The above lines are probably the most truthful remarks about DNA that you will hear. Most defense lawyers know what it is but have not taken the time to understand or educate themselves on how to combat it.  All they know is when they get a report from a lab that there is a positive result against there client, they are looking for ways to plea the case out.  Prosecutors on the other hand know that science is on their side and unless the defendant has a large amount of money to hire experts, they have what they call " a slam dunk case ". Prosecutors have lab personal at their disposal and access to all the testing they need.  On the other hand, defense lawyers usually get a one page report from a lab implicating their client. They do not have unlimited access to the labs and if the money is there, from their client, they have to hire outside testing.  Defense lawyers need to learn to request special discovery early in a case so that they can actually see what the prosecutors have on their client.

DNA is absolutely a good tool for investigators but the fact that they have a positive DNA does not always mean that the case is solid or the person quilty.  Todays generation of investigators would just as soon wait for the DNA results  to come back and establish their case around that.  What has happened to real police work wherein you conduct a full investigation?  DNA does not tell you if the person is guilty or not.  DNA tells you that for some reason, the DNA is there.  It's up to the investigators and prosecuters to evaluate the evidence.  More on this later.

I want to talk about a couple of issues with DNA that as a citizen, and former police detective I find very disturbing.

The first discusson will pertain to DNA Databanks or Databases.

Most states have laws regarding the collection of DNA samples from certain convicted offenders and maintaining these samples in a national database called Combined DNA Index System or CODIS.  To be eligible for CODIS, the person has to be convicted of a certain crime which is different in each state.  The original crime for the creation of a database was sex crimes.  This had been expanded to other felonies and does vary from state to state. If you go to my favorite links page and click on DNA Databanks, you will go into the PBS site.  Once there, click on state-by-state breakdown and you will find a map where you can click on the state you want and learn some of the crimes that will land you in the databank if convicted.  This information is from 1998 and I have not found a current updated map, but it will at least give you some guidelines. NOTE: IF ANYONE HAS A CURRENT SITE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.

That explains databanks if you are convicted, but what I have a problem with is the voluntary collection of DNA samples and maintaining them in a state databank.  In Florida, our state agency is the Florida Department of Law Enforcement or FDLE.  In the Miami area, there have been DNA dragnets conducted on a couple of serial rapist cases.  In one case, there was about 300 voluntary samples taken and about a thousand on the other. The first case was solved but not as a result of the dragnet.  The second is still on-going.  My point is, that going around taking samples from whom ever you want and cluttering up the crime labs has not been productive and is very costly, not to mention that it is an invasion of privacy.  Investigators need to rely more on police work and not just on the small chance that some serial rapist will actually give his sample to you if asked.  The most intrusive issue about this procedure is that they are keeping your DNA profile in a state databank after you have voluntarily given the sample.  They now have a form telling you that it will be kept, but how many of you actually read it or do you just do what the officer tells you to do ? Many samples have been taken without this warning and in fact, they have been told that the sample is for elimination purposes only and will be destroyed.  Florida does have a catch all in their statute that allows the samples to be kept in an automated databank.  The ACLU has stated that they might challange the law but I have not heard of any such challange yet. ( Rush Limbaugh can take care of himself ).  ANYONE who feels compelled to give a voluntary sample should understand that if you do, you are now part of a state databank and will be compared with many other cases without your knowledge.  In addition, if another state wants your specific sample ran, they can request it and it will be done. 

My strongest suggestion to you is do not give your DNA to anyone unless they have a proper warrant.  They must have reasonable suspicion to obtain your body fluids.  This is the utmost invasion of your privacy and I am going to give to an example of why it is:

We filed for special discovery on a DNA case and received a large packet of paperwork from FDLE.  Contained within this paperwork was the DNA profile of nine strangers(they were named) and the DNA charts on evidence that had nothing to do with our case.  Three of these nine people were females and we know for a fact that one of them is a victim of a crime because FDLE says it in the reports.  This is how easy it is to have your DNA given out.  I do not think that this is very private at all!!  This is just one example of how your DNA is NOT protected in any databank.  Attorneys need to attack the state law and have it declared unconstitutional. There are thousands of you out there that are victims of this and you should have your attorneys challenge this.  If you do not have an attorney, contact you local ACLU and see if they will help.  For those of you who have not yet become a member of the databank, DON'T.

Florida Court's Decision Backs Limbaugh's Medical Privacy Case

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - A decision by a Florida court Wednesday, which threw out a conviction because the state illegally obtained a defendant's medical records, provides powerful new ammunition for Rush Limbaugh's lawyers.

The radio host has said in a court filing that his medical records were also illegally seized and therefore may not be used against him.

Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, immediately filed a notice informing the 4th District Court of Appeals of this new decision by another Florida court.

Black has said the Palm Beach County state's attorney improperly obtained Limbaugh's medical records. The prosecutor claims that without those records they cannot continue their investigation until they review Limbaugh's medical records, which have been sealed since Dec. 23.

A judge in Florida's 3rd District Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that the conviction of Timothy Sneed for second-degree murder committed in October 1998 was invalid because the state used his medical records seized by police without his permission, as required by law.

According to Judge Cecilia Altonaga in Miami, the conviction must be reversed because Sneed's hospital records, which were used to help convict him, were seized by police in violation of Florida statutes.

Only after the seizure did the state file notice that it it intended to seek a court order to obtain the records. Altonaga ruled that move could not overcome the illegality of the seizure.

Sneed had pleaded that the shooting was in self-defense. Police said there were inconsistencies between his claims to them and statements he made at a hospital.

Noting that Sneed argued the state had used illegally obtained hospital records to convict him, the court reversed his conviction and sentence. It ordered a new trial "in which Sneed's hospital records must be excluded from the state's case-in-chief."

In April, Limbaugh told his listeners: "There are things in people's medical files that are irrelevant to whatever it is would be searched. But this prosecutor ignored the statute, a statute, by the way, he had been admonished for ignoring two years ago by this same appellate court and stormed into the offices of four of my doctors with search warrants, with the sole purpose of intimidating the doctors and their staff."