicted felons and a small number of sex related misdemeanors. But this excludes 54 percent of convictions. Many states are now following the federal government policy of taking DNA samples upon arrest. More than 20 states now require DNA collection upon arrest for violent felonies. Expanding DNA collection from all convicted offenders, or better yet upon arrest, is vital to expand DNA databanks and maximize their effectiveness. 

A prime example is the startling contrast between New York’s DNA databank and Great Britain’s DNA databank. In the decade prior to 2006, when New York had even more restrictive limitations on the collection of DNA samples, its DNA databank provided about as many “hits” as Great Britain (with no restrictions on DNA sampling upon arrest) gets every 10 days. 

In 2007, the year after New York allowed DNA collection from all convicted felons, DNA “hits” increased by more than a third of the cumulative total from the prior 10 years. In 2008 and 2009, the cumulative total of “hits” rose to 7,980 — an astounding 300 percent increase in crime scene matches over the prior decade.  

DNA collection after felony or misdemeanor convictions (or better yet, following the federal policy of taking DNA samples upon arrest for every crime) is essential to provide swift justice for the accused and exoneration for the innocent. Most criminals are arrested more often for misdemeanors than felonies, by a ratio of 10 to one. And after many felony arrests, charges are often plea-bargained down to misdemeanors. This is especially true for sex offenses involving children, where parents prefer a guilty plea to a traumatic trial.

The earlier a recidivist offender is identified for his prior crimes and brought to justice, the fewer future victims will be added to his scorecard. Across the country, states that are collecting DNA upon arrest will be able to identify tens of thousands of forensic DNA profiles retrieved from unsolved crime scenes that had been languishing without a match.  New York’s legislature should join them now and remove all restrictions on DNA collection. 

Requiring DNA to be collected upon arrest is supported by the New York State Law Enforcement Council, representing New York’s law enforcement agencies, including New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Unfortunately, although the DNA upon arrest bill is under consideration in the state Senate, the same bill was killed instantly upon its submission to the state Assembly Codes Committee.

A good compromise for the legislature in this session is Governor David Paterson’s proposed DNA expansion bill requiring DNA samples from all those convicted of a crime, felonies and misdemeanors alike. This bill will save thousands of potential victims of preventable crime, many of them among New York’s most vulnerable groups —  women, children and the elderly. 

Legislators, whose first duty is to protect public safety, can still spare these soon-to-become victims the agony of serious injury, torture and sometimes death. Which New York state legislator will step up and look a mother in the eye to apologize for not protecting her child from a vicious attack that could have been prevented? How do you explain to grieving parents that it was just politics that prevented a simple vote in the New York Assembly and Senate to expand the DNA databank?

Gerald J. Turetsky,

Chairman Committee on

Civil and Criminal Justice

Respect for Law Alliance Inc.

445 Park Ave., 9th floor

New York, NY 10022

Phone: (212) 486-0543

Fax: (212) 486-1378

Email: ag@rfla.us

Website: rfla.us