LITTLE ROCK — Everybody has heard of those cases where DNA evidence exonerates a wrongly convicted citizen.
The fact that technology has advanced to the point where it can clearly and unequivocally intercede on behalf of innocent people is a blessing indeed. But fewer are familiar with the flip side of DNA technology, its ability to indisputably link and identify a person to a crime scene, which offers immeasurably more potential to improve criminal justice in the U.S.
Relatively few people are erroneously convicted in our system-only a couple of hundred have been exonerated by DNA-but an enormous amount of violent crimes go unsolved every year. The clearance rate for murder, 92 percent in 1962, now stands just over 60 percent. Rapists elude authorities at an even higher rate; four out of 10 rape cases remain uncleared.
A Scripps Howard News Service study this spring of FBI computer files of homicide cases since 1980 offered up some shocking statistics. Of more than a half-million homicides recorded during that time in the U.S., about 185,000 have never been solved. Arkansas’ 82 percent homicide clearance rate was better than the national average. Still, on average 6,000 Americans get away with murder every single year.
The rates on rape are even more disturbing, since there are so many more cases. A 40 percent solution rate on 90,000 rapes annually means that 54,000 women who survive a violent rape each year essentially are sentenced to life without justice.
Inexplicably, the rate for forcible rape in Arkansas has skyrocketed in recent years. In 1960, it was just below the national average. By 2008, the last year for which statistics are available, it stood at an all-time high, nearly twice the national figure. Only three states had a higher rape rate in 2008.
DNA evidence is often left at the scenes of murders and rapes, meaning that advances and expansions in application of DNA testing can help dramatically in landing criminals in those cases behind bars.
It’s turning out to be a summer of success for DNA technology as a crime-fighting tool. Just this week, a convicted felon was charged with capital murder and rape in connection with a 20-year-old case as a result of DNA testing. The victim, Treva Parks, was assaulted and killed at her Little Rock apartment in 1990.
In Louisville, Ky., last week, a man was convicted of multiple charges, including rape, robbery and kidnapping, after a DNA sample that he had been mandated to give as a convicted felon was determined to match semen found at a crime scene in 1990.
And in California, investigators used a technique called familial searching to identify a man they allege to be a serial rapist and killer who preyed on South Los Angeles women for 25 years by tracing his DNA back through his son.
The man is now charged with 10 counts of murder because, according to authorities, a partial DNA match showed up on his son, who was in prison on a weapons conviction. The case comes as a direct result of a change in California law in 2009 to compel all felony arrestees to provide DNA samples.
All 50 states require convicted sex offenders to submit DNA samples, and 23 states, including Arkansas, now require mandatory DNA testing of persons arrested for murder or sexual assault.
The premise behind genetic crimefighting is based on hard facts and common sense. Repeat offenders are rampant in state prisons; since 1974, more than 90 percent of inmates have “been there, done that” before. Plus, a small group of habitual criminals commit most of the nation’s crimes. A 1991 study attributed 70 percent of America’s crimes to 6 percent of its criminals.
Knowing that it’s the rare robber, rapist or murderer who skips straight to a single violent outburst, it’s a strong assumption that the more DNA is sifted through the FBI index, the more likely matches, especially on the motiveless, random crimes that are the hardest to solve.
Naturally, anything that promisingly purports to put more bad guys in jail raises eyebrows at the ACLU. So far, mandatory DNA sampling has passed legal muster in the courts, but the latest disingenuous objection involves race-baiting the issue. The worry is that because blacks are overrepresented in arrests and convictions, they also would be over-represented in DNA matches to crimes.
As usual, the civil liberties of victims and families awaiting justice are conveniently given second-class status in the analysis. After all, if there’s a disproportionate effect on black criminals, that would necessarily mean there’s also a disproportionate benefit among black victims, since the vast majority of crime is intra-racial.
With a top-five state ranking in rape rates and recent top-10 appearances for assault, Arkansas should be an aggressive leader in collecting DNA for all violent arrestees-and in any arrests that involve a firearm.
Dana D. Kelley is a free-lance writer from Jonesboro.
Editorial, Pages 17 on 07/30/2010