1 1 2 The National Institute of Justice 3 U.S. Department of Justice, Presents 4 5 THE FIFTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE 6 ON THE FUTURE OF DNA 7 8 Implications for the Criminal Justice System 9 10 Co-Sponsored By New York State Division 11 of Criminal Justice Services 12 New York State Police 13 New York City Police Department 14 Northeastern Association of Forensic Scientists 15 Marriott East Side Hotel 16 New York, New York Stuyvesant Room 17 Monday, May 8, 2000 9:00 a.m. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Reported by: JEAN VALERIE GAFA 25 JOB NO. 104647 2 1 2 A P P E A R A N C E S 3 4 LISA FORMAN Deputy Director 5 Investigative and Forensic Sciences Division Office of Science and Technology 6 National Institute of Justice U.S. Department of Justice 7 Washington, DC 8 DAVID G. BOYD Deputy Director 9 National Institute of Justice U.S. Department of Justice 10 Washington, DC 11 KATHERINE LAPP Commissioner 12 New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services 13 Albany, New York 14 THE HONORABLE GEORGE E. PATAKI Governor 15 New York, New York 16 HEATHER L. Cartwright Attorney Advisor to the Director 17 Office for Victims of Crime Office of Justice Programs 18 U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 19 JACK BALLANTYNE 20 Associate Professor Department of Chemistry 21 University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida 22 DAVID AND ANN SCOVILLE 23 Canandaigua, New York 24 DEBBIE SMITH Williamsburg, Virginia 25 3 1 CHRISTOPHER ASPLEN 2 Assistant U.S. Attorney District of Columbia 3 Executive Director National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence 4 U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 5 ROBIN S. WILSON 6 Executive Assistant National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence 7 Office of Science and Technology National Institute of Justice 8 U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 9 HOWARD SAFIR 10 Police Commissioner New York City Police Department 11 New York, New York 12 MARGARET BERGER Suzanne J. and Norman Miles Professor of Law 13 Brooklyn Law School Brooklyn, New York 14 MAUREEN E. CASEY 15 Deputy Commissioner Policy and Planning 16 New York City Police Department New York, New York 17 DAVID COFFMAN 18 Crime Laboratory Analyst Supervisor Florida Department of Law Enforcement 19 Tallahassee, Florida 20 NORMAN A. GAHN Assistant District Attorney 21 Sexual Assault Unit Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office 22 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 23 REBECCA L. SPARKES Project Area Manager 24 The Forensic Science Service Birmingham, England 25 4 1 DAVID J. WERRETT 2 Director of Service Delivery The Forensic Science Service 3 Birmingham, England 4 BOB GREENBERG Senior Vice President 5 G&H International Services LLC Washington, DC 6 MARK DALE 7 Inspector New York State Police 8 Forensic Investigation Center Albany, New York 9 JANE SIEGEL GREENE 10 Executive Director The Innocence Project 11 Cardozo School of Law New York, New York 12 TIM SCHELLBERG 13 Governmental Affairs / Attorneys at Law Smith Alling Lane 14 Tacoma, Washington 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS 2 MS. FORMAN: My name is Lisa Forman. 3 I'm the acting director of the Forensic 4 Sciences Division in the office of Science 5 and Technology at the National Institute of 6 Justice. 7 And I would like to take this very 8 first moment to welcome you and thank you 9 all for coming and introduce you not to me 10 but to the staff who are here to take care 11 of whatever concerns or issues you might 12 have. 13 I'd like to take a moment to introduce 14 the NIJ staff to you, Lisa Kaas, Anjali 15 Swienton, John Paul Jones, and the 16 commission staff, Robin Wilson; and I'm also 17 commission staff too. I wear a lot of hats. 18 And the people that just stood up are 19 here to help you in any way they can in the 20 next two days. 21 I'd like to also point your attention 22 to both Ms. Margaret Black and Alanna 23 LaFranchi, I think I just misstated her 24 name, from the Institute of Law and Justice 25 who are out there at the registration desk, 6 1 2 and they can also help you. 3 So please, you're our guests for the 4 next two days, and we hope we can attend to 5 any of the issues that might arise for you. 6 I'd like to take this moment to 7 introduce you to the director of our Office 8 Science and Technology and one of the 9 associate directors of the National 10 Institute of Justice, Dr. David Boyd, and 11 Dr. Boyd will be starting the welcoming 12 remarks. 13 DR. BOYD: Well, welcome to the fifth, 14 and we think final, DNA conference that NIJ 15 will be sponsoring directly, although we 16 will not allow this kind of function to go 17 away. We'll be sponsoring in other venues. 18 I'd like to start by thanking our the 19 co-sponsors, and there are a number of them, 20 New York State Division of Criminal Justice 21 Services, and you will hear shortly from 22 Katherine Lapp who is the director of that 23 organization, The New York State police, the 24 New York City Police Department, and the 25 Northeastern Association of Forensic 7 1 2 Scientists. 3 This conference, this fifth annual DNA 4 conference is going to use a problems and 5 solutions format in discussing the past, the 6 present, and we think far more importantly 7 the future of forensic DNA evidence. 8 We're going to hear from victims who 9 know the value of DNA and the National 10 Offender Databank, and we're going to look 11 at the current state of public crime labs in 12 this country as they struggle to keep pace 13 with increasing offender samples as well as 14 the demands of case work, and that, of 15 course, includes huge numbers of nonsuspect 16 cases. 17 But before I get into the body of my 18 remarks, I am known in the Department of 19 Justice. Let me first make very clear, I am 20 not an attorney even though I am in the 21 Department of Justice. 22 As people have sometimes joked, the 23 doctor in my title is not from a juris 24 doctorate, it's from Ph.D., and we're proud 25 of that. 8 1 2 I also have to tell you, we're 3 outnumbered. As you can imagine, coming 4 from an agency that likes to bill itself as 5 the world's largest law firm, there 6 sometimes is some sensitivity about lawyer 7 jokes, and so I have agreed with my former 8 boss that In the future I would be more 9 careful about using fictional jokes about 10 attorneys. 11 Instead I would tell stories that 12 shows them as they really are, and for that 13 reason, I want to tell you a brief story. 14 It will be paraphrased slightly which comes 15 from an actual court transcript. 16 It's about a medical examiner. This 17 medical examiner, kind of a crusty old 18 character, a lot like Mark Dale, even though 19 mark is not an medical examiner. 20 And this medical examiner's being 21 cross-examined by a young attorney. He 22 says, "Now, tell me, Doctor, you are the 23 doctor who first examined Mr. Ellen's body; 24 is that correct? 25 "Yes, sir, it is." 9 1 2 "Was he dead at the time?" 3 "Well, no, he was sitting on the table 4 wondering why I was going to perform an 5 autopsy." 6 So the young lawyer says, "All right. 7 How did you know he was dead?" 8 "Well, I was the doctor performing the 9 autopsy." 10 "But were you certain he was dead? 11 Did you take his pulse? Did you check his 12 heartbeat?" 13 "No, I didn't." 14 "Then how did you know he was dead?" 15 And he said, "Well, for one thing his 16 brain was sitting in a jar on my desk." 17 "But is it possible that he could 18 still have been alive?" 19 At which point the medical examiner 20 sort of leaned back, looked at him for a 21 moment and said, "Well, I suppose it's 22 possible that he could be out there 23 practicing law somewhere." 24 (Laughter.) 25 Now, we all know what happens when the 10 1 2 DNA laboratories cannot keep up with the 3 requirements coming in from the field. 4 Every case in the field that involves 5 a crime, any crime, has all sorts of 6 emotional effects, and so everybody imagines 7 that's the most important crime, the most 8 important bit of evidence that needs to be 9 analyzed. 10 And that lack of capacity has created 11 many serious problems. Many of you may have 12 seen Dr. Paul Ferrar on television just in 13 the last few days because of a case where 14 someone had been released from custody 15 because a DNA sample had not been processed 16 and so went out, committed another rape and 17 murder. And so the laboratory system in 18 Virginia was under severe attack. 19 Now, there are thousands of such cases 20 in every laboratory, and they all seem very 21 high priority. Which one is the highest 22 priority, however, tends to come clear only 23 after the fact when another crime is 24 committed. 25 And so we're going to explore as part 11 1 2 of this conference some potential areas 3 where we think solutions can be found. 4 We're going to look at things like new 5 legislation, in fact, we've been testifying 6 a great deal on that recently; new 7 technology; on analytical assistance for 8 private industry; and improved training and 9 educational opportunities for forensic DNA 10 scientists. 11 Now, as many of you know, the National 12 Institute of Justice over the past several 13 years has taken the leading role in the 14 development of DNA as a critical tool for 15 the criminal justice system. 16 We've done that through a wide variety 17 of programs, including a number of new 18 initiatives. Now, we're proud of the fact 19 that since we first helped to bring DNA 20 technology to the United States back in the 21 1980s, after the British had established its 22 value, NIJ has been involved in funding in 23 whole or in part every new advance, every 24 significant advance in DNA identification 25 technology in the United States. 12 1 2 And the United States now, as a 3 consequence, leads in DNA identification 4 technologies. And so, we started all the 5 way back our R&D program in 1987. 6 But you need to understand that at the 7 time we started it, this is pretty big for 8 us because we had an incredibly tiny budget, 9 and so from our perspective, we were 10 spending a huge amount on DNA R&D every 11 year, $300,000 per year. 12 Now, Defense spends about $37 billion 13 by itself, but we had what was then the, and 14 it's important to remember this kind of 15 scale, we had the largest DNA research and 16 development budget in the United States at 17 $300,000 a year. 18 Finally, in 1999, just last year, we 19 were able, and you need to understand it 20 takes us two to three years to win these 21 arguments with Congress, but we were finally 22 able to persuade Congress that there ought 23 to be a five-year DNA research and 24 development program. 25 And so, beginning last year, we have 13 1 2 now had $5 million, last year, $5 million 3 this year, and we should have $5 million in 4 each of the three subsequent years. 5 So for the first time, there is 6 serious money for DNA R&D, and that's 7 important because it also means now we have 8 a little money for other than DNA, forensic 9 science R&D as well. 10 NIJ, however, needs to ensure that 11 this program addresses the specific needs of 12 the laboratories in the field, of the public 13 forensic laboratories, and so for that 14 reason, we started this year for the first 15 time a DNA grantee's workshop. 16 And its goal since the very beginning 17 is to develop a dialogue between the 18 research and the laboratory communities to 19 ensure that we spend that $5 million in the 20 best possible way to produce the tools and 21 the capabilities that you and the 22 laboratories need. 23 The Forensic Laboratory Improvement 24 Program, of course, is the strongest and 25 oldest program that we've had now. It goes 14 1 2 back to 1996. It was authorized all the way 3 through fiscal year 2000. Notice fiscal 4 year 2000, it ends. 5 It has not really been $15 million per 6 year. It actually started very small. In 7 fact, the second year I think it fell to 8 about $3 million, and then it hit 15 and 9 we've been largely able too argue that we 10 need most of the $15 million. 11 We have, as a consequence of that, 12 funded more than 130 separate laboratory 13 facilities to date, and that's as of fiscal 14 year 1999 with a total of $35 million. 15 And that means that instead of about 16 six DNA capable laboratories across the 17 United States, fully capable laboratories, 18 we now have better than a hundred, we'll 19 probably have more than a hundred and thirty 20 by the time all of the funding is in place 21 and then purchased all of the equipment and 22 taken all the training. 23 We've been able, as a consequence, to 24 support increased laboratory capacity, and 25 we've been able to do that by increasing 15 1 2 technical capabilities by funding both 3 equipment purchases and staff training. 4 But we were terribly concerned that 5 this was going to be the last year of what's 6 been a crucial program for laboratories. 7 And we didn't want it to go away, so 8 starting about three years ago, remember 9 that long lag time for federal budgets, we 10 started making the argument that it should 11 be replaced when it ends with a new program 12 called the Crime Laboratory Improvement 13 Program, which ought to get -- and we were 14 optimistic -- but ought to get, we thought, 15 $55 million a year. 16 We didn't get $55 million a year, 17 although the President's budget puts in a 18 huge amount of money, $55 million, which 19 includes more than just CLIP but a 20 significant chunk which is for CLIP for next 21 year. 22 Fortunately, Congress accepted the 23 argument, and so this year, for the first 24 time, we're now allowed to fund broad 25 forensic science applications for the 16 1 2 forensic laboratories, not just DNA. And we 3 anticipate that the CLIP program, the Crime 4 Laboratory Improvement Program, will now 5 exist for at least five years or so, and we 6 are continuing each year to request $55 7 million or a total of $275 million by the 8 end of the program. 9 Even that isn't enough, but it's 10 important to understand how much we were 11 getting even five years ago, and that 12 measure was largely zero. So $55 million 13 would be a spectacular improvement. 14 Now, we intend with this to look at 15 everything, from fingerprints to trace 16 evidence. We also want to improve 17 coordination and cross-jurisdictional 18 learning among forensic laboratories. 19 And because we hope it will continue 20 to operate for some years, part of what we 21 will be doing over the next few years as we 22 do these special workshops, the DNA 23 workshops with the DNA labs, is to do 24 forensic workshops every year with all the 25 laboratories to figure out how best to 17 1 2 coordinate these activities and to use this 3 community to figure out which DNA 4 investments do we really need to make. 5 Now, here's what it took to get the 6 money for the CODIS backlog. We did this in 7 a remarkably short period of time. We were 8 able to enlist the support of some very 9 strong players, Patricia Schroeder, who 10 strongly supported this activity and several 11 members of Congress, victims' groups and the 12 rest in the space of about 18 months, we 13 were able to convince Congress to 14 appropriate $15 million to help with CODIS 15 Backlog Reduction Program, and that's 16 beginning in fiscal year 2000. 17 Funds under this program are being 18 made available to state crime labs for 19 outsourcing to private laboratories the STR 20 analysis of previously collected offender 21 samples. 22 Now, let me make clear. This program 23 funds offender samples, that is, for the 24 convicted offenders. It is not for the 25 backlog of current crime evidence. We think 18 1 2 that's a shortfall, but we're working on 3 that. 4 Outsource samples are going to be 5 tested against the 13 core STR loci that are 6 part of the FBI's CODIS system, and we are 7 going to be encouraging getting that entered 8 into the database in a timely manner. 9 And the states also have to certify as 10 match for their grants, and they will attest 11 that they will test a percentage, and we're 12 just touching on this because we're trying 13 to make the point to Congress, a percentage 14 of nonsuspect case samples in-house for 15 CODIS entry. 16 Now, that's not a particularly onerous 17 requirement. We've said one percent, one 18 percent of the money that you get to do that 19 because we want to start that rolling. 20 Congress is now -- I testified about 21 two or three weeks ago, and it's very clear 22 that Congress is intensely interested in 23 also trying to find a way to fund the 24 elimination of nonsuspect case backlogs. 25 We plan to continue this program in 19 1 2 2001, and we may even have to do it in 2002 3 and we've indicated that's a possibility to 4 Congress. They have not so far been turned 5 off. 6 It may last longer than just next 7 year, but that may also require that when 8 you are asked is $15 million a year and up, 9 I would never suggest to any of you that you 10 consider lobbying on our behalf, but you 11 have every right to make clear what you 12 think to be the case. 13 The National Commission on the Future 14 of DNA Evidence was chartered by the 15 Attorney General in 1997 at NIJ's 16 recommendation, and that was to help try to 17 put this on the map to try to help Congress 18 understand why it was critically important. 19 And it is intended to ensure the 20 greatest benefit to the criminal justice 21 system. And it's already made a number of 22 recommendations to the Attorney General to 23 support DNA labs and to enhance their 24 capabilities and capacities, and its work 25 was crucial in winning the DNA backlog 20 1 2 funding. 3 In fact, on that table in the back, I 4 believe there are copies of the earliest DNA 5 Commission publications. Many of the 6 Commission's recommendations, however, are 7 going to add to what I think those of you 8 from the labs will already consider a 9 staggering workload that the public forensic 10 laboratories currently face. 11 You've got CODIS offender samples to 12 put through. We have a backlog there that 13 exceeds easily half a million samples, 14 probably will go to 7 or 800,000 samples 15 before we can even get the funding at work 16 helping to reduce it. 17 Post-conviction analysis under the 18 Leahy Bill, which is now going to require, 19 which proposes to require a great many 20 activities on the part of the states that 21 will burden the labs even further. 22 Now, NIJ staff is trying to find ways 23 to reduce that burden as much as possible, 24 including trying to work, continue to work 25 for funding of outsourcing of offender 21 1 2 samples, funding for post-conviction, and 3 that sort of thing. 4 But we also understand that whatever 5 it is we decide to do is going to have to be 6 designed in collaboration with the state and 7 local crime laboratories, so you should 8 expect us to be calling on you to 9 participate with us in working out what 10 those plans would be; and hope that you 11 would be helpful in doing that. 12 Finally, we planned this conference as 13 the final one in our annual series. Our 14 newly created annual DNA Grantees' Workshop 15 is intended to pick up where this conference 16 leaves off in most areas, in others a number 17 of other opportunities exist in the forensic 18 community. 19 And this is part of the reason we 20 don't think we need the annual DNA 21 conference anymore. We now have the annual 22 Promega and FBI CODIS meetings. 23 And our intention in creating this 24 series was to win lots of attention, 25 publicly and in Congress, to support the DNA 22 1 2 activities. We think we've done that, and 3 we think it's now time to turn our attention 4 to general forensic kinds of things for 5 these public activities. 6 Now, as this will also be our final 7 chance to have the stage before this 8 audience, or at least we from NIJ, We'd like 9 to take the opportunity as well to honor 10 some of our colleagues that we feel have 11 made an invaluable contribution to the field 12 of DNA, science over the years, in fact. 13 I think there are a list of those in 14 your agenda right now, and so we're going to 15 be giving some special awards out tomorrow 16 at lunch to those people who have been 17 critical. 18 And so we want to thank you. We want 19 to thank you for coming and helping us to 20 enjoy the next two days. Now, before I 21 leave, I can't pass up an opportunity and my 22 last opportunity before the DNA conference 23 to tell you one more real story about the 24 way lawyers are. 25 Seems there was a young police officer 23 1 2 on the stand. He was being cross-examined, 3 maybe, by the same young attorney. Who 4 knows? The attorney asks, "Tell me, 5 officer, how do do you know that the person 6 sitting at the defense table here is, in 7 fact, the subject?" 8 The detective says, "Because the 9 arresting officer pointed him out to me when 10 I arrived on the scene." 11 "And you believed him?" 12 "Yes, sir." 13 "Do you believe all your fellow 14 officers?" 15 "Yes, sir, with my life." 16 "With your life. Well, tell me, 17 officer, do you have lockers at your 18 station?" 19 "Yes, sir." 20 "Do you have a locker there?" 21 "Yes, sir." 22 "Do you have a lock on your locker?" 23 "Yes, sir." 24 "Do you keep it locked?" 25 "Yes, sir." 24 1 2 "Yet you trust your fellow officers 3 with your life?" 4 "Well, yes, sir. You see, our station 5 is co-located with the courthouse, and from 6 time to time defense attorneys have been 7 known to walk through the locker room." 8 Now, it's my great pleasure now to 9 introduce our next speaker, Katherine Lapp, 10 who was appointed Governor Pataki as both 11 the Director of Criminal Justice and 12 Commissioner of the Division Criminal 13 Justice Services back in 1997. 14 She came there from her tenure at the 15 appellate division of the New York State 16 Supreme Court where she had begun her work 17 in the republic criminal justice arena in 18 1983. 19 As the criminal justice director, she 20 is Governor Pataki's chief advisor and 21 policy maker, and I tell you, she's 22 intensely interested in all the things we're 23 doing in this area. 24 We were actually able to get her to 25 spend the better part of the day at the 25 1 2 Albany Crime Lab looking at some really wild 3 notions we have about forensic science where 4 we have underway some experiments to see 5 whether it's possible to take telemedicine, 6 which you've also heard of -- we also do 7 work outside the forensic arena -- and we 8 had done a great deal of work in 9 telemedicine in the prison system. 10 And so we then wanted to start a 11 teleforensics project. And we'll do that 12 and I'll quote Mark Dale. I don't think 13 there are any senior police people to get 14 even. 15 Anyway, Mark made the point that one 16 of the things we wanted to be able to do was 17 protect the crime scene by handling what he 18 called the "rank ego issues" to find a way 19 to keep them out of the crime scene but 20 still in charge so they could be satisfied. 21 And so he strongly supported this 22 approach. Katherine came out, spent the 23 entire day with us looking at all of these 24 options. So it's very clear that she's 25 intensely interested in the issues that are 26 1 2 here. 3 She manages more than a $2 billion 4 budget annually and it includes, of course, 5 the State Police, the Department of 6 Correctional Services, the Division of 7 Parole, Crime Victims' Boards, Division of 8 Probation and Correctional Alternatives, and 9 Division of Criminal Justice Services where 10 she serves as the commissioner. 11 And I'd like her to know that we do 12 technology work in all those areas. So as 13 we invite you to other things, we hope 14 you'll also come. 15 So it's my very great pleasure to 16 introduce to you Katherine Lapp 17 (Applause.) 18 WELCOME TO NEW YORK 19 MS. LAPP: Thank you, David. As I was 20 listening to his remarks, I was reflecting 21 on whether I should admit to being an 22 attorney. 23 One of the great compliments I 24 received about a year ago was someone in the 25 Governor's counsel to ask a legal question, 27 1 2 and she came back, he wasn't available, she 3 sat down. 4 She said, "Well, let me ask you this 5 question since no one else is available." 6 She asked me the question. I gave her back 7 a legal answer, and she said, "Where did you 8 learn all that?" 9 I said, "Well, I'm an attorney." 10 She said, "I've known you for three 11 years. I never knew you were an attorney." 12 So I'm not sure if I should take it as 13 a compliment or actually a question about my 14 legal skills. I'm not really sure. 15 But I want to thank you to New York. 16 New York has been at the forefront of DNA 17 issues, thanks to a lot of talented people, 18 not myself, but people before I came to this 19 state that have invested a lot of time, a 20 lot of resources, and a lot of talent in 21 making sure that New York State's databank 22 was one of the foremost in the country. 23 As you all of you know, DNA has 24 presented a great many possibilities to law 25 enforcement and the criminal justice system. 28 1 2 It has challenged all of us to think of ways 3 to make sure that it's used to its fullest 4 extent but also to look at a lot of legal 5 issues, what are the implications for the 6 entire system, not just for law enforcement. 7 Now, as I said, here in New York, we 8 made great strides in this regard, thanks to 9 the leadership at the state level with 10 Governor Pataki, but also at the local level 11 with Commissioner Howard Safir who's sitting 12 here in the audience. 13 He's been out in the forefront 14 nationally with the Governor making sure 15 that people understand on the federal, 16 state, and local levels throughout this 17 country that we need to invest time and 18 resources in DNA. 19 Now, our databank, which currently 20 holds about 8,300 STR 13-loci samples from 21 convicted offenders actually became 22 operational last August, and by March of 23 this year, we actually had our first hit in 24 a 21-year-old homicide in Westchester County 25 that really focussed the attention in this 29 1 2 state to the importance of making sure that 3 our databank is as large as possible and 4 that law enforcement throughout the state 5 understand its full potential. 6 Now, thanks to the leadership of our 7 Governor, our DNA law was recently expanded 8 in December of last year to cover 65 percent 9 of all convicted felons. 10 We essentially take samples now from 11 violent felony offenders and a myriad of 12 non-violent felony offenders, including drug 13 sellers and certain high level drug 14 possessors. 15 That, essentially, means that our 16 annual intake of samples grew from 3,000 a 17 year to over 30,000 a year, and just as 18 importantly, our new law had a retroactive 19 effect which covered roughly a hundred 20 thousand offenders in prison, on probation, 21 and parole; and it really challenged the 22 staff of the State Police and the Division 23 of Criminal Justice Services and a number of 24 other people to start targeting those 25 offenders making sure we had the DNA samples 30 1 2 before their sentences actually ran out. 3 And I can say that since December 1st, 4 we have managed to take 40000 DNA samples 5 from that retroactive pool, which is no 6 small feat when you consider how big the 7 state is and how many people that involved. 8 Now, in addition to populating our DNA 9 database and making sure that our law was as 10 expansive as possible, the Governor didn't 11 stop there. 12 He provided a million dollars to local 13 DNA laboratories in the state to make sure 14 that they had at least the beginnings of 15 resources to start doing analysis on 16 unsolved cases. 17 He also doubled the budget of the 18 State Police Lab to make sure that not only 19 they could handle the workload, the 30,000 20 annual samples coming in, but also to make 21 sure they had the personnel needed to start 22 targeting the unsolved cases. 23 At the state labs, in most states, the 24 State Police lab actually provides crime lab 25 services to many, many jurisdictions 31 1 2 throughout the state that may not have the 3 ability to access that kind of resources on 4 a local level. 5 He also provided upwards of $8 million 6 for a contract that we now have in place 7 with a private lab that will now be taking 8 the samples, those 40,000 samples I just 9 referenced, we will be shipping them to the 10 private lab. 11 They will do the analysis on those 12 convicted samples and we will download them, 13 and our projection is about 3,00 a month 14 will be analyzed and downloaded beginning 15 next month. So we really anticipate that 16 within the next 12 to 18 months that we'll 17 have our databank pretty well populated. 18 He's also introduced legislation to 19 eliminate the five-year statute of 20 limitations for serious violent felonies, 21 and he's proposed legislation to require all 22 convicted offenders, including felons and 23 misdemeanors to provide samples to the 24 databank. 25 Now, as I said, we're fortunate in 32 1 2 New York to have a Governor that not only 3 understands the full potential of DNA, but 4 is willing to fight hard for the resources 5 and legal changes that are needed so that we 6 can maximize its full potential. 7 So without further ado I'd like to 8 introduce the Governor of the State of 9 New York, George E. Pataki. 10 (Applause.) 11 CONFERENCE KEYNOTE 12 MR. PATAKI: Good morning. It's nice 13 being with you this morning, and there's 14 nobody up front. I don't know what 15 happened. Katy, thank you for all that 16 you've done and your leadership, and I look 17 out and see Commissioner Safir. 18 Commissioner, thank you for the great job 19 that you have done. 20 It is, of course, a sad day in 21 New York today with the funeral of 22 Cardinal 0'Connor's funeral, and all 23 New Yorkers' prayers and thoughts are with 24 him, but we all have no doubt he has earned 25 his position alongside God, the God he loved 33 1 2 so well and served so well. 3 Let me begin by welcoming all of you 4 here to New York. Before I do anything, I 5 should inform all of you who haven't been 6 here in a while that the laws of this state 7 have been strengthened and changed 8 dramatically over the course of the past few 9 years. 10 Before you go home, each of you is 11 going to be required to leave a DNA sample 12 in the back. (Laughter.) No, you're not 13 going to have to do that, but the laws have 14 been dramatically changed in New York State. 15 We have ended parole, first for repeat 16 violent felons, and then for all violent 17 felons. We ended early-release and work- 18 release for violent felons. We passed 19 Megan's Law. We've raised minimum 20 standards, and the results are our streets 21 are as safe as they've been in a generation. 22 Our rate of crime is down over a 23 third. Our rate of violent crime is down 24 almost 40 percent, and the rate of homicide 25 is down over 50 percent; and we are just 34 1 2 very encouraged that for each of the last 3 five years, we've seen -- and we just got 4 the statistics last week -- we've seen a 5 dramatic reduction in violent crime across 6 the state. We're going to do everything in 7 our power to see that that continues. 8 And let me say that I'm honored to 9 talk to you about what is truly an exciting 10 and promising new era of law enforcement 11 where we can do more. 12 Here in New York, we're working 13 aggressively to harness DNA technology so we 14 can wage and win a high-tech war against 15 crime. Soon after I took office five and a 16 half years ago, I signed a DNA law requiring 17 criminals convicted of 21 specific crimes, 18 violent and/or sexual offenses, to submit 19 DNA samples to the state. 20 Since then, we've expanded the law 21 dramatically. Today, anyone convicted of a 22 violent felony, of a Class-A drug 23 possession, or grand larceny is required to 24 submit a sample to our databank. 25 This means that roughly 65 percent of 35 1 2 all felony offenders in New York will be 3 profiled in our databank. That's 30,000 new 4 samples a year, ten times the previous 5 amount, and because our new law is 6 retroactive, there's a giant pool of about 7 100,000 samples that are being taken right 8 now from inmates, parolees and probationers. 9 Collecting these samples is a massive 10 undertaking to say the least, but it's a 11 crucial one. And we've already collected 12 30,000 samples from offenders in that 13 retroactive pool in less than six months. 14 Of course, taking the samples is 15 useless unless they're properly analyzed and 16 entered into our databank. That's why this 17 year we doubled the budget of our State 18 Police Crime Lab, which operates our 19 databank, and we provided funds to contract 20 with a private forensic laboratory to assist 21 in analyzing the samples. 22 Right now, we have 8,300 STR profiles 23 in our databank, which makes New York one of 24 the largest state repositories of 13-loci 25 STR samples in the country. 36 1 2 With the new resources and with our 3 aggressive plan to download over a hundred 4 thousand additional Samples in the next 12 5 to 15 months, we expect New York's databank 6 to be sitting alone on the top of the list 7 in the very near future. 8 And I cannot tell you how important 9 the retroactivity piece of this was when 10 fought with the legislature to get adopted. 11 Just this past March we had the first cold- 12 case match against our databank. 13 The suspect was in prison serving time 14 for an unrelated crime, and he would have 15 been out next May. Under the retroactive 16 provisions, he was required to submit a DNA 17 sample in February. We added it to our 18 databank, and less than a month later it was 19 matched to crime scene evidence in a murder 20 that occurred 21 years ago. 21 That murder took place just a half 22 hour north of here in suburban Westchester 23 County where a young woman was brutally 24 stabbed to death in her apartment. I 25 recently met with the victim's mother, 37 1 2 sister, and her daughter who was less than 3 one-year-old at the time of the murder. 4 Obviously, nothing can replace the 5 sense of loss, but because of DNA, they 6 finally had a sense of closure and a sense 7 of justice after more than two decades of 8 uncertainty. 9 I can't tell you how relieved and 10 grateful they were that this vicious cold- 11 blooded killer was finally charged with that 12 murder and will be put in prison. 13 I just want to tell you one other 14 aspect of this case that points out how 15 important our ability to use this DNA 16 evidence to get those matches is. 17 That person would have been free next 18 May. He had been convicted, not charged but 19 convicted of nine violent felonies since he 20 committed the murder. He had been convicted 21 of eight misdemeanors since he had committed 22 that murder. 23 The police had kept the sheet with the 24 blood on it. They had suspected that he was 25 murderer, but they didn't have the proof 38 1 2 until we had that DNA analysis. But think 3 about it. Convicted of 17 crimes, he would 4 have been out on the street again next May. 5 How many crimes did he commit for 6 which he was not convicted? That is why the 7 ability to have this match and to have this 8 DNA pool is so critical not just to that 9 family who finally has justice for the 10 person who killed their mother or sister, 11 but also for the people because of crimes 12 that will not be committed because this 13 person will not get out of jail next May. 14 DNA slammed the prison door closed on 15 a violent career predator solving a murder 16 and definitely saving the lives of future 17 victims. 18 This case points out the limitless 19 potential of DNA technology. Think about 20 it. Just two months ago, we solved a crime 21 that was committed when Jimmy Carter was 22 president. With that in mind, it's clear 23 that our laws must change and evolve so that 24 we can properly utilize this new technology. 25 First and foremost, we have to lift 39 1 2 the statute of limitations for certain 3 violent felonies, which in New York now is 4 five years. There's no statute of 5 limitations on pain. There's no statute of 6 limitations on suffering. There should be 7 no statute of limitation on justice. 8 And that's why I proposed a bill that 9 would eliminate the statute of limitations 10 for rape, criminal assault, and all Class-B 11 felonies. the statute of limitations simply 12 doesn't make sense in today's world, 13 especially when we have a tool like DNA that 14 can shed truth on a crime that occurred 15 decades ago. 16 As we've been fighting to pass this 17 law, my friend, District Attorney, Robert 18 Morgenthal here in Manhattan County has 19 taken a creative step because we don't yet 20 have that law in place. 21 He was faced with the impending 22 expiration of the five-year statute of 23 limitations in a rape case. Crime scene 24 evidence provided the perpetrator's complete 25 DNA profile, but the rapist is still out on 40 1 2 the loose. Even more disturbing is that 3 that same profile has been linked to a 4 series of subsequent rapes here Manhattan. 5 Eventually, DNA is going to lead the 6 police to that rapist, but not necessarily 7 before the statute of limitations expires. 8 How tragic would that be when we know 9 someone is guilty of a series of rapes, and 10 yet he can hide behind that five-year 11 statute of limitations. 12 District Attorney Morgenthal used a 13 innovative and highly creative tool. He 14 indicted that person using a John Doe 15 indictment, a unique legal approach using 16 the perpetrator's DNA profile in the 17 indictment. That is a creative tool, but it 18 would be far better if we didn't have the 19 statute of limitations in the first place. 20 That indictment will ensure that no 21 matter when he is found, the perpetrator 22 will face justice instead of getting a free 23 ride because he managed to hide for five 24 years. 25 These are just a few of the many ways 41 1 2 that DNA technology has strengthened not 3 just our ability to track down criminals but 4 our criminal justice system as a whole, and 5 like I've said many times before, DNA isn't 6 just about getting the criminal, DNA is 7 about getting to the truth. 8 We've seen several cases where DNA has 9 been used to exonerate innocent people who 10 spent years in prison. Others were 11 wrongfully charged only to be set free when 12 their DNA failed to match that left at the 13 crime scene. 14 Unfortunately, DNA technology was not 15 available in 1983 when a man named Vincent 16 Jenkins was convicted of raping a Buffalo 17 prison. Jenkins spent 17 years in prison 18 until the courts ordered his release last 19 September. DNA tests proved conclusively 20 that he was not the rapist. 21 According to Barry Scheck, co-director 22 of the Innocence Project here at Cardozo Law 23 School here in the city, Mr. Jenkins was the 24 61st inmate in the United States to be 25 exonerated by DNA evidence. 42 1 2 These cases remind us that DNA 3 evidence is the most powerful weapon we've 4 got in the fight for justice. Our criminal 5 justice system is not perfect. Human beings 6 can make mistakes, but DNA is conclusive and 7 indisputable. 8 When an innocent person goes to 9 prison, it is every bit as much a 10 miscarriage of justice as if a guilty person 11 goes free. And, of course, when the wrong 12 person is convicted, it means the real 13 criminal is still out there on the streets 14 looking for another victim. 15 That's why we must continue to amend 16 our laws, policies, and procedures in a way 17 that allows us to harness the full potential 18 of DNA technology as a tool for finding the 19 criminal and finding the truth. 20 To assist in this critical endeavor, I 21 will introduce legislation to create a DNA 22 Review Committee that will operate under the 23 auspices of our state's Forensic Science 24 Commission. The Commission, which is 25 chaired by my Director of Criminal Justice 43 1 2 Services, Katy Lapp, is comprised of law 3 enforcement officials, prosecutors, defense 4 and forensic science experts and is 5 currently responsible for accrediting DNA 6 labs in the state. 7 The DNA Review Committee will 8 dramatically expend the jurisdiction of the 9 Commission, giving it the additional 10 responsibility of reviewing cases where a 11 conviction was set aside because of DNA 12 evidence. 13 The Commission would have the 14 authority to examine all aspects of a case 15 and determine where mistakes were made. 16 Armed with this information, they will take 17 whatever action is necessary, such as 18 recommending changes in the law to prevent 19 those mistakes from occurring again. 20 The collective expertise of this body 21 will be instrumental in bringing about 22 reforms that will allow our criminal justice 23 system to keep pace with the revolutionary 24 impact of DNA technology. It will also be 25 responsible for setting guidelines for DNA 44 1 2 crime scene collection, analysis and 3 evidence of storage procedures, all in an 4 effort to ensure DNA, when available, is 5 properly maintained. 6 We have a case now where a rapist's 7 DNA was obtained by a hospital here in 8 New York City, and the hospital, 9 unfortunately, discarded that evidence so 10 that that person was able to go free. We 11 have to have guidelines and procedures to 12 make sure that evidence is held intact so 13 that it can be used when we finally catch 14 the criminal. 15 We all know that the proper collection 16 and storage of DNA evidence is critical to 17 the process and critical to the truth. DNA 18 is a gift that law enforcement is obtaining 19 from science, and in New York, we will use 20 it to make our criminal justice system as 21 absolutely correct as humanly possible. 22 By intelligently expanding the use and 23 applications of DNA technology, I believe we 24 can fulfill an ideal that was eloquently 25 stated a long time ago by Benjamin Disraeli 45 1 2 who said that, quote, "Justice is truth in 3 action." 4 Another eloquent spokesman, 5 Samuel Johnson, said, quote, "The law is the 6 last result of human wisdom acting upon 7 human experience for the benefit of the 8 public." 9 DNA has made us much wiser in just a 10 few short years by enabling us to see our 11 mistakes and allowing us to learn from them. 12 I'm proud of New York's long tradition as a 13 leader in so many important movements 14 throughout history. 15 New Yorkers are a compassionate 16 people. We've always fought for the truth 17 with compassion and with commitment, and 18 I'm grateful for those of you in this room 19 who have working so hard to make our streets 20 the safest they've been in a generation. 21 And I know I can rely on your support 22 in the future as we confront the great 23 challenges still ahead of us. Together, I 24 know we can meet those challenges because we 25 have the talent, we have the will, and now, 46 1 2 importantly, we will have the DNA. 3 Thank you for your dedication, thank 4 you for what you've done, and thank you for 5 helping to make this a better state, a 6 better country. God bless you. 7 (Applause.) 8 PANEL I: VICTIMS 9 MS. CARTWRIGHT: Good morning, my name 10 is Heather Cartwright, and I work for the 11 Justice Department and I am an attorney. 12 I'm actually proud to say. I am with the 13 Office for Victims of Crime. We are a 14 component of the Justice Department that is 15 dedicated to promoting the interests of 16 crime victims. 17 Our agency is responsible for 18 administering the Crime Victims' Fund, which 19 provides money to the states through grants 20 to fund victim assistance and compensation 21 programs, and we are delighted to be here 22 today to assist you in obtaining a view of 23 the enormous impact of your work on crime 24 victims. 25 The panel that we have here today 47 1 2 consists of some crime victims and a 3 professor of chemistry and biology to give 4 you a view of the enormous human impact of 5 your work on people in the community. 6 This new technology of DNA is really 7 an amazing tool, and although it can never 8 make a crime not have happened or bring back 9 someone who's gone, it can do an enormous 10 amount to affect the lives of crime victims 11 and to help them to obtain justice. 12 Our first panelist this morning is 13 Mrs. Debbie Smith. Mrs. Smith was a 14 stay-at-home mother in March of 1989 when 15 she became the victim of home invasion and 16 rape. Mrs. Smith has spoken widely on the 17 importance of DNA technology for solving 18 crimes, including appearances on the 19 60 Minutes TV show and on national TV in 20 Canada. 21 She also spoke at the Second 22 Commission for the Future of DNA Evidence 23 that was held in Chicago. Mrs. Smith also 24 assists with training sexual assault nurse 25 examiners or SANES in Richmond, Virginia and 48 1 2 counsels rape victims in her hometown. 3 Would you please welcome Mrs. Debbie Smith. 4 Thank you. 5 MR. SMITH: I am from Williamsburg, 6 Virginia, and we boast of our roller 7 coasters and things that we have at Busch 8 Gardens, but I can tell you we have nothing 9 on you as we drove from the airport in the 10 shuttle bus; and I kept looking for the 11 little height marker to see if I was tall 12 enough because I didn't think I was. It was 13 quite a thrill, quite a different experience 14 for me. 15 9342-00 through 9342-05, numbers of 16 identification, human identification. 17 89-85-00-0234 written and spoken without any 18 particular face on the mind. 19 228153839VA654195, cold and impersonal 20 numbers of human identification but 21 revealing very personal information about 22 this faceless individual. Never before had 23 there been so many ways to identify me, and 24 yet, I had never in my life felt so lost. 25 I resented being referred to as a 49 1 2 number because the numbers made it seem I 3 didn't exist as a real person. They were 4 mechanical and unreal, but I didn't know at 5 that time that it would be numbers, it would 6 be matching numbers, that would breathe air 7 into my lungs and allow me to truly live 8 again. 9 There's no way for you to understand 10 that what you do in your laboratory and 11 offices, how it can mean the difference 12 between life and death without taking you 13 back to March 3, 1989. 14 It's about one o'clock in the 15 afternoon on a Friday. Outside it's cold 16 and gray with a light mist falling. I'm in 17 my home in Williamsburg, Virginia in a nice 18 neighborhood of Williamsburg, Virginia, 19 which, by the way, happens to be one of the 20 safest towns in this country. 21 My husband, who is a police 22 lieutenant, was upstairs asleep after having 23 been up over 30 hours. I couldn't have been 24 any safer, most people would have thought, 25 but I had no way of knowing that in a matter 50 1 2 of moments, my life and the life of those 3 around me would be changed forever. 4 It was a typical day in the life of 5 any wife and mother. I was cleaning house, 6 doing laundry, and preparing dessert for 7 friends, with friends at dinner that night. 8 In the of midst all this, I noticed 9 that my clothes dryer wasn't working 10 properly, so I went outside to check the 11 exhaust vent. When I returned, I decided to 12 leave that back door unlocked, a door that 13 is usually always locked, but I knew I was 14 going to be returning right away with the 15 trash, and after all, I thought, what could 16 happen in just a few minutes, time for me to 17 go in, retrieve the trash and come back out. 18 But before I could return, within 19 moments, a stranger entered that door and 20 nearly destroyed and definitely changed my 21 life forever. This masked stranger forcibly 22 took me outside of my home to a wooded area 23 behind my house. He blindfolded, robbed, 24 and repeatedly raped me. 25 This crime that took less than one 51 1 2 hour has deprived me of the innocent outlook 3 on life and of my freedom. The sounds of 4 his voice rang through my ears like a 5 deafening clamor. "Remember, I know where 6 you live, and I will come back if you tell 7 anyone." 8 But I did tell someone. As soon as I 9 was allowed to return home, I ran upstairs 10 to where my husband was sleeping and woke 11 him with the words, "He got me, Rob. He got 12 me." 13 I begged him not to call the police. 14 I pleaded with him not to tell anyone 15 because I feared that this man would keep 16 his promise, that he would certainly come 17 back and kill me, but the police officer and 18 my husband knew that we couldn't allow this 19 crime to go unreported. 20 He convinced me of the importance of 21 going to the hospital and allowing the perp 22 to taken. All I wanted to do was take a 23 shower. I wanted to wash it all away. 24 After the hospital visit when we were 25 finally allowed to go home, I thought that 52 1 2 the worst was over. I had survived this 3 terrible ordeal. Surely, I could put it 4 behind me and I could go on. 5 I didn't realize that the worst was 6 yet to come. My favorite place in the 7 world, my home, seemed now nothing more than 8 cold stone and wood. Everything seemed to 9 have a strange look about it. Nothing 10 seemed to be familiar at all. The one place 11 that I had always felt safe and comfortable 12 was now taunting me with horrible memories. 13 I would relive this nightmare day 14 after day. Each day I would remember more 15 and more of the details as the shock began 16 to wear off. I was beginning to realize it 17 was far from being over. 18 For the first time in my life, I 19 couldn't find any reason to want to live. 20 The love of my family and friends wasn't 21 enough anymore. They couldn't erase the 22 memories, and they couldn't take away the 23 pain. 24 Even my faith in God seemed to be 25 failing me because I just couldn't 53 1 2 understand how a God who was supposed to 3 love me could have allowed this to happen. 4 There was no escaping the pain and 5 there was no escaping the fear. Fear will 6 not be satisfied until it has taken over 7 your mind and body as a cancerous tumor. It 8 will not be stopped until it has inhabited 9 every part of you. 10 It cripples you like arthritis making 11 every move unbearable until, finally, it's 12 just not worth the pain. You become 13 paralyzed, feeling trapped and helpless. 14 It was always there. It was there in 15 my waking hours as well as my dreams. On 16 many occasions, my husband would be awakened 17 in the middle of the night with the blood 18 curdling screams from the nightmares. It 19 was at this point that I began to realize 20 that I could not and I would not live this 21 way. 22 Death seemed to be the only 23 alternative for me. It was the only answer 24 that would end this nightmare that had 25 become my life. In death, there would 54 1 2 finally be peace and quiet. I would no 3 longer have hear his voice in my ear, I'd no 4 longer have to feel his arm around my neck, 5 and I would no longer have to see his face 6 before my eyes. My mind would finally be at 7 rest. 8 But I knew that I couldn't risk 9 surviving. My death would have to be fast 10 and it would need to be final. I decided 11 that a gun would be the answer. Over and 12 over again, I planned this suicide in my 13 head, but there was one problem that had no 14 solution, and that was my husband and my two 15 children. 16 I worried who would find me. Would 17 they live in guilt feeling that they had 18 somehow failed me? What would this do to 19 them? I couldn't bear the thought that they 20 would have to endure the same kind of pain 21 that I was feeling, and I thank God that my 22 love for them was stronger than my need to 23 rid myself of this constant torment. 24 I finally grabbed onto that thread, 25 and it did become my reason to live, but one 55 1 2 of the most frequent comments I heard after 3 I was raped was, "At least you're alive." 4 But I can tell you standing here still 5 today that I was alive physically, but 6 inside I had died. This intruder never laid 7 a physical hand on anyone else in my family, 8 but when he left, he left each one of us 9 victims. 10 He touched emotions in us that we had 11 never known. Suddenly, there was rage in 12 the eyes of my son. My daughter was afraid 13 to go from the porch to the driveway after 14 dark. And each of us, especially my 15 husband, felt the awful guilt, the awful 16 pain of guilt. 17 He felt as if he could protect the 18 whole city but was unable to protect his own 19 wife in his own home. Our son was 20 conscience stricken because the attacker had 21 used the baseball bat that he had neglected 22 to put away. 23 I felt responsible because, after all, 24 I had left the door unlocked for those brief 25 but life-changing moments. Our home which 56 1 2 had always been filled with love and 3 laughter had now become a house full of 4 bitterness, anger, fear, and guilt. 5 But my family weren't the only victims 6 that day. Every person that touched my life 7 or my family's life was to feel the effect 8 of this crime. They no longer felt safe in 9 their comfortable little town of 10 Williamsburg. They, too, felt invaded and 11 vulnerable. 12 I could see the pain in their eyes 13 because I was a constant reminder that rape 14 can truly happen to anyone and anywhere. 15 They would guard their words so they 16 wouldn't say anything that would upset me. 17 They were angry for me, and yet they 18 felt absolutely helpless because there was 19 nothing that they could do. I often, in 20 fact, found myself comforting them. Our 21 minds and bodies ached because we wanted 22 understanding, and yet we couldn't find any. 23 I waited daily to hear the news that 24 they had found this man that had changed our 25 lives so drastically, and I can tell you 57 1 2 that those days turned into weeks, the weeks 3 into months, and those months turned into 4 years. 5 And I lived in constant fear of his 6 return, hearing his words over and over in 7 my head, "I know where you live and I will 8 return and I will kill you." The 9 Williamsburg Police Department followed 10 every lead and every clue only to come up 11 empty-handed. 12 Even my own mind began to doubt 13 myself. Had it really happened, or was it 14 just some terrible nightmare? Do they 15 believe me, or are they doubting me as I was 16 doubting myself? 17 But in my heart, I knew that it wasn't 18 a terrible nightmare, something that was 19 going to fade with time. I knew that it was 20 a nightmare that I was going to have to live 21 forever, and I began to realize that the 22 quality of life that I had once enjoyed was 23 now gone forever. 24 I craved peace of mind and I did 25 everything I could to try to attain it. An 58 1 2 alarm system was installed in our home, 3 including panic buttons, as well as one I 4 could wear around my neck. The privacy 5 fence was put around our yard. At one 6 point, I even took to carrying a gun. My 7 kids used to call me "the pistol packing 8 mama." 9 But I had to do away with that because 10 it tends to make salesclerks a little 11 nervous when you have to move a .38 out of 12 the way to get your checkbook. But my 13 biggest fear was that I was going to hurt 14 some innocent person all because they got up 15 too close behind me. 16 There just didn't seem to be any way 17 that I could attain this peace and rest that 18 my mind and my body craved for so long. I 19 began to wonder how I was ever going to 20 truly live again. I would suffer daily with 21 the memory of a man who was in my life for 22 such a short span of time, and he may never 23 had to have to pay for this crime; but I 24 would have to pay for it forever. 25 I can tell you that it is only by the 59 1 2 grace of God that I am here today because 3 for six and a half years, I simply existed, 4 trying to go on and live as normal. 5 VA122015Y, more numbers, 91-17682, but these 6 numbers, I can tell you bring with them a 7 life-giving force and renewed hope. 8 As George Lee sat at his computer in 9 the Virginia Division of Forensic Science on 10 July 24th, 1995, on probably what seemed to 11 be to him just another day in the lab, he 12 had no way of knowing what effect his work 13 that day was going to have on my life and 14 those around me. 15 On this day, Mr. Lee entered a 16 prisoner's blood sample into the computer, 17 and it automatically began its cross-check 18 against previously entered samples. To his 19 joy and surprise, he received a cold hit, 20 something that was fairly rare at that time. 21 Two days later, this information was 22 passed on to the Williamsburg Police 23 Department where the case was being 24 investigated. They, in turn, passed the 25 information on to the shift supervisor 60 1 2 working that day, who just happened to be my 3 husband. 4 On that day, July 26, 1995, my husband 5 walked into our living room, and he handed 6 me a composite that he had carried with him 7 ever since the incident and told me that I 8 could throw it away because we weren't going 9 to need it anymore. 10 Not only had they identified my 11 rapist, but he was already in prison and had 12 been there for since six months after he had 13 attacked me. But for the first time in six 14 and a half years, I could feel myself 15 breathe. 16 I finally felt validated. There was a 17 real name and a real person to go with my 18 nightmare. Everyone would know that I was 19 telling the truth, that it was real. 20 Finally, I could quit looking over my 21 shoulder. No longer did I have to drive 22 around in circles just hoping that somebody, 23 that one of my neighbors would come by, 24 would drive by so I could get the courage to 25 get out of car to go into my home if no one 61 1 2 else was home. 3 Unfamiliar noises no left me panic 4 stricken. I no longer had to scan the faces 5 in the crowd to see if he was following me. 6 Suicide was no longer a consideration. And 7 finally, my husband is grateful that I don't 8 wake him up too often in the middle of the 9 night with the ear piercing screams. 10 Within myself, the healing had begun, 11 and peace had come at last. Because of the 12 effort in this field of DNA, this man is off 13 the street for good. The jury gave Norman 14 Jimmerson two life sentences plus 25 years 15 with no chance of parole. 16 I stand here before you today as an 17 example of what DNA is truly all about. 18 Because of the miracle of DNA, I did not 19 miss my childrens' graduation from college, 20 and I will be present to see my husband walk 21 our daughter down the aisle in November. 22 And I am here today with you on my 28th 23 wedding anniversary because of the important 24 effect that DNA has had in my life. 25 On behalf of myself and other victims 62 1 2 and their families, I want to extend my 3 heartfelt thanks to those of you who work in 4 this field. I am not a public speaker by 5 nature, and it takes every ounce of courage 6 that I can muster just to be here. 7 But I can tell you that I count it 8 both a privilege and an honor to be a small 9 part in the furtherance of this cause. Any 10 time a great tool such as this is available 11 yet not used, I think that our society 12 commits a crime against its members. 13 We must use the crime solving 14 capabilities of DNA to the fullest, and I 15 pray that each of you will continue with 16 this in mind. Thank you. 17 (Applause.) 18 MS. CARTWRIGHT: Thank you. Next, I 19 would like to introduce you to David and Ann 20 Scoville. Mr. Scoville is a retired teacher 21 and Mrs. Scoville is retired from the Girl 22 Scouts. On October 21st, 1991, their 23 28-year-old daughter, Patricia, was raped 24 and murdered in Stowe, Vermont. 25 The Scovilles have worked extensively 63 1 2 to encourage the passage of DNA legislation 3 and other sexual assault reform legislation 4 in Vermont, Rhode Island, and New York 5 state. Please welcome David and Ann 6 Scoville. 7 (Applause.) 8 MR. SCOVILLE: We, too, are honored to 9 share a story with you here today, even 10 though I'm sure that too many that are all 11 too familiar to all of you right now. 12 On October 21st, 1991, at Moss Bend 13 Falls on a popular hiking trail in Stowe, 14 Vermont, our 28-year-old daughter, Patricia 15 Ann Scoville, was raped and murdered. That 16 she was murdered in Vermont, a small New 17 England state, a state which is reputedly 18 one of the safest states in the country, has 19 always seemed unbelievable to us, for Patty 20 had spent the year after graduating from 21 high school in Denmark as a rotary exchange 22 student. 23 She had spent a semester of her 24 undergraduate years at Cornell in Denmark at 25 the University of Copenhagen. She had 64 1 2 traveled in Russia. She had worked five 3 years in Boston. But she left Boston and 4 moved to Stowe seeking its quiet beauty. 5 And we, as her parents, were pleased because 6 in our minds, she would be safer there than 7 in the big city. 8 Three weeks after she arrived in 9 Vermont, she was raped, she was murdered, 10 she was left in a shallow grave. She wasn't 11 found until eighty days later. 12 Having only rented a room when she 13 first moved to Stowe, Patty had put many of 14 her possessions and furnishings in a storage 15 locker. We are told that she spent some 16 time around noon at the locker sorting 17 through some of her belongings. 18 At 1:39 in the afternoon, she made a 19 transaction at her bank in the Village of 20 Stowe. The day was a brisk, but fall sunny 21 day. It assumed that she then rode her bike 22 the approximately five miles to Moss Bend 23 Falls where her bike was found two days 24 later. 25 We continually relive that horrible 65 1 2 week between October 21st and the 29th. You 3 don't need to hear it all, the massive 4 search; the arrival of Patty's brothers and 5 aunts and uncles to join in the search; the 6 not knowing and the fears associated with 7 not knowing; the winding down of the futile 8 search, since the only real clue was her 9 bike found leaning against the tree at the 10 base of the falls. 11 Early Tuesday morning, October 29th, 12 1991, the cadets from North University were 13 enlisted to make a final search of the 14 immediate area. The body of our daughter, 15 Patricia Ann, was found in a shallow grave 16 approximately 75 yards from the falls. 17 Although she was fully clothed, her autopsy 18 revealed she had been raped and murdered, 19 her death due to asphyxia. 20 As of today, May 8th in the year 2000, 21 Patty's rapist and murderer has not yet been 22 identified nor is it known if Patty's rapist 23 and murderer has committed other violent 24 crimes nor is it known if Patty's rapist and 25 murderer, if he has committed other violent 66 1 2 crimes, has ever been caught, has ever been 3 convicted or, more importantly, has been 4 removed from being able to ever commit other 5 violent crimes. 6 We have gained a profound respect for 7 the many investigators in Vermont and 8 elsewhere who methodically eliminated 9 possible suspects. The fact that DNA 10 evidence was found at the crime scene gave 11 us a strange sort of solace at first, for we 12 were told, and we believed, that DNA 13 evidence would help to find and convict that 14 killer. 15 But we were to learn that there were 16 very limited investigative uses at that 17 time. I, of course, immediately wanted DNA 18 samples taken from every male within a 19 thousand miles of Stowe, but we soon learned 20 phrases like "probably cause," "reasonable 21 grounds," "fourth amendment rights." 22 Indeed, eight and a half years later, 23 there is presently a case pending before the 24 Vermont Supreme Court resulting from an 25 attempt to block a lower court's 67 1 2 non-testimonial order for a suspect to 3 provide a DNA sample. On the brighter side, 4 however, some 70 individuals have been 5 eliminated as suspects over the past eight 6 and a half years. 7 You can imagine, we became very 8 excited when the DNA Identification Act of 9 1994 authorized the FBI to establish 10 national standards for forensic DNA testing 11 and to create CODIS. The change from DNA 12 evidence being just a tool for convicting 13 criminals to its becoming a tool for 14 identification was definitely in our favor. 15 We naively figured at that time that 16 it would probably take six months or so to 17 activate a national database. Slowly, we 18 learned the necessity of lobbying and 19 testifying in both Vermont and Rhode Island, 20 the last two states to pass DNA legislation 21 in 1998. 22 Here, again, we naively figured that 23 once legislation was passed, it would 24 probably take a couple of months before 25 CODIS was fully operational. Then we 68 1 2 learned and began to take into account the 3 differences in the legislation, and we 4 became involved by writing more letters and 5 testifying and lobbying in our own state of 6 New York, of which we're very proud, in an 7 effort to expand the DNA database to include 8 more than just the 11 percent of convicted 9 felons designated in the original law. 10 Admittedly, we have gained a 11 tremendous respect for our legislators and 12 our elected officials, but we also have had 13 to accept the bitter frustration over a 14 political system that seemingly often plays 15 games with crime victims and crime 16 investigations and criminal justice. 17 We don't need to suggest to you the 18 innumerable possible scenarios in Patty's 19 case. You already know that most of them 20 include a rapist/murderer who has committed 21 his violence more than once. In our minds, 22 CODIS was, has been, and still is a 23 no-brainer. CODIS is the next logical 24 extension in the investigation of Patty's 25 rape and murder, looking at the next logical 69 1 2 group of suspects: Convicted sexual and 3 violent criminals, felons, many of whom are 4 repeat offenders in all states. 5 Now that there are 25 states and the 6 FBI hooked into the CODIS network, we 7 naively, but now with tongue in cheek, still 8 hold to our six-month expectation of a fully 9 operational CODIS. Needless to say, we 10 appreciate all of your efforts that you do 11 daily, and we continue to offer to do 12 whatever we can to expedite the process. 13 Please, don't hesitate to think about 14 us, of us, and call on us. We find it very 15 gratifying and exciting whenever we talk 16 with any of you who are connected with DNA 17 or CODIS. Your passion and excitement in 18 what you are doing is contagious and gives 19 us hope. 20 As Patricia Scoville's parents, we 21 cannot rest easy until her rapist and 22 murderer is identified and prevented from 23 raping and murdering other women. We 24 believe we deserve to know what happened to 25 her that day and by whom. We also believe 70 1 2 that eventually DNA will identify Patty's 3 killer, and that DNA will prevent other 4 parents from ever experiencing what we 5 continue to experience. 6 We are convinced that CODIS, in the 7 long run, will save time, energy, grief and 8 money on the part of the law enforcement 9 investigators, agencies, and families. The 10 very bottom line for us is that we look 11 forward to the day when DNA will quickly 12 match suspects and crime scenes thereby 13 preventing further violent assaults. 14 We cannot help but believe that had 15 today's technology and today's legislation 16 been available and had a national CODIS 17 network been operational in 1991, that 18 Patricia Scoville just might still be alive 19 today. 20 Because Patty can't be with us to 21 speak on her own behalf, Ann would like to 22 share with you a little more about Patty and 23 how our lives have changed. 24 25 MRS. SCOVILLE: Good morning, 71 1 2 everyone. Whenever I see the picture up in 3 front of a group like this, it reminds me 4 that that very picture is next to my bed, 5 and it's it is last thing that I see before 6 I go to sleep at night and the first thing 7 that I see when I wake up in the morning. 8 That was one of the therapies that I 9 used for myself early on during the 10 investigation and as the years have gone by. 11 Whenever we're asked to share our 12 story, I find myself reliving those days in 13 October that somehow have turned into weeks, 14 months, and years; those days that changed 15 our lives forever, those days when the 16 unthinkable happened to our daughter, to us, 17 to our family and our friends, those days 18 when Patty Scoville was murdered, raped and 19 missing, and finally found under a pile of 20 pine boughs eight days later. 21 We parents expect our children to 22 outlive us, not the other way around. 23 Murder is something that you see on the 24 eleven o'clock news, something that happens 25 to other people, not to us, not to our 72 1 2 family, and not in Vermont, the very place 3 people move to live a less hurried, less 4 stressful and a safer life. 5 Even now, it seems like a bad dream. 6 Even now, there are times when we still 7 shake our heads in disbelief. We will never 8 get over this devastating loss, though we 9 are slowly and painfully learning to live 10 with it. 11 I remember thinking at the time and 12 for quite a while, I don't know how I'm 13 going to live without her in my life. Yet, 14 here I am today propelled partly by the 15 shock and unfairness of violent crime and 16 its impact on victims, partly because there 17 is a need to keep telling our story, for 18 that is how we heal, and perhaps to help 19 others, but also, because Patty cannot speak 20 for herself. Therefore, I feel we must. 21 I, too, thank you for the the 22 opportunity to let me share with you for a 23 few minutes just who it is and what we have 24 lost and to put a specific and personal face 25 to one senseless and random violent crime. 73 1 2 Born on June 3rd, 1963, Patty was, is, 3 the oldest of our three children and our 4 only daughter, and I want you to know that 5 every time somebody asks me, how many 6 children do you have, I still stumble over 7 that. Do I still have three children, or do 8 I now have two? 9 She was also the oldest -- she was the 10 oldest of our three children, but she was 11 also the oldest of my parents 16 12 grandchildren. From the time that she was 13 born, she was a delight to have around. She 14 had great big dark brown eyes and tiny 15 little feet that clicked when she walked, 16 and that was cause for a lot of teasing 17 among our family and her friends. She had a 18 wonderful sense of humor and a laugh to go 19 with it. 20 In all of her 28 and a half years, she 21 gave us so many occasions to be so proud, 22 from being recognized in high school for her 23 musical and leadership abilities to being a 24 rotary exchange student to her semester 25 abroad and her travels always making the 74 1 2 most of life's opportunities and helping us 3 to see the world as a little bit smaller. 4 She loved being part of a big family, 5 family gatherings, and getting together with 6 friends. She had a sense of enthusiasm and 7 fun that was catching and a way of caring 8 and encouraging that was thoughtful and 9 supportive. 10 It mattered not whether you were a 11 much younger cousin, her brother, her 12 friend, her ill grandfather, or her parent, 13 she had a way of connecting that just made 14 us feel really special. 15 She was a person who stood up for what 16 she believed. She was conscientious and 17 committed to her work. She was willing to 18 get involved and work for change rather than 19 just complain, and she wasn't afraid to 20 confront a problem nor hesitant to give her 21 support and her love. 22 To me, not only was she my first born 23 and only daughter, she was my friend and my 24 mentor as well. We would laugh about how 25 she would help drag me into the 21st 75 1 2 century, whether it was about the latest 3 fashion or the computer or some other 4 electronic device that Mom could not deal 5 with. 6 We were both Cornelians whose class 7 reunion would fall the same year, so we 8 theorized that no matter where we were or 9 what we were doing in life, we could count 10 on meeting at least every five years in a 11 setting that we both loved. 12 Now those occasions serve as another 13 reminder of our loss. When the company she 14 worked for was bought by another and she was 15 about to lose her job, I watched and 16 listened with pride as she used her free 17 time, not only to look for a job, but also 18 to volunteer for the Boston School System 19 and the Paulis Center there, how she went 20 about considering a "life change," as she 21 called it, to move to Vermont. And I 22 marvelled at her attitude as using it as a 23 positive attitude for change in her life, 24 and it gave me a better way to look at my 25 own contemplated job move. 76 1 2 When our first grandchild was born, 3 she happened to be home, and she was very 4 excited. She used to say that marriage and 5 children were part of her life plan, and she 6 looked forward to a day when that would 7 happen, as we did. 8 Whenever I needed encouragement, a 9 good listener, advice, or a lighter moment, 10 I knew she was only a phone call away. 11 Needless to say, when Patty died, a 12 part of me died with her. My life, our 13 lives, are forever changed. There will be 14 no wedding, no grandchildren. There are no 15 more phone conversations or letters or her 16 great cards. There are no more reunions or 17 visits. Her voice, her laugh, her fun 18 loving enthusiasm, her sense of humor, her 19 support, her caring and love, we experience 20 only in our memories. But, of course, that 21 is not ever the same. 22 We have lost a part of us that can 23 never be replaced. Not a day goes by that I 24 don't think of her and miss her. It is said 25 that when your parents die, you lose a part 77 1 2 of your past, but when your child dies, you 3 lose a part of your future; and indeed, you 4 do. 5 When the death is by murder, we, her 6 family, are all victims as well, left with 7 recurring images and bad dreams of violent 8 and unthinkable death scenes, left wondering 9 why and how this could happen, left 10 wondering if she knew what was happening, 11 and left with the agonizing questions that 12 never seem to go away. Was she terrified? 13 Did she suffer? Did she remember that we 14 loved her? Who could have done this to her, 15 to us, and why? Is it someone who killed 16 before October 21st, 1991, or since, and 17 will this person ever be caught? And I'm 18 here to tell you those questions don't ever, 19 ever go away. 20 Certainly, as time goes by and Patty's 21 murder remains unsolved, it is sometimes 22 difficult to remain hopeful. Yet, just as 23 certainly, it seems that the more time that 24 goes by, the greater the possibility that 25 DNA evidence will play a major role in 78 1 2 solving her murder. 3 As we become familiar with the DNA 4 technology, its collection, its uses, and 5 limitations, we have gained a renewed 6 respect for the detail and diligence 7 necessary to solve crimes, and for those of 8 you who work in this field, we look forward 9 to the day when every state is connected to 10 one database so that the search for her 11 killer or any killer or violent offender can 12 extend from one end of this country to 13 another in a matter of minutes instead of 14 years. 15 In the name of Patty Scoville and all 16 victims of violent crime, we appreciate your 17 efforts in working towards this important 18 the goal. Thank you. 19 (Applause.) 20 MS. CARTWRIGHT: Thank you. Our final 21 panelist is Jack Ballantyne, an associate 22 professor in the Department of Chemistry in 23 the University of Central Florida. 24 Professor Ballantyne, prior to entering 25 academia, was an operational forensic 79 1 2 biochemist for 18 years working in the 3 United Kingdom, Hong Kong, and the 4 United States. 5 His most recent full time operational 6 appointment was as the supervisor of the 7 Biological Sciences Section of the Suffolk 8 County Crime Lab, Long Island, New York. 9 Professor Ballantyne also participated 10 in the DNA identification of victims of the 11 TWA, Flight 800 disaster. Dr. Ballantyne 12 received a Bachelor of Science from the 13 University of Glasgow, Scotland and a 14 Masters of Science in Forensic Science from 15 the University of Strathclyde, Scotland and 16 an Ph.D. in Genetics from the State 17 University of New York at Stony Brook. 18 Please welcome Dr. Ballantyne. 19 (Applause.) 20 DR. BALLANTYNE: Good morning, ladies 21 and gentlemen. I should like to thank the 22 organizers of the National Institute of 23 Justice for inviting me to participate in 24 this fifth annual, and I now understand, 25 last annual conference on the future of DNA. 80 1 2 It is an honor and a pleasure but also a 3 profoundly humbling experience for me to 4 share the forum with victims of crime. 5 The subject of my talk this morning 6 is, "How can DNA research and development 7 enhance victims' rights?" At least, that 8 was the topic of the talk I was asked to 9 speak on. It is not a particularly easy 10 subject, but it's one that we should 11 address. 12 For some time now, I have personally 13 felt that crime victims are not universally 14 and equitably given a fair deal when it 15 comes to the provision of forensic services. 16 I hope this morning to explain some of the 17 reasons why this is the case and also to 18 suggest ways in which we may in the future 19 be able to deliver forensic services to all 20 victims. 21 I'm also going to break with tradition 22 as well this morning as a scientist. I 23 think I'm only going to use one audiovisual, 24 one overhead, I don't have a Powerpoint 25 presentation and I have one overhead and 81 1 2 that's it. However, I've got a long speech. 3 You get one or the other. You can't have 4 both. 5 During the commission of violent 6 crime, biological material is often 7 transferred from one individual to another 8 individual, or from individual to the crime 9 scene. With today's DNA technology, we're 10 able, to all intents and purposes, ascertain 11 the donor of a blood, semen or saliva stain, 12 provided the laboratory has the wherewithal 13 and desire to examine the evidence and the 14 reference sample from the contributor has 15 also been analyzed. 16 We are now able to solve some cases by 17 comparing probative samples against 18 appropriate databases to generate so-called 19 case-to-case or case-to-offender hits. We 20 have also spent a considerable period of 21 time developing not only sensitive and 22 discriminating methods, but also quality 23 support system for these methods. 24 Quality system management for DNA is 25 now more or less standardized, thanks to the 82 1 2 development of industry-defined consensus 3 standards and supporting legislation. 4 However, we have concentrated on one 5 aspect of quality, trying to ensure error- 6 free analysis. That's what we've done up to 7 now, to the extent that is even possible. 8 We have, up to now, neglected two other 9 areas of quality, namely, the provision of 10 timely results and the completeness and 11 thoroughness of analysis. 12 For the most part, we have 13 concentrated on analyzing those cases which 14 have a developed suspect and are awaiting 15 adjudication as opposed to those cases for 16 which there is no obvious suspect. 17 Unfortunately, despite the unprecedented 18 ability of DNA to provide meaningful 19 investigative information to law enforcement 20 for those non-suspect cases, we have sadly 21 neglected this sub-set of cases with obvious 22 peril to victims and potential victims. 23 So I'd like you to consider the 24 following scenario which is not uncommon 25 throughout the United States. A woman is 83 1 2 awakened by an unknown masked intruder who 3 sexually abuses her and rapes her. She is 4 ruthlessly victimized. She then reports the 5 rape to the police, after which she submits 6 to a traumatic sexual assault examination in 7 which she provides intimate biological 8 samples and clothing items, including 9 vaginal, anal, oral swabbings, and her 10 underwear. To some degree, she's victimized 11 a second time. 12 Then the rape kit, so-called rape kit 13 and clothing is submitted to the local crime 14 lab where it sits unanalyzed in perpetuity. 15 In my opinion, the victim has just been 16 victimized a third time. 17 Since we're often dealing with 18 recidivists, the non-analysis of this case 19 has increased the chance that the 20 perpetrator may go on to victimize one or 21 more individuals. There are quite simply 22 too many cases that are languishing on 23 shelves in crime labs, or even worse, which 24 have been returned to the submitting agency 25 unanalyzed to face an uncertain and 84 1 2 sometimes unknown fate. 3 There are many victims in this society 4 for which meaningful information could be 5 obtained if we could examine the case and 6 obtain the genetic information from 7 transferred evidence, and we, as a group, 8 we, as forensic scientists, should not rest 9 until every victim has equal access to 10 genetic testing. 11 By victim, I mean victims, homicide 12 victims, rape and sexual assault victims, 13 assault and robbery victims, motor vehicle 14 hit-and-run victims, mass disaster victims, 15 victims falsely accused of crime. I should 16 like to paraphrase, I think, Dr. Tom Caskey 17 in that "Every victim deserves a genetic 18 diagnosis." 19 So what are our reasons for our 20 inability to deliver universal forensic 21 services to all victims? It is due to a 22 combination of factors, including 23 insufficient resource allocation to crime 24 labs, Sometimes inefficient and supervisory 25 practices within the labs themselves, and 85 1 2 technological limitations. 3 My purpose today is to address the 4 potential technological innovations that may 5 impact universal accessibility to genetic 6 testing, but I don't want us to lose sight 7 of the fact that other important 8 socioeconomic factors are at play. In other 9 words, as the Governor said or another 10 speaker said, we need to lobby for more 11 resources to be placed into this field. 12 So in terms of technological solutions 13 to try, the goal being to try and get every 14 victim a genetic diagnosis when needed, 15 there are basically three known mutually 16 exclusive areas of technological 17 advancement, in my opinion, which would be 18 expected to dramatically enhance our ability 19 to provide timely investigative information 20 to law enforcement. 21 Of course, all of what I'm going to 22 discuss is predicated upon the assumption 23 that it's critical to populate the existing 24 databases of forensic casework samples and 25 convicted offenders, or even suspect 86 1 2 wherever possible, as completely and in as 3 timely manner as possible. 4 Most of the useful investigative 5 information is expected to result from 6 interrogation of such databases. That's 7 become clear from our previous speakers 8 also. Basically, the technological advances 9 envisioned would make genetic profiling 10 faster and perhaps cheaper -- faster is the 11 key -- or would be able to provide analysts 12 with data on samples which are currently 13 intractable to routine analysis. 14 And the three areas that I'd like to 15 just quickly, briefly mention, first of all, 16 miniaturization; secondly, automation; and 17 thirdly, non-standard analytical methods. I 18 shall discuss these in more detail, but 19 before doing so, it is useful to look at the 20 progress of evidence from the crime scene 21 until it is actually analyzed and reported 22 in the lab. 23 This diagram is meant to represent 24 what actually happens in forensic cases. We 25 have a crime scene at the top. A crime 87 1 2 takes place. Items are recovered from that 3 crime scene and sent to the laboratory. 4 Also, for every crime scene, you have a 5 victim and you have a perpetrator. 6 Victim samples are also sent to the 7 laboratory, and we also have, if we're 8 lucky, a suspect, a developed suspect. 9 Suspect items are also sent to the 10 laboratory. What happens is the lab stores 11 these samples, storage, and if you're lucky 12 examination for probative evidence takes 13 place, actual examination. 14 Sometimes the evidence is not crystal 15 clear as to where the evidence is, what type 16 of evidence we're looking for. We have to 17 look for the evidence. So we examine for 18 probative evidence, and then if we obtain 19 so-called probative evidence, we may then 20 move on to DNA analysis and reporting. 21 The arrows are meant to represent the 22 quantity of evidence. The crime scene has a 23 large amount of evidence that's normally 24 received in a lab. Victim's sample is quite 25 a large amount of material. Suspect's 88 1 2 sample is typically less, all of it stored, 3 and much less is subsequently examined; and 4 much less is then analyzed and reported. 5 The rate limiting step in this process 6 is often not this last DNA analysis and 7 reporting. Often the rate limiting step is 8 the examination stage. After the storage, 9 when the evidence goes into the lab, it has 10 to examined. That is a rate limiting step 11 for most of the process. It isn't actually, 12 in many instances, the DNA analysis and 13 reporting. So that's a problem we have to 14 try and address. 15 One thing also, since I'd like to milk 16 my one overhead, the crime scene, is not a 17 laboratory environment. So even if we 18 develop devices that can take to the crime 19 scene, we have to be careful because the 20 crime scene is not a lab. I'll discuss that 21 in a few seconds. So let me just, first of 22 all, discuss these in detail: 23 miniaturization, automation and new 24 techniques or new non-standard methods. 25 Miniaturization, the ability to 89 1 2 manufacture integrated miniature 3 lab-on-a-chip or analytical devices will 4 impact both crime scene and lab analysis, 5 and there are two kinds of these so-called 6 biochips under development. 7 The first are microfabricated fluidic 8 devices -- these are truly lab-on-a-chip, 9 and the second are things called 10 microarrays. The first one allows for the 11 extraction, amplification, separation, 12 genotyping and data analysis of a particular 13 sample; it truly is a lab-on-a-chip. 14 Impressive strides have been made in this 15 area and are mainly based on so-called 16 electrokinetic transport principles. Much 17 of the laboratory analysis, in fact, has 18 been transferred to these chips, in 19 principle. 20 The second type of device, not to be 21 confused with the first, is typically an 22 array of oligonucleotides, sometimes called 23 oligonucleotides, which is used to used to 24 genotype a sample once the DNA's already 25 extracted and amplified. Both of these are 90 1 2 currently under development. 3 It is envisioned that such 4 lab-on-a-chip devices could be developed 5 into point of use devices, similar to point 6 of care devices in the medical profession, 7 that could be used, for example, at the 8 crime scene. 9 All the necessary reaction components 10 except the sample could be incorporated into 11 the device at manufacture thus allowing 12 novices to use the chip at the scene. 13 Conceivably, one could sample a stain at the 14 scene, obtain a profile, and wirelessly 15 interrogate a national database for 16 potential hits. 17 So one could go to the scene and 18 obtain instantaneous genetic information, in 19 theory. Miniaturization is also expected to 20 facilitate analysis within the lab itself -- 21 that was the crime scene -- within the lab 22 itself by making the analysis faster and 23 cheaper and susceptible to automation. 24 It is envisioned that multiple chips 25 for different assays will be usable in a 91 1 2 so-called plug-and-play system similar to 3 those used in modern day video games which 4 would have common controllers. 5 There has been some discussion about 6 the relevance or desirability of such point 7 of use devices at the crime scene, as I 8 alluded to earlier. I don't think forensic 9 scientists should fret about losing their 10 jobs over this one because that's what 11 they're worried about. 12 As I said before, crime scenes are not 13 lab environments. Evidence is often found 14 in cramped, badly lit, inaccessible areas; 15 and the use of such devices may be 16 impractical. 17 We also don't want to miss important 18 stains, and conducting our analysis at the 19 scene may have this unintended result. 20 Sometimes you can't see the stains, the 21 important stains, at the crime scene because 22 it's not the ideal environment, sometimes 23 you can. 24 Secondly, most of the probative 25 evidence doesn't come from the crime scene 92 1 2 any way. Most of the probative evidence, 3 arguably, is actually found on the 4 perpetrator or the victim or on the clothing 5 thereof of the victim or the perpetrator or 6 items belonging to the victim or 7 perpetrator, hence these victim samples and 8 suspect samples. 9 A large amount of probative evidence 10 really actually comes from that source other 11 than the crime scene. So if you only 12 concentrate on the crime scene, we can't 13 only concentrate on the crime scene. We 14 have to look at these other areas where 15 probative evidence is routinely recovered. 16 That's the first thing, miniaturization. 17 Second area that will have an impact 18 on our ability to provide faster information 19 is automation, and, of course, they're not 20 mutually exclusive. Automation, of course, 21 is required to enhance productivity and make 22 the analysis faster and cheaper, and 23 automation of the DNA analytical process 24 itself, that is the last part there, is 25 progressing well; and great strides have 93 1 2 been made and some are expected very soon, 3 some important announcements, particularly 4 in the field of mass spectometry and 5 automated DNA sequencing platforms, the 6 ability to automate the DNA analysis part. 7 But as I said, that is not the rate limiting 8 step anyway, but that will certainly help 9 us. 10 However, there are other labor 11 intensive areas that would benefit from 12 automation. These would include a method 13 for the differential extraction of stains in 14 which spermatozoa are often found in the 15 background of non-male cells. That would 16 help in some way, but, of course, that could 17 be classified as part of the DNA analysis 18 program. 19 One area that may be useful is the 20 time-consuming search for spermatozoa that 21 typically involves a microscopical 22 examination of a stain extract. The 23 combination of an automated 24 precisely-controlled microscope stage, video 25 capture and appropriate AI or neural network 94 1 2 software would remove this type of 3 examination as a rate limiting step in the 4 processing of rape kit evidence. 5 But it just may simply be that some of 6 these front-end aspects are not suitable for 7 automation, and for those of you who really 8 need to look forward to more efficient use 9 of people within the laboratory environment 10 itself in terms of work practices and 11 ability to process evidence at a reasonably 12 fast rate. 13 The third thing I wanted to talk 14 about, I've talked about miniaturization and 15 automation, are some non-standard analytical 16 methods, for example, intractable samples, 17 what I call intractable samples. 18 A number of potentially probative 19 samples are simply not unable to be analyzed 20 with the present technology. One subclass 21 of such samples include those in which the 22 DNA's damaged or degraded in one way or the 23 other. 24 Research is needed to develop 25 microscale assays to ascertain the nature of 95 1 2 the DNA damage and attempt to repair the 3 damage in vitro using cocktailsof 4 appropriate DNA repair enzymes. So we want 5 to be able to take samples where we'd like 6 to get results, and, because of damage to 7 DNA, we want to repair that and get results 8 where previously we couldn't. 9 Often difficult specimens samples are 10 susceptible to mitochondrial DNA but not 11 nuclear DNA analysis. The problem is that 12 some mitochondrial haplotypes are relatively 13 common in the population, and therefore, the 14 probativeness of that evidence is somewhat 15 reduced in some instances. 16 We need to investigate methods to 17 interrogate other regions of the 18 mitochondrial DNA genome which may exhibit 19 polymorphism in an attempt to discriminating 20 potential of the system. So that's one area 21 that could be of use. 22 Another area, low copy number of 23 single-cell analysis. There's a well known 24 statement in forensic science, "Every 25 contact leaves a trace," which, in theory, 96 1 2 means that every single person that has come 3 into this room has left a trace of their 4 presence here. If we apply that to the 5 biological side, each of may have left a 6 small number of cells at the crime scene, 7 which is here. 8 The question is, can we analyze that 9 material, and if so, can we deal with he 10 obvious problems that can occur when one 11 does this. We, in the forensic science 12 community, have deliberately reduced our 13 sensitivity of our analysis so we don't pick 14 up such low levels of material. 15 However, if it's done in a proper 16 environment by properly trained and 17 competent people, perhaps there is a place 18 for so-called low copy of single-cell 19 analysis. Potential methods for such 20 methods have been published, for example, 21 whole genome analysis or increasing the 22 cycle number or micromanipulation, actual 23 micromanipulation of the cells. 24 Another area that may be of interest 25 are so-called phenotypic characteristics, 97 1 2 and this occurs when a database search -- 3 say we have CODIS up and running, everything 4 is up and running. We've managed to get to 5 a situation where everyone who needs to be 6 is on that database, and we have removed all 7 our backlogs. We now have a fully 8 operational system. It's still positive 9 that you'd have a negative. You'd have a 10 stain left by the perpetrator, and we'd have 11 a negative search on a database search. 12 It may be possible to detect sets of 13 phenotype determining genes in biological 14 stains, and this could provide novel 15 meaningful investigative information about 16 the phenotypic characteristics of the stain 17 donor. Much like an eyewitness 18 identification, this would be a scientific 19 eyewitness identification. 20 Such phenotypic characteristics 21 include obvious physical traits such as the 22 race, the sex, the height, the body stature, 23 eye and hair color, and facial features. 24 Other potential interesting traits that 25 would be somewhat dependant upon gene 98 1 2 expression include, down the road, some 3 behavioral traits such as harm avoidance; 4 susceptibility to alcoholism, that's 5 controversial; mental illnesses; and 6 willingness to take risks. 7 Although, it is recognized that gene 8 expression is confounded by environment, 9 nevertheless basic knowledge of and recent 10 and prospective advances in quantitative 11 genetics provide cautious optimism for the 12 potential of the success of the approach 13 proposed. So it may be possible, from a 14 stain, to gain some information about the 15 individual independent from a search on a 16 database if the database is negative. 17 Another area of interest where 18 research and development could help would be 19 Y-chromosome markers. There are several 20 reasons whereby the development and 21 consolidation of additional Y-chromosome 22 polymorphisms would be a useful addition to 23 the forensic scientist's armamentarium. 24 Probably, the most important is the 25 identification of the male component in a 99 1 2 male/female specimen in which the female 3 fraction is present in overwhelming 4 quantities. These are cases often where you 5 have a -- often involves young children or a 6 young female is molested and sexually 7 assaulted by a male where the male deposits 8 a very small number of cells, say buccal 9 cells from the oral cavity, in the genital 10 area of the female. 11 Under these circumstances, you can't 12 normally detect that trace quantity of male 13 cells. However, if you were to use 14 Y-chromosome markers, and some places are 15 beginning to do so. The Chief Medical 16 Examiner here in New York City, to my 17 knowledge, they are the only lab in the 18 country reporting Y-chromosome markers. 19 But we need to look for additional 20 Y-chromosome markers, and start to use that 21 technology in these cases which require it. 22 The last theory of technology I just 23 briefly want to describe, I couldn't help 24 myself because everybody's talking about it, 25 are SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms. 100 1 2 We need to conduct research into 3 suitable batteries of SNP markers for 4 forensic use since automatic genotyping of 5 these will be facile. The reason we want to 6 look at SNPs is because we can automate the 7 analysis. The problem with SNPs is that we 8 already have a technology that exists today, 9 and we want a bit of stability. 10 Our STR, 13-CODIS STR-loci are very 11 useful, and we want to be able to use them 12 to get the criminals off the street, so to 13 speak. However, we still need to conduct 14 research into these other additional markers 15 because of the ability to readily automate 16 the analysis. However, before SNPs could 17 take over, they would have to be proven to 18 be faster, better, cheaper, etc. 19 The problem with SNPs is we need to 20 develop ways in which to deal with the 21 analysis and interpretation of SNPs and body 22 fluid mixtures. Of course, Y-chromosome 23 SNPs may be a good place to start for method 24 development since, for the geneticists in 25 the audience, heterozygotes don't exist and 101 1 2 mixture and interpretation is often not an 3 issue. 4 So there are areas, I just wanted to 5 give you a snippet of what types of 6 technologies exist that may help us achieve 7 the goal of making the analysis, delivering 8 the services to those who need these 9 services. 10 So at the moment then, in conclusion, 11 we do have a significant problem in trying 12 to deliver forensic services to all crime 13 victims. However, there are a number of 14 technological initiatives that we, as 15 laboratorians, can take which in combination 16 with lobbying for additional resources and 17 improving our internal work practices 18 through enlightened management supervision 19 may actually make a difference. 20 I stated previously, we should not 21 rest until every victim who not only has a 22 right and expectation to equal access to 23 genetic testing, but also actually gets it. 24 Thank you. 25 (Applause.) 102 1 2 MS. CARTWRIGHT: Thank you for your 3 attention to this victims' panel. I guess I 4 want to close in just asking you to keep in 5 mind through this conference and as you go 6 about your work, the enormous difference 7 that your work makes to the individual 8 victims' lives, the huge difference that the 9 DNA match made to Mrs. Debbie Smith, and 10 the huge impact that a DNA match could make 11 to the Scovilles in the murder of their 12 daughter. 13 Thank you for your attention, and 14 enjoy the rest of the conference. 15 (Break.) 16 PANEL II: REPORT FROM THE NATIONAL 17 COMMISSION ON THE FUTURE OF DNA EVIDENCE 18 MR. ASPLEN: Welcome back after the 19 break. My name is Christopher Asplen. I'm 20 an assistant United States attorney in the 21 District of Columbia currently detailed as 22 the Executive Director of the National 23 Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. 24 In keeping with the theme, however, I 25 am also an attorney. In reference to David, 103 1 2 however, I happen to be the attorney in the 3 office right next to David's office. So you 4 can well imagine the amount of abuse that 5 gets handed right across the hallway into my 6 office. 7 But it's a great place to work, NIJ. 8 One of the great things about being the 9 Director of the Commission and being 10 detailed to that position is when I want to 11 be an insider and part of NIJ, I can talk 12 like an insider, and when I want to be an 13 outsider, I can talk like an outsider. 14 And so I'll talk like an outsider for 15 a minute. NIJ has really done some 16 tremendous, tremendous work in this area, 17 and particularly, in the Office of Science 18 and Technology, and I'll explain a little 19 bit more about the Commission for those of 20 you who aren't aware of it. 21 But a lot of times, for those of you 22 who have heard about the Commission, have 23 read our materials, have seen some of the 24 work we've done, a lot of times we get asked 25 the question, how does the Commission do all 104 1 2 the work that it does with only three staff 3 people? And it's actually two and a half 4 staff people only because Dr. Forman has a 5 whole other responsibility not anything 6 related to the Commission. 7 And the secret is not in how many 8 people you have, but who you have, and with 9 the Commission having Robin Wilson and 10 Dr. Forman on it, on the staff, they do 11 incredible work, they do a tremendous amount 12 of work; and the Commission would not be as 13 successful as it's been without their 14 dedication to it and without the support of 15 NIJ and OST. 16 So let me also give credit to the 17 State of New York. I often know when 18 Commissioner Safir, for example, has spoken 19 on the arrestee issue because 15 minutes 20 later my phone rings because someone in the 21 press is calling asking whether or not the 22 Commission has spoken to that particular 23 issue or whether or not they're going to 24 take that issue up. 25 When New York went to the extended 105 1 2 felonies and included offenses in the CODIS 3 database as it did, they came to the 4 Commission asking, "What's the state of the 5 nation in this regard?" 6 "Isn't it true that New York is on the 7 cutting edge of this?" 8 "Isn't it true that New York is on the 9 cutting edge of reducing their backlog?" 10 "Isn't it true that New York is on the 11 cutting edge in terms of attempting to 12 outsource the rape kits, their attempt to 13 eliminate statutes of limitations?" 14 Yes, it's true. Yes, it's true. Yes, 15 it's true. New York is on the cutting edge 16 of those matters, and so I commend New York, 17 both on a state level, and on a local level, 18 New York City, in the fine work that you're 19 doing; and you not only provide a phenomenal 20 service to the state but also to the nation 21 in terms of providing an example of the 22 power of the technology and what we can do 23 with it when we're dedicated to really 24 integrating the technology into the criminal 25 justice system and really applying it. 106 1 2 The Commission was created at the 3 request of Attorney General Reno a number of 4 years ago and was really in response to some 5 post-conviction cases she had read about, 6 those instances in which DNA had been used 7 to exonerate individuals previously wrongly 8 convicted; again, a scenario in which 9 New York is a leader as one of the two 10 states up until recently who had specific 11 legislation on that issue. 12 However, once the Commission was 13 created or actually in the creation process, 14 it was determined that the Commission's goal 15 should be to maximize the value of DNA in 16 the criminal justice system, which meant 17 going far beyond its application to the 18 post-conviction process but really coming to 19 grips with the actual application and 20 integration of the technology into the 21 system. 22 And what we really quickly realized 23 was that it was about application, almost 24 more so than, often times, about the 25 technology itself, that regardless of what 107 1 2 our technological ability was or will be, if 3 we're not putting it into the hands of law 4 enforcement, if we're not empowering the 5 laboratories to do the testing, the greatest 6 bells and whistles in the world aren't going 7 to do us much good. They're not going to 8 save many people's lives. 9 So we really began to focus on some of 10 those application issues. The Commission 11 was broken up into five different working 12 groups. We have a crime scene working group 13 which is specifically oriented towards law 14 enforcement and the identification, 15 preservation, and collection of DNA 16 evidence. 17 We also created a post-conviction 18 working group which, obviously, was about 19 the post-conviction matters as was the 20 genesis of the Commission. 21 A third working group was legal issues 22 working group which was created to deal with 23 those other non-post-conviction issues, but 24 issues such as arrestee testing, sample 25 retention, and things like that. 108 1 2 Fourth working group was laboratory 3 funding. Again, it all comes down to money, 4 ultimately, and what do we need financially 5 and how are we going to empower our 6 laboratories to do the work. 7 And then finally, we have a research 8 and development working group which will 9 give us a picture of what the technology 10 will be five,ten years down the line and 11 which will speak to the value of the current 12 investment in STRs and what potential 13 changes there are on the horizon for issues 14 like crime scene analysis, chip technology, 15 et cetera. 16 So those are the five general areas 17 we've looked into. We've made a number of 18 recommendations already, and we'll be 19 wrapping up our work by the end of the year. 20 Today, what I'd like to do is talk 21 about the crime scene investigation working 22 group first, and then I'm going to, in the 23 context of that, turn it over to Robin 24 Wilson, who has done a yeoman's job on 25 bringing one particular program to fruition 109 1 2 which I think will be very valuable. 3 The crime scene working group, as I 4 said, is oriented towards law enforcement, 5 and what we did is we realized that there a 6 was quite lack of educational materials and 7 training for law enforcement in the 8 identification, preservation and collection 9 of DNA evidence. 10 One of the first things we decided to 11 do was to create a training tool, which 12 turned out to be a simple little pamphlet 13 which you've probably all seen by now, 14 especially if you work in a police 15 department, that very simply explains DNA 16 but more importantly explains where you may 17 find DNA where you might not have otherwise 18 thought to look before reading the pamphlet. 19 Actually, less important than the 20 information in the pamphlet itself, perhaps, 21 was the decision and commitment by NIJ and 22 the Attorney General to pass one of these 23 out, or to send one of these out to every 24 law enforcement officer in the entire 25 country. 110 1 2 We printed a million copies of it. We 3 proactively sent out over 700,000 copies to 4 every agency, every individual police 5 officer in the country, and now we're on our 6 second reprinting and we're printing an 7 extra 500,000 copies. 8 And, perhaps most importantly, we were 9 just informed of our first example where 10 this has been responsible for solving a 11 crime. There was a case in Austin, Texas 12 not too long ago in which an elderly woman 13 was raped and murdered by an individual who 14 not only wore a condom but also wore rubber 15 gloves. 16 Well, because the police officer 17 investigating the crime saw in our pamphlet 18 that you can test ligatures for DNA, he 19 collected the ligature for that. Now, 20 obviously, they collect the ligature anyway 21 as having an evidentiary value but wouldn't 22 necessarily have tested the ligature. 23 In this particular case they did. 24 Apparently, what happened was, in the 25 context of or in the course of strangling 111 1 2 the woman, the individual, I guess, had to 3 use one hand to hold the victim down, the 4 other hand to hold one end of the ligature, 5 leaving his mouth to bite down on the 6 ligature tightening it, and that's how they 7 got the DNA. 8 It also turned out that the 9 perpetrator was a serial perpetrator having 10 other rapes and homicides in his past. A 11 wonderful result, and, again, it's just the 12 first one that we've been informed of. 13 We're also in the process of producing 14 a publication which will education law 15 enforcement officers about how to use DNA 16 and the database in solving old cold cases, 17 if you will. Again, an instance where 18 New York is leader as evidenced by the first 19 case that you saw, the 21-year-old case. 20 As we know, there are a tremendous 21 number of cases that sit on the bedposts of 22 officers that they've never quite gotten out 23 of their mind that they know someday they 24 will solve. Well, we obviously have a 25 technology now which will take us a lot 112 1 2 further into those cases and which will 3 enable us to solve a lot more cases that 4 previously were thought to be unsolvable. 5 But with that discussion of the crime 6 scene working group, let me turn it over to 7 the Executive Assistant for the Commission, 8 Robin Wilson, who graduated with a BS degree 9 from Virginia Tech. After graduating from 10 college, she worked on Capital Hill for a 11 while with a representative from Florida but 12 fortunately, was convinced to come to the 13 Commission as Executive Director, and it's 14 fair to say that it was one of the better 15 decisions that the Commission has made in 16 its tenure. 17 She has been tremendous asset to the 18 Commission and has made a wonderful 19 contribution, and this product that you're 20 about to see would not be at this stage and 21 would not be completed when it's going to be 22 without her work. So with that, Robin, I'll 23 turn it over to you. 24 MS. WILSON: Good morning. I'm 25 excited to be here to tell you about the 113 1 2 training program that the Crime Scene 3 Investigation Working Group is developing. 4 We expect it to be finished in July, 5 the first module, the first of two modules 6 will be finished sometime in July. Our 7 Commission meeting is on the 9th and 10th in 8 Washington DC, and we expect the actual 9 final product of Module One, which is the 10 beginning level program for first responding 11 and officers who have a limited knowledge of 12 DNA evidence. We expect that to be finished 13 in July. 14 Module Two is a more advanced level 15 training and that will be finished sometime 16 before the fall. That will be for crime 17 scene technicians, evidence technicians and 18 the like. 19 We expect that the training program is 20 going to be in a CD ROM interactive program 21 where the officer can either use it on his 22 own laptop or in the department with CD ROM 23 capabilities, or it can be used in a roll 24 call or academy-type setting. 25 It has testing component so they can 114 1 2 test their knowledge and what they've 3 learned throughout the program. It's being 4 developed through an existing grant that NIJ 5 has with the Eastern Kentucky University, 6 and as I said, they're using video 7 technology and stitched videos so we 8 actually set mock crime scenes with actors 9 that have fake blood and all of that. So it 10 looks real, and the student can navigate 11 through a crime scene and click on items 12 that might yield DNA evidence. 13 And their actions, whether they put on 14 gloves when they go into a crime scene, will 15 be able to be monitored by the program. So 16 we can say was it contaminated, they didn't 17 put on their gloves. 18 The phone will ring. It will have 19 components that will challenge the student. 20 The phone will ring, if the student goes and 21 picks up the phone without gloves, if they 22 talk on the phone to call their back up or 23 whatever they need, those types of things. 24 So it's a really interactive program that 25 we're really excited about. 115 1 2 We're going to produce enough copies 3 so every department in the United States 4 will have both modules, and also enough for 5 training academies and universities that 6 work with departments because we know 7 there's lots of rural departments who don't 8 necessarily have the computers and the 9 technology to be able to operate CD ROMs and 10 that sort of thing. 11 So we're hoping to get a wide enough 12 dissemination that will really help. It is 13 portable, and we think that's a really 14 valuable component that it's portable so 15 someone can use it at home if they want to. 16 We're hoping that, hopefully, we'll be 17 able to put it up on the internet. So if 18 someone can go to a site and actually go 19 through the training on an internet site. 20 So, of course, that's all, hopefully, by the 21 end of year, that will be possible. 22 I have a prototype here that I'm going 23 to show you, and, again, it's just a 24 prototype, but it kind of shows you some of 25 the bells an whistles that are going to 116 1 2 used, give you an idea of what it's going to 3 look like. 4 Again, this is just a prototype and 5 the one that we've actually developed is a 6 lot more technical. The beginning level, 7 obviously, we tried to make it very easy 8 just like the pamphlet is. 9 It's sort of modeled after that, so 10 it's easy to learn, kind of fun. We wanted 11 to make it fun for the officer and 12 interesting. So I'll go ahead and 13 demonstrate that for you. 14 (Demonstration in progress.) 15 So that just gives you an idea of sort 16 of what we're trying to develop. Again, it 17 is a prototype and we've tweaked the 18 language, and we've changed some of the 19 things that we need to change, that sort of 20 thing. 21 We're working very hard. We've got a 22 lot of good people on working group that are 23 helping us, and it's going to be a really 24 good product; and we've gotten a lot of 25 calls. New York has called and they have 117 1 2 let us know that they want to be first on 3 the list. So feel free to come and ask us 4 any questions. It's going to available 5 through NCJRS the way the other publications 6 are, and you can always, of course, look on 7 our website, www.nijojp.uscoj.gov/nij/dna. 8 (Applause.) 9 MR. ASPLEN: If any of you have ever 10 been involved in the development of 11 something like that, the applause is well 12 deserved in terms of, it is the single most 13 tedious thing the Commission has done. 14 Every potential click is a storyboard 15 sheet that you have to go through, and 16 there's about two hours worth of material on 17 that CD ROM that we've had to go through, 18 and it's been gone through with quite a 19 panel of experts. 20 The working group has experts from all 21 over the country on it, and they've been 22 working very hard, but, again, no one has 23 worked harder than Robin on getting that 24 out. 25 At this point in time, I'd like to 118 1 2 turn it over to Dr. Forman who will talk 3 about the CODIS program and some other 4 issues. The value of having Dr. Forman, the 5 value of having someone with her 6 credentials, more importantly, having her 7 personally on the Commission staff is 8 probably incalculable in terms of her vision 9 of where to take some of these things, the 10 ability when an issue comes up as to whether 11 Commission should address it or how they 12 should address it from a technology 13 standpoint, her wisdom and vision in terms 14 of getting the Commission to get their arms 15 around certain issues has really been 16 fantastic. 17 And I think that the Commission has 18 been extremely well served by her dedication 19 to the project and by her expertise, and so 20 with that, Dr. Forman. 21 DR. FORMAN: That's very kind, Chris. 22 I only hope I can live up to the technology 23 end of it by turning my computer on. 24 As Chris has discussed already and 25 David has mentioned, the Attorney General 119 1 2 addressed the first meeting of the 3 Commission by employing the Commission to 4 provide her with recommendations as soon as 5 they had formulated the recommendations and 6 not wait until the end of their two- or 7 four-year term to present her with a lengthy 8 report with many recommendations buried into 9 it. 10 One of the very first recommendations 11 that she did receive from the Commission 12 after post-conviction recommendations was 13 the Commission's recommendation that the 14 estimated 750,000 convicted offender samples 15 that were stored but unanalyzed in our 16 nation's public DNA laboratories be 17 immediately processed and entered into the 18 CODIS database. 19 As this slide shows, there were three 20 particular areas that the Commission 21 addressed thanks to the work of the working 22 group, the Laboratory Funding Working Group 23 that provided the background and research 24 for the Commission on this and was chaired 25 by Dr. Paul Ferrara. 120 1 2 The three limitations that they 3 identified for the Attorney General just 4 really less than about ten months ago, were 5 the current backlog of untested convicted 6 offender database samples, the lack of 7 appropriate prioritization of database 8 sample collection and testing, and the 9 limited use of DNA in non-suspect cases. 10 And these were all areas that the 11 Commission encouraged the Attorney General 12 to support the reduction of the samples 13 through the use of additional funding. 14 Well, it was actually as David and 15 Chris both mentioned, the high profile 16 nature of the Commission's discussion, that 17 attracted sufficient attention, that it's 18 importance was recognized in the most recent 19 appropriation process. 20 And in December, although our fiscal 21 year begins in October, it was actually 22 really December by the time we really knew 23 what our budget was going to be, the 24 Appropriations Committee had awarded $15 25 million, had allocated $15 million for the 121 1 2 reduction of the CODIS backlog this year. 3 So we received this appropriation and 4 identified that we would be able to support 5 the reduction of the CODIS backlog samples 6 by awarding to each state that had a 7 sufficient number of backlog samples as of 8 March 31st, 2000, a price that the 9 Laboratory Funding Group identified as about 10 $50 a sample to reduce the number of backlog 11 samples that each state had in their 12 freezers at that point in time. 13 We also learned that when we received 14 this funding, because we would have a very 15 short turnaround for this particular funding 16 phase, we had from December until October to 17 get this whole program implemented, we 18 identified that, as David mentioned, there 19 is a possibility of renewal of an additional 20 $15 million for the FY 2001 budget. 21 And as David mentioned, if this 22 program is successful -- and how do you 23 determine success in this program? By the 24 number of hits that we get across the 25 country which can be translated into the 122 1 2 number of lives that we're able to save 3 through this program -- there is a 4 possibility of still additional funding to 5 wrap up loose ends in fiscal year 2003. 6 David outlined the program very 7 briefly in his opening remarks. I'd like to 8 put a little more flesh on those bones. 9 This is how we're going to implement the 10 program this year; the states are going to 11 be required to outsource, use the moneys 12 that they are provided from the federal 13 government to outsource to high throughput 14 vendors their convicted offender samples 15 that they have collected as of March 31st, 16 2000. 17 That was a main recommendation of the 18 commission who recognized that public 19 laboratories do not have the facilities or 20 the capacity and, in fact, were never meant 21 to be high throughput laboratories for 22 massive numbers of database samples, but 23 instead to focus laboratories on the job 24 that they were really created to do and that 25 is the sensitive, customized work that 123 1 2 actual casework requires. 3 The solicitation that is put out to 4 the laboratories requires that the state's 5 vendors meet a 30-day turnaround time, that 6 the state's vendors be ASCLD accredited or 7 NSFTC certified, that the state's vendors 8 use all 13-CODIS STRs. 9 We also have a time limitation on the 10 states themselves. They must have their 11 RFPs awarded, their requests for proposals 12 awarded within 120 days of receiving 13 funding, receiving federal funding. And 14 this is an extraordinarily fast time. I 15 know it doesn't sound like is a fast time, 16 but for this particular bureaucratic beast, 17 this is a very fast turnaround time. 18 The states must also be willing to 19 perform up to ten percent quality assurance 20 on the samples that they are outsourcing. 21 They may use federal funds to complete this 22 quality assurance mandate. They may use 23 either in-house to support their own quality 24 assurance work, or they may also outsource 25 to their original laboratory or to an 124 1 2 additional vendor, if they wish, this 3 quality assurance function. 4 Now, because the funds, the awards, 5 are going to each of the states instead of 6 being able to do high-volume throughput, 7 instead of being able to do large economies 8 of scales by first identifying vendors, but 9 each state will be required to perform their 10 own RFP and make their own deals with their 11 own outsource vendors, we had to make a cut- 12 off. 13 Our $50 a sample is an extremely 14 generous estimate if you have a large number 15 of samples, but if you have fewer than a 16 thousand samples to offer to a vendor, we 17 were concerned that we would have 18 laboratories who would not be able to meet 19 the $50 sample estimate that we were able to 20 provide for them. 21 So laboratories, states, had to have 22 at least a thousand backlog samples as of 23 March 31st, 2000. We also set a match 24 requirement on the states. We want to 25 encourage the states to do the work that 125 1 2 they do very well, again, that's the 3 customized case work that goes to each 4 analyst. 5 However, we know that each state has a 6 phenomenal number of cases that are 7 requiring their attention, and we know that 8 the phone rings off the hook and the 9 prosecutors want their case now and that 10 many, many, rape kits sit untested. 11 In fact, the Commission was able to 12 commission itself a report, an estimate, 13 done by the Police Executive Research Forum 14 in which they estimated, and we believe this 15 is a low estimate, that there are about 16 180,000 untested rape kits in this country 17 because the laboratories simply don't have 18 the capacity to do the ongoing casework and 19 the casework for which no suspect is known. 20 So as a requirement, we are requiring 21 the states who are applying for federal 22 funding for CODIS analysis of their backlog 23 samples be willing to perform in their own 24 laboratories, in-house, not outsourced, one 25 percent unsuspect, no-suspect cases, of the 126 1 2 amount of samples that they are awarded 3 funds to outsource. 4 Now, let me say that again because I 5 said it really badly. Of the number of 6 convicted offender samples the states are 7 being funded to outsource, they must, in 8 their own laboratories, provide one percent 9 of no-suspect caseworks to provide forensic 10 cases against which they can compare their 11 convicted offender samples. 12 The solicitation also requires that 13 they expedite their uploads at the state 14 level into the national database so that by 15 the end of this funding period, we will have 16 an actually populated database. Now, this 17 solicitation was crafted with the help of 18 many people, and I'd like to acknowledge 19 especially the people in the FSS unit of the 20 FBI, the Forensic Science Services unit of 21 the FBI, including Barry Brown; Steve 22 Miscoda; Dawn Herkenham, who was loaned to 23 us through them; and John Behan and Lucy 24 Marsinka, who all worked very hard on the 25 solicitation. I'd especially like to 127 1 2 acknowledge the work of our own new 3 employee, John Paul Jones, who also worked 4 extremely hard on the solicitation so that 5 we could create a solicitation that was 6 responsive to the needs of the laboratory 7 while at the same time would help to 8 populate CODIS. 9 Now, I should say that as of this 10 particular moment in time, there are 280,000 11 samples, convicted offender profiles, in the 12 CODIS database. Unfortunately, those 13 280,000 samples are all analyzed using the 14 older technology that is fading from use in 15 casework. So we have a lot of apples in the 16 convicted offender database, but they are 17 being compared to oranges, and that's going 18 to make for a very bad fruit salad, I guess. 19 So at this point we have about 20,000 20 samples in the CODIS database that includes 21 all 13-convicted offender samples. This is 22 what we're expecting from the work that John 23 Paul has done, the surveys that John Paul 24 has done, at the close of the solicitation, 25 the funding of solicitation which closes on 128 1 2 the 15th of this month. 3 We expect that there will be about 200 4 to 250,000 samples that will be funded, and 5 this list identifies that there are several 6 states who will be applying simply for 1,000 7 to 10,000 samples analysis, including New 8 Mexico, Illinois, Alaska, Florida, New 9 Jersey and Minnesota. 10 There are states who will be applying 11 for 10 to 20,000 sample analysis, including 12 Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Carolina. 13 There are states who will be applying for 14 more than 20000 samples to be analyzed, 15 including our partners for this conference, 16 the State of New York, Virginia, California, 17 and Texas. 18 What is limiting these states 19 applications for the number of samples that 20 they're willing to have analyzed is the 21 exactly the capacity issue of the one 22 percent match. States are rightly, will not 23 commit to more non-suspect casework than 24 they can actually perform. So that's part 25 of the reduction of the number of samples 129 1 2 that we are going to see in this particular 3 funding round. 4 There are a number of states who will 5 not be applying this round at all, and these 6 states are listed on the other side of the 7 slide. Several of these states, Vermont, 8 Nevada, New Hampshire, Delaware, Wyoming, 9 and Idaho, had fewer than 1,000 samples 10 collected as of March 31st, 2000, and that 11 is, even though they have convicted offender 12 laws on their statutes, they have not yet 13 begun to collect the samples. 14 There are some states who simply have 15 no backlogs. There are some states who had 16 state dollars already appropriated, and they 17 have generously decided that they will use 18 those funds that are committed in that way 19 already, leaving more funding for other 20 states who do not have such good fortune in 21 their own state legislatures. And there are 22 other states who will not be applying this 23 year. 24 We feel that it's critical to get 25 these samples analyzed as quickly as 130 1 2 possible from the states who are applying so 3 we can go back and say that we have 4 generated a sufficient number of hits, that 5 the program is clearly working, that we need 6 to have the additional funding so that 7 states that were unable to compete in this 8 particular solicitation will be able to 9 compete next year in a similar 10 solicitation. 11 So as I said, the solicitation closes 12 next week. If our predictions hold true, 13 I've done a little math for you on the side, 14 if we do get 250,000 convicted offender 15 samples analyzed, that means that we will 16 get 2,500 no-suspect cases analyzed at the 17 same time. 18 Then given some very conservative 19 estimates that we have via the states, and 20 we have really dummied our expectations 21 down, we should have at least 250 cold hits 22 from these data. Those 250 cold hits 23 transfer into closure for the victims that 24 we heard this morning and for their 25 families. They translate into real cases 131 1 2 that are now prevented, and unfortunately, 3 also will translate into the identification 4 of cases that could have been prevented if 5 we had only started this earlier. 6 But we are starting now, and we are 7 dedicated to making this program work as 8 best as we can, as fast as we can. So the 9 reason she's up there is it ain't over till 10 the fat lady sings, and this time next year 11 at our DNA Grantees' meeting, I plan on 12 putting on a hat and belting it all out. 13 Let me give you one quick brief update 14 on one other working group the Commission is 15 waiting to here from, and it is an update 16 from the Research and Development Working 17 Group. Here you see the names of the people 18 who are on this particular working group. 19 Commissioner Jim Crowe is the chair of the 20 group, and he is aided and abetted by many, 21 many, able-bodied, wonderful thinkers. 22 The Research and Development Working 23 Group report is destined to be the very last 24 report that the Commissioner receives, and 25 it is not because these people are in any 132 1 2 way tardy, but it is because this group is 3 dedicating itself to providing the 4 Commission with the most up-to-date 5 information about the state of research and 6 technology for forensic DNA use. 7 And there have been many, many 8 discussions by this group about many topic 9 areas, and I guess, most of you can see that 10 one of the prime topic areas has been 11 statistical, given the nature of many of the 12 people who are on this particular working 13 group, but they've also considered how the 14 technology will impact on the forensic use 15 of DNA. 16 And I think that I won't go into a lot 17 of details. We don't have very much more 18 time. I would urge you to look at the DNA 19 Commission's website, especially for its 20 last meeting when Chairman Crowe outlined 21 some of the issues, and there was testimony 22 about some of the issues in this particular 23 working group's draft of their report. It 24 is reprinted verbatim on our website, which 25 is all of those letters that we said before 133 1 2 and just call us and we'll send you the 3 information or e-mail us and we'll send you 4 the information. 5 But the bottom line for this 6 particular working group is this: 7 Technology is going forward. The 8 technologies that we are using now are very 9 strong and appropriate for forensic 10 application, and there will be other 11 technologies that will be equally 12 appropriate and useful for forensics. 13 What will make the bigger difference 14 in the next two, five, and ten years, which 15 is the time frames that this particular 16 working group is projecting for, is not what 17 the technology will do, but really how the 18 technology fits in the puzzle with all of 19 these other pieces. 20 So I urge you to look at the website 21 and flesh this out for a little bit more for 22 yourselves, and the actual report will be 23 given to the Commission really, really soon, 24 really soon. I think probably a very close 25 to final draft will be given to the 134 1 2 Commission on the July meeting on July 9th 3 and 10th in Washington D.C., and we would 4 urge as many of you as are able to attend 5 that meeting as well. They're all open to 6 the public. Thank you. 7 MR. ASPLEN: I may have spoken a 8 little too soon when I was talking about the 9 angst that one goes through in developing a 10 CD ROM because if there is something that it 11 can be compared to, it is developing a 12 solicitation like the one Lisa has been 13 directing for the CODIS backlog monies. 14 In the federal bureaucratic process, 15 it is quite a task, especially when you try 16 to do things differently than they've been 17 done before and you try to do it creatively 18 in a way that most benefits the community, 19 gets things done most quickly. 20 It's taken a lot of innovation, it's 21 taken a lot of patience, but what it hasn't 22 taken is a lot of time, and that's because 23 this solicitation has from the beginning 24 been approached, I won't say unique, but a 25 very tangible sense of mission and a very 135 1 2 tangible sense of understanding that quite 3 literally every single day matters; and it's 4 been approached in a way that recognizes the 5 concerns that the Smiths and the Scovilles 6 talked about this morning so that we can get 7 this money out there absolutely as quickly 8 as possible so that we can solve cases as 9 soon as possible. And that is due to the 10 leadership of Dr. Forman is developing that. 11 So let me finish up our remarks by 12 referencing a couple of other matters that 13 the Commission has addressed that you may 14 have read about, heard about, may need some 15 clarification, perhaps. One, is the issue 16 of post-conviction testing and current 17 pending federal legislation which would 18 create a federal right to post-conviction 19 testing. 20 Senator Leahy from Vermont has 21 introduced legislation which would provide a 22 federal right to post-conviction testing in 23 certain circumstances. The first purpose 24 listed under the purpose section of the 25 legislation is that it substantially 136 1 2 implement the recommendations of the 3 National Commission. 4 There is a great debate going on right 5 now, not on the floor of the Senate, but in 6 those areas such as the Department and other 7 arenas, a great debate regarding the 8 standard that should be set for 9 post-conviction analysis and the extent to 10 which standards -- we need to be sure that 11 if a standard is created, that it not open 12 certain the flood gates but at the same time 13 that we let cases come to light that should 14 come to light. 15 Again, it has only been introduced in 16 the Senate so far, and they have not had 17 hearings on the matter. However, if you 18 choose to give me a call periodically, I'd 19 be happy to update you as that matter moves 20 along. 21 Also, there is pending legislation 22 introduced by three separate 23 representatives, one of which, 24 Representative Gilman, from here in New 25 York, the other Representative Weiner, also 137 1 2 from New York, which would provide 3 significant money for backlog reduction, 4 both convicted offender sample and for 5 forensic index sample. 6 And that legislation is pending as 7 David mentioned, he testified regarding that 8 legislation earlier, actually about a month 9 ago. So those are some issues to watch out 10 for on the national level. 11 Two other issues that I would address 12 briefly, one is the arrestee issue and the 13 Commission's comments to the Attorney 14 General on taking DNA samples from 15 arrestees. 16 In discussing that matter, and once 17 again, New York, in terms of driving that 18 discussion has been a leader, the Commission 19 made a recommendation to the Attorney 20 General that essentially said that at this 21 stage of the game, we should first eliminate 22 the convicted offender backlog; second, that 23 we should allocate appropriate resources to 24 forensic sample testing; and third, in the 25 event that individual jurisdictions decide 138 1 2 to do arrestee testing, then a very strong 3 argument should be made to the legislature 4 that it should not be an unfunded mandate, 5 that we should not simply replace one 6 backlog for another, essentially, 7 recognizing that we are still in the 8 beginning stages of DNA database work; and 9 we need to get over some of those hurdles 10 first. But it did not say that there should 11 be a policy against arrestee testing. 12 The other issue that the Commission 13 has addressed that has been a matter of 14 concern to the individual states, has been 15 the recommendation regarding sample 16 retention and whether or not convicted 17 offender database samples should be retained 18 or not. 19 The recommendation in that regard was, 20 again, a recognition of the relative early 21 stages that we are in in the United States 22 in terms of DNA databases, and the 23 recommendation was that we should retain 24 samples at this juncture and looked about 25 five years out and said that within the next 139 1 2 five years the issue should be re-examined 3 again, formally. 4 Now, we should always continue to 5 analyze the privacy issues that are attached 6 to something like database retention. 7 However, it should be looked at formally in 8 the next five years. In the interim, 9 though, two things should be accomplished. 10 Number one, for those states that do 11 not have currently penalties for misuse of 12 database information such as particular 13 database samples, those states should pass 14 legislation in that regard; and secondly, 15 for those states which do not have very 16 clear requirements or legislation regarding 17 the research uses that can be put towards 18 DNA database samples, should be clarified. 19 We go from extremes such as can be 20 used for database validation to can be used 21 for any humanitarian purpose, and the 22 Commission felt like, again, given the very 23 early stages we're in, that we should be 24 very clear in the limitations that should be 25 placed on database sample uses. 140 1 2 So with that, I will open it up to 3 questions in the recognition that any time 4 that any of us has gone out and spoken about 5 the Commission's work, it has always been an 6 opportunity for us to take your comments and 7 questions back to the Commission. 8 So with that, I will entertain any 9 questions anyone might have. Dr. Lederberg. 10 SPEAKER: It may seem a little odd 11 coming from me. Let me just first say I 12 think this entire process, the assessment, 13 the evaluation is exemplary for this time in 14 history. 15 Technology is assessment is sure to 16 bring in ethical, legal, and social 17 implications of new technology that we have 18 an example of. 19 My question is, with the Commission 20 over, you said in five years there will be a 21 re-examination of the particular issue, has 22 there been any thought given to the ongoing 23 process? 24 Are there going to be changes 25 happening every year in the legal framework, 141 1 2 technological background, and I take the 3 opportunity on some lower levels of 4 involvement, public participation, and so on 5 is really going to be necessary to ensure 6 public confidence. Where do you stand on 7 it? 8 MR. ASPLEN: There has been a good bit 9 of discussion on that exact issue. With the 10 determination of the Commission, there will 11 be somewhat of a vacuum created, I think, in 12 two regards, number one, in specific 13 recommendations that go to United States 14 Department of Justice, but also, as you 15 mentioned, in terms of a broad-based group 16 looking at these kinds of important policy 17 issues and technology integration issues 18 that incorporate input from all different 19 realms, from all aspects of the system. 20 This Commission does intend to 21 terminate at the end of the year since it is 22 this Attorney General's commission. It will 23 be left to the next Attorney General as to 24 whether or not that Attorney General would 25 like to create something similar to it or 142 1 2 something that would attempt to accomplish 3 the same goals in gathering that kind of 4 input. 5 Yes, we're in discussions of that 6 right now. What recommendations can we make 7 for the future in finding an entity that 8 would prove effective in that regard? 9 Perhaps, one of the best examples of 10 that particular issue was the arrestee 11 issue. When it began to be discussed often 12 times on TV at night and Larry King and 13 things like that, I think the Commission 14 provided an excellent forum for the 15 discussion on a national level that allowed 16 us to look at some of the broader policy 17 issues and I think allowed us to really 18 grapple with that issue from a national 19 perspective. 20 So, yes, we recognize that that would 21 be an issue, and we're in discussions about 22 what recommendations to make to fill that 23 void. 24 SPEAKER: I had a quick question about 25 the outside vendors. How much is known 143 1 2 about these vendors and which states and the 3 quality of their work and so on and so 4 forth? 5 MR. ASPLEN: You mean for the CODIS 6 solicitation? 7 SPEAKER: Yes. 8 DR. FORMAN: The solicitation has a 9 number of requirements for the vendors 10 themselves. Two of the main requirements 11 are that the vendors be ASCLD accredited or 12 NFST certified. 13 So, in that way, there are certain 14 quality control, quality assurance 15 standards that those vendors must meet, or 16 they wouldn't be able to attain either the 17 accreditation or certification. 18 SPEAKER: How many vendors are there 19 out there that need certification? 20 DR. FORMAN: There are several. There 21 aren't hoards, but there are several. 22 MR. ASPLEN: An absolutely true story. 23 I got a phone call about eight months ago, 24 sounded like a relatively young guy who was 25 calling and saying he just got out of 144 1 2 school, and a friend of his and he were 3 going to start a laboratory and asked if I 4 could send him any information on this DNA 5 testing stuff and Whether or not I thought 6 there would be money for databasing, and I 7 said, Well, here's a number of resources to 8 go to," and mentioned ASCLD and things like 9 that. He said "Well, how do you spell 10 that?" That's not a good sign. 11 SPEAKER: Are there any funding offers 12 for states that fall between the cracks, the 13 states that you mentioned here? I come from 14 a small state, population-wise. We don't 15 have a thousand backlog Samples, but we do 16 have the capability to analyze the samples 17 that we have. 18 I wonder if there is a program going, 19 maybe funding to do that? 20 DR. FORMAN: The answer for this 21 year's solicitation, no, you will fall 22 between the cracks. However, we are working 23 on the appropriations language so that we 24 will have more flexibility so that states 25 can form consortiums with other states, so 145 1 2 that states can, perhaps, at certain levels, 3 do their own convicted offender testing 4 in-house if that's appropriate to their 5 particular system. 6 This year is our kick-off year. We 7 had to streamline the system in order to get 8 it going, but next year, we hope that we 9 will have more flexibility given the 10 appropriations language that we've asked 11 for. 12 SPEAKER: Is there any, are you 13 addressing any legislation issues regarding 14 collection from juvenile offenders? 15 MR. ASPLEN: The question is whether 16 or not we've considered any legislation 17 regarding the inclusion of juvenile 18 offenders, et cetera, and we really haven't 19 done that. 20 The Commission, generally, has stayed 21 away from issues that they consider to be 22 kind of state specific, if you will, in 23 terms of individual state decisions that are 24 going to decided kind of on their own 25 individually. The Commission hasn't 146 1 2 addressed those matters, believing that 3 they're state decisions. 4 It is lunchtime. Let me close by 5 saying I can count probably 20 people in 6 this room who have played incredibly 7 important roles in the Commission's 8 progress. I won't mention them because 9 there are too many and not enough time. 10 But we thank you all and continue to 11 thank you in the future, and if there's 12 anything we can do for your individual 13 states, for New York, in terms of 14 information that we can provide, please, do 15 not hesitate to call us. 16 And, again, we thank you for your 17 leadership and your participation in our 18 process. Enjoy lunch. 19 (Applause.) 20 WORKING LUNCH 21 KEYNOTE SPEAKER: HOWARD SAFIR 22 DR. BOYD: We're going to do this 23 luncheon just a little differently than in 24 the past. We're going invite the speaker up 25 first. The reason we'll do that is he has a 147 1 2 commitment. He also will be attending a 3 funeral, and he has to leave here shortly in 4 order to do that. 5 It's a great pleasure that we have so 6 important a figure in the use of DNA and the 7 law enforcement context to speak with us 8 today. What's interesting is we have here 9 someone who has been both federal and a 10 local official, having started his career 11 back in 1965 in what was then called the 12 Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which, of 13 course, is now called the Drug Enforcement 14 Administration, DEA. 15 In 1977, he was appointed Assistant 16 Director of the DEA, and he became Chief of 17 the Witness Security Division of the U.S. 18 Marshal Service and subsequently was 19 appointed Assistant Director of Operations 20 for the U.S. Marshal Service, a position he 21 held until retirement in 1990. So there is 22 life after retirement for federal officials. 23 He directed a wide variety of complex 24 international and domestic investigations, 25 and he was twice awarded the Presidential 148 1 2 Meritorious Executive Award. He rejoined 3 government in 1994 when Mayor Giuliani asked 4 him to serve as the City's 29th Fire 5 Commissioner. 6 That makes him a very special law 7 enforcement official because as we're 8 working hard to try to bring what we call 9 the first responder community together, it 10 is both interesting and, I think, 11 particularly gratifying that we now have a 12 senior official who has been in both roles 13 that have to work so closely together. 14 During his tenure at the Fire 15 Department, he was responsible for technical 16 innovations, a manager of improvement that 17 resulted in a $20 million reduction in 18 overtime, the streamlined command structure, 19 and improved training and equipment and 20 firefighter certification process. 21 He serves on a number of committees 22 for the International Association of Chiefs 23 of Police. He's been a delegate to 24 Interpol, and he's been on a number of other 25 senior advisory boards. 149 1 2 On April the 15th, 1996 he was 3 appointed the 39th police commissioner for 4 the City of New York, and so it's with very 5 great pleasure that I introduce Commissioner 6 Howard Safir. 7 (Applause.) 8 COMMISSIONER SAFIR: Thank you. Good 9 afternoon and welcome to the Big Apple. 10 It's great to have everybody here, and it's 11 great to talk about DNA. 12 I'm very pleased to have the 13 opportunity to speak to you and offer my 14 thoughts concerning DNA and its importance 15 to law enforcement. I also want to talk to 16 you about some of what we've had achieved in 17 New York over the last year, and 18 particularly since last February when I had 19 the opportunity to speak before the National 20 Commission on the Future of DNA. 21 In addition, I want to take this 22 opportunity to reemphasize my ultimate goal, 23 and this is important, which is that in the 24 not too distant future, we will throughout 25 the entire country take DNA samples 150 1 2 systematically at the time of the arrest. 3 Let me repeat that, at the time of arrest. 4 Still, I'm very pleased with the 5 progress we have made over the last year, 6 and as you will see, in New York we are 7 moving forward very rapidly. When I spoke 8 last February to the National Commission, 9 the law in New York allowed us to take DNA 10 samples from only eight percent of convicted 11 felons, and these, as you can guess, were 12 only the most serious offenders who were 13 convicted of crimes such as murder and 14 sexual assault. 15 At the same time, the New York State 16 Police, keeper of the state convicted 17 offender database were not yet analyzing the 18 samples even from this limited pool of 19 offenders. 20 The New York City Medical Examiner, 21 who maintains our local databank, was not 22 linked into the state system, and, of 23 course, at the time the state was not part 24 of the national CODIS system. At the NYPD, 25 we had 16,000 rape kits in storage that had 151 1 2 never been analyzed, and there was no clear 3 plan on how to proceed. 4 Well, in the last year, a great deal 5 has changed. First, the Governor and the 6 state legislature has moved forward and 7 expanded the law to require 65 percent of 8 convicted felons be included in our state 9 databank. Among the additional crimes 10 included are weapons offenses, robbery, and 11 the higher levels of narcotic violations. 12 I was also very pleased that we were 13 able to add burglary to the included 14 offenses since we know from the work Paul 15 Ferrara in Virginia and David Coffman in 16 Florida this addition will help us identify 17 many sex offenders. 18 I'm also happy to report that more 19 recently, the Governor called for more 20 expansion of the databank to include all 21 convicted offenders, and this is certainly a 22 statute that I support fully. 23 In August of 1999, the New York State 24 lab went online with CODIS, and subsequent 25 to that, our own medical examiner here in 152 1 2 New York City went online with the state lab 3 and is uploading files to them. 4 This has already brought success with 5 the first match occurring only a week ago 6 with one suspect being matched to three 7 rapes that occurred within our subway 8 system. 9 To date, New York State has loaded 10 over 8,000 profiles into the database and 11 has put into place a comprehensive program 12 to ensure that samples are taken from 13 appropriate offenders, including those on 14 parole and probation. We estimate that 15 there will be over 30,000 samples collected 16 every year. 17 Among those involved in the collection 18 process are correctional staff, physicians' 19 assistants and private contractors. Also, 20 as of January 1st of last year, we changed 21 New York City's policy. Every, and I 22 repeat, ever sexual assault kit in New York 23 City is now being processed by our medical 24 examiner. 25 We have also increased the number of 153 1 2 submissions from other violent crimes and 3 will be starting a pilot program in two of 4 our Bronx precincts to process burglaries 5 for DNA evidence. 6 At the same time, we recognize the 7 importance of dealing with our backlog of 8 rape kits and are proceeding to hire outside 9 contractors to process these rape kits. In 10 fact, some of you in this room, I believe, 11 have been on the contracts. 12 While it would be inappropriate for me 13 to comment more extensively on this topic, 14 it is quite clear to me that the private 15 sector has a major role to play in the 16 addressing of this country's backlog and 17 working with law enforcement agencies in 18 continuing to process their DNA profiles in 19 evidence. 20 Because of all of our efforts, the 21 workload of our medical examiner has 22 significantly increased, and this year in 23 his "State of the City" in January, 24 Mayor Giuliani announced our intent to 25 create a major state-of-the-art DNA lab here 154 1 2 in New York City at a cost of probably more 3 than $100 million. 4 Now, obviously, the lab we have is 5 doing excellent work. In fact, I believe 6 it's doing more case work than any other 7 government lab in the country. Still, we 8 believe that continuing developments of 9 High-sensitivity testing or low-copy number, 10 as it is called, our case load of crime 11 scene evidence may increase from about 3,000 12 cases annually to almost 100,000 in the next 13 five years. 14 So it's very important that we extend 15 our capabilities and do it as soon as 16 possible. Now, as I've indicated in the 17 past, I would like to see the laws expended 18 to allow us to take samples from offenders 19 at the time of arrest, and specifically for 20 fingerprintable offenses. 21 I believe we should take these samples 22 using buccal swabs. As all of you know, 23 this is exactly what they do in England, and 24 it is what I believe we should be doing 25 here. The Governor mentioned this morning 155 1 2 somebody who committed 17 crimes. Well, if 3 the proposal that I'm suggesting was in 4 place, he would have committed one and would 5 have been arrested the first time based on a 6 DNA match. 7 So, naturally, I also believe that if 8 we take it at the time of arrest, if the 9 person is acquitted or not prosecuted, the 10 profile should be removed from the database 11 and the samples destroyed. Just to give you 12 a sense of the impact of such a policy, this 13 slide shows how many suspect matches the 14 Forensic Science Service had when I spoke to 15 the National Commission about a year ago, 16 and it also shows the number of matches as 17 of last week. 18 What an incredible increase to go from 19 36,000 to over 70,000 in a year. We have to 20 keep in mind that England is about one fifth 21 the size of the United States. Were they 22 our size and at that same rate, they would 23 have had 350,000 matches since 1995. 24 That's the kind of success we're 25 capable of having, and we have to move 156 1 2 forward to obtain the funding, training, and 3 facilities to achieve this. Now, people 4 often ask me, do I believe that it's 5 necessary to take DNA at the time of arrest. 6 Do I leave that? Well I really believe it. 7 It isn't enough to wait until the 8 people are convicted. I think it's quite 9 clear that we need to take samples at the 10 time of arrest, and I want to explain the 11 reasons why. 12 First, we have to realize that 13 comparing a DNA profile, as all of you know, 14 is in many ways similar to comparing 15 fingerprints, and this is something we do at 16 the time of arrest, not at the time 17 conviction. 18 We take fingerprints at the time of 19 arrest and check for warrants and then we 20 compare them to fingerprints taken at 21 burglaries and other crimes. We certainly 22 don't wait until a person is convicted or 23 acquitted six months or a year later to see 24 if he's wanted for other crimes. 25 Second, people are often not convicted 157 1 2 of the specific crime they actually commit. 3 There are a number of reasons for this, 4 including the need to plea bargain cases to 5 keep the criminal justice system moving 6 efficiently. 7 However, this leads to situations 8 where the police have apprehended someone 9 for an offense that is clearly included in 10 the DNA databank statute of the individual 11 state, but because the person accepts a plea 12 bargain for a lesser offense, their DNA will 13 not be placed in the databank. By taking 14 DNA at the time of arrest, we avoid this 15 problem. 16 There are also some people who 17 suggested that we should only have convicted 18 felons in our databank because only those 19 who commit the most serious of crimes should 20 warrant this degree of government intrusion. 21 Now, since I favor the use of buccal 22 swabs to take DNA samples, the degree of 23 intrusion is, in fact, minimal, and as many 24 of you know, as technology develops, it's 25 even going to be less intrusive than just 158 1 2 taking saliva. 3 Equally, as all of you know well, the 4 DNA profiles being placed in our databanks 5 do not reveal genetic predisposition. So I 6 reject the argument that law enforcement 7 databanks will lead to some type of 8 Orwellian state. 9 In fact, if we need to fear anything, 10 it's the relationship between the medical 11 establishment and insurance companies who 12 regularly share confidential information at 13 the moment. 14 In addition, our experience in law 15 enforcement supports the concept of taking 16 DNA at the time of arrest even for low-level 17 offenders. We know here in New York City, 18 and we've had a 55 percent reduction in 19 major crime since 1993, and we've done that 20 by addressing small offences which supports 21 our understanding that offenders who commit 22 small crimes are also offenders who commit 23 major crimes. 24 You'll notice on the slide a rather 25 Dangerous weapon, certainly not anything any 159 1 2 of us would like to contend with. This 3 weapon was seized two weeks ago by one of 4 transit officers when he stopped a man for 5 jumping the turnstile in the subway system. 6 I don't think we should have to wait 7 until we catch him with a gun like this 8 before we take a DNA sample from him. We 9 should take the sample for his first 10 fingerprintable offense, which, by the way, 11 includes not paying a subway fare, so that 12 when we recover a gun like this at a 13 homicide, we can swab it and know instantly 14 who was carrying it. 15 A final point concerning taking DNA at 16 the time of arrest. Consider how many 17 investigative hours we would save by 18 reducing investigation time on other crimes. 19 All over this country, people are 20 sitting in jail awaiting trial. Some, 21 undoubtedly, have committed rapes and other 22 crimes for which DNA profiles are sitting 23 somewhere in the CODIS system at the local, 24 state, or national level, but instead of us 25 being quickly able to make these matches, we 160 1 2 have to wait for the person to go to trial 3 on the current offense; hopefully, be found 4 guilty of an offense that happens to be 5 covered by the state's DNA statute; and then 6 hope that the state is actually taking the 7 required samples, which we know many states 8 are not. 9 Meanwhile, investigators are working 10 day and night on other cases that the same 11 person may have been involved and following 12 up false leads that go nowhere. By taking 13 samples at the time of arrest, we could free 14 up the investigative time and allow for 15 other investigations to proceed. 16 More importantly, we could give peace 17 of mind to victims who would know that their 18 attackers had been caught. It's also quite 19 probable that by implementing universal DNA 20 testing of those arrested and the crime 21 scene work that would have to accompany it, 22 we would identify many innocent people who 23 may have been falsely identified or 24 convicted. 25 Now, some may raise the obvious 161 1 2 concern, won't it be expensive? The simple 3 answer is, initially, it will be, but the 4 expense will be well worth it. In the U.S., 5 we make about 15 million arrests a year. 6 Let's assume, for argument's sake, 7 that we plan to take DNA in 12 million of 8 these cases. At $30 a sample, and I think 9 with the economies of scale, the cost may 10 even be less expensive, it would cost us 11 about $360 million for the first year. 12 I would expect the cost to decrease 13 each subsequent year as we devise methods, 14 probably using fingerprint checks, to avoid 15 taking samples from people whose DNA profile 16 is already permanently in the databank. 17 At the same time I think we should 18 dedicate an equal or greater amount of 19 funding to allow for casework. So let us 20 assume we're working towards a goal of about 21 a $750 million. This sounds like an 22 incredible amount of money, but let's think 23 about it for a minute. 24 Nationally, the direct and 25 intergovernmental criminal justice 162 1 2 expenditure cost is about $120 billion a 3 year. My own department, for example, has a 4 budget of $3.2 million. An increase of $750 5 million dollars would equal six tenths of 6 one percent increase in criminal justice 7 expenditures, and it seems to me that this 8 is an expenditure we can afford and must 9 afford. 10 Another way to think about it is, for 11 those who feel the cost is prohibitive, is 12 in terms of the cost of other major 13 government projects. The 1997 Cassini 14 spacecraft cost $3.3 billion. The three 15 most recent spacecrafts, all launched in 16 1999, and part of the better, safer, cheaper 17 NASA program cost in total $785 million. 18 Now, my point is not taking anything 19 away from NASA, but I believe a 20 comprehensive program that will place 21 murderers, rapists, and other criminals 22 behind bars warrants at least equal funding; 23 and I think the federal government has a 24 large role to play in providing that 25 funding. 163 1 2 I'm not claiming that $750 million is 3 the ideal number, but, certainly, it is that 4 magnitude of scale to which we should be 5 looking. In fairness, we are headed in that 6 direction. Although, I would like us to 7 move even more quickly, there are a number 8 of bills in Congress that will provide us 9 with as much as $60 million in the next two 10 years to address convicted offender backlog 11 and casework. 12 This funding, if approved, will 13 certainly help us make an impact on our 14 backlogs. As we gain more federal funding, 15 there are certain elements we need to look 16 for in terms of how it will be spent. 17 First, and most obviously, the funding 18 must be made available to address the 19 convicted offender backlog and to address 20 casework. 21 Second, we must be able to use it for 22 training and facility, creation and 23 development. 24 Third, the funding must be available 25 for use in public and private partnerships. 164 1 2 Fourth, we need to be able to ensure 3 that the standards established by the DNA 4 advisory board are adhered to. 5 And last, there has to flexibility in 6 how the funding is to used. The funding has 7 to allocated in ways that different 8 jurisdictions can use it consistent with 9 their own needs. 10 Now, I realize what I've laid out 11 today is an ambitious agenda. It will 12 challenge the capacity of existing resources 13 to the point of demanding the creation and 14 massive expansion of laboratories. 15 I think we, in government, have to 16 support this expansion and work with private 17 and public labs and even academic 18 institutions to ensure that state-of-the-art 19 laboratories and training programs are in 20 place to ensure accredited laboratories and 21 well-trained personnel are available. 22 At the same time, we in law 23 enforcement have an incredible strategic 24 challenge before us. We have to provide a 25 bottom-up, top-down comprehensive training 165 1 2 program that teaches every officer about the 3 sensitivity of DNA evidence and how to 4 preserve crime scenes and prevent evidence 5 contamination. 6 Certainly, I appreciate the efforts of 7 the National Institute of Justice in 8 publishing the pamphlet, "What Every Law 9 Enforcement Officer Should Know About DNA 10 Evidence." 11 At the same time, we have to teach our 12 crime scene officers the best methods for 13 DNA collection and how to judiciously choose 14 where and when to gather evidence. In fact, 15 I'm sending my crime scene officers to 16 England to study the best methods used 17 there. 18 We have a great challenge before us, 19 but it's also an incredibly exciting 20 challenge. I want to thank all of you in 21 this room for the great work that you are 22 doing. 23 My job, and, fortunately, "This is a 24 bully pulpit," as Teddy Roosevelt said, 25 "When I speak sometimes the press listens." 166 1 2 And as Commissioner, I intend to fight to 3 get all of you more resource and greater 4 funding and to keep needling the federal 5 government until they step up to the plate 6 and meet what I believe is their 7 responsibility to provide funding to state 8 and local government to do, first, the 9 backlog and then to expand to suspect DNA. 10 I want to leave you with a picture on 11 a screen of a man in a HAZMAT or space suit, 12 but all of us know and that's what I believe 13 in my heart is that's the way criminals will 14 have to dress in the future if we use DNA 15 effectively. Thank you very much. 16 PANEL III: MODEL SOLUTIONS 17 DR. BERGER: Even though it's a few 18 minutes early, I think I'm going to take the 19 prerogative of being the moderator and 20 starting the program because we have such an 21 array of interesting people to tell you 22 about model solutions, and they don't have 23 enough time to tell you all that they would 24 like. So let's just start. 25 I'm also not going to take very much 167 1 2 time doing introductions. I see that there 3 are little bios of everyone in the back of 4 the program, so I'm just going to mention 5 the current affiliation of each of the 6 speakers, tell you the order in which 7 they're speaking, hope that they will manage 8 to keep their remarks fairly short so that 9 we will have an opportunity for some 10 questions from the audience. 11 Our first speaker will be David 12 Coffman, currently supervising the State of 13 Florida's DNA investigative service database 14 and who is the Florida representative to the 15 CODIS subcommittee. 16 Our next speaker will be Maureen Casey 17 who is the Deputy Commissioner for Policy 18 and Planning for the New York City Police 19 Department. 20 Then we will hear from Norman Gahn, 21 who is currently a Milwaukee County 22 Assistant D.A. assigned to the Sexual 23 Assault Unit and who is also a member of the 24 National Commission on the Future of DNA 25 Evidence. 168 1 2 Finally, we are very fortunate, 3 indeed, to have a duo who has joined us from 4 Great Britain. We will be hearing both from 5 Rebecca Sparkes and from David Werrett, both 6 of whom are working together with the DNA 7 Services and who will tell us about the 8 English experience that we keep hearing 9 about at times. 10 And so, I would simply like to turn 11 the program over to David Coffman. Thank 12 you. 13 MR. COFFMAN: I want to thank NIJ for 14 inviting me to speak at this conference. I 15 must admit that I did not plan to come up 16 here because we just had a major database 17 expansion in Florida, and I was informed 18 that I was on the agenda. 19 And after hearing Debbie Smith and 20 Scoville's presentations this morning, I'm 21 extremely glad. I think, as forensic 22 scientists, we need our batteries charged 23 like that to know what we're doing is really 24 doing some good rather that just looking at 25 the tremendous workload we all have. So I'm 169 1 2 very pleased to be here and thanks to Lisa 3 and NIJ for inviting me. 4 I want to give you a quick rundown 5 before I get into my major presentation of 6 just where we are with our database in 7 Florida. 8 We started taking samples in 1989 and 9 we started collecting for a very limited 10 number of crimes, initially, and we've had 11 three revisions since that time. 12 So far we've collected 65,000 13 convicted offenders, and every one of those 14 felons does have a DNA profile in CODIS. 15 However, we just began re-analysis of all 16 our samples because they were all in RFLP 17 technology, and we're happy to say that 18 we've put the missing piece of the puzzle to 19 our automation efforts in place, and it was 20 an instrument that has been developed by PE, 21 the 3700. 22 And April was our first full month of 23 operation, and in one month's time with a 24 staff of four, we completed 4,200 samples 25 with all 13 loci. So we now have 21,000 170 1 2 samples with all 13 loci of those 65 up in 3 CODIS at the national index, and we're 4 adding about 5 to 6,000 in-house and 5 utilizing a private vendor. 6 So our hope is this is by, this is 7 what I told my bosses any way and it's my 8 hope, that by the end of this year, by 9 December, we'll have all 65,000 of these 10 samples analyzed. 11 We've had 225 hits or matches to our 12 database and this has aided in over 340 13 investigations. The reason that number is 14 different is we recently had a match between 15 Washington DC and Jacksonville, Florida, and 16 that one association or that one hit 17 basically helped resolve 11 sexual assaults 18 between those two cities. So that's why that 19 number is higher. 20 It is important to note that even 21 though we've been building our database 22 since 1991, that's when we began analysis, 23 half of these hits occurred in the last 24 24 months. So it shows that as you build your 25 database, that's when the success starts 171 1 2 happening. And also, we collect these 3 samples as they go into prison, so they have 4 to get out before they commit other crimes. 5 So that's why, like I said, 50 percent of 6 our matches have been in the last two years. 7 We've also been happy to have the 8 statute of limitations removed from sexual 9 assault in Florida. That occurred in 1997. 10 There are some restrictions, the major 11 restriction to that is that the victim must 12 report the crime within 72 hours, and if 13 they do that, then the statute of 14 limitations is unlimited. 15 A lot of reasons for this. I think 16 the thing that drove it over the edge in the 17 legislature is, that year that this was 18 being heard, we had solved four sexual 19 assaults and there wasn't a thing we could 20 do about it. 21 We knew who the person was, but the 22 statute of limitations had run out, and one 23 of them, as a matter of fact, had run out 24 about two weeks prior to us making the 25 match. So we think this is what helped 172 1 2 drive this legislation. It had been in the 3 session the year before. It had not passed, 4 but the next year, it passed very easily, as 5 a matter of fact. 6 Also, this year we were successful in 7 getting the addition of burglary as a 8 qualifying offense for our database. As 9 New York, New York and Florida, we keep in 10 contact with each other. We learn from each 11 other, and I appreciate that relationship, 12 but our legislation is retroactive as well. 13 We only have 16,000 convictions for 14 burglary in Florida a year, but we're going 15 to be receiving close to 50,000 samples in 16 the next 12 months from the addition of 17 burglary because it's a retroactive offense. 18 I think our database is well on its 19 way. I think databases, if we can get the 20 funds to work the samples, and I should 21 mention that our ability to get those 22 samples re-analyzed by the end of this 23 calendar year is in part due to the NIJ's 24 $15 million grant that we really hope to 25 get. 173 1 2 So, the second part of the equation 3 is, we have the databases, we've shown they 4 worked, but as Police Commissioner Safir 5 pointed out, that is not all there is to 6 this. You can have everybody in this 7 country tested, and if you're not analyzing 8 those cases that need DNA testing, it's not 9 going to do a bit of good. 10 So here's the second part of the 11 equation: We need to work more cases that 12 do not have suspects. We need to work -- 13 more non-violent cases need to be examined, 14 for instance, burglary. 15 I don't know if the people from 16 Great Britain are going to discuss this, but 17 they've used the proximity of burglary 18 crimes to help solve sexual assaults in that 19 area. So I think it's important that we work 20 every case that requires DNA testing, not 21 just sexual assault and homicide. 22 We need to have additional personnel. 23 This country's forensic community has been 24 woefully understaffed for years, and we 25 always used the excuse that if you didn't 174 1 2 have a suspect, there's nothing we could do 3 with the case anyway. You had to have a 4 suspect to compare the evidence. 5 Well, that's no longer an excuse. We 6 have DNA databases. We have NIBIN, which is 7 the firearms database. We have AFIS. 8 That's not an excuse anymore. These cases 9 need to be submitted to our laboratories so 10 they can be worked, and our laboratories 11 need the personnel to do it. 12 We need additional funding, which NIJ 13 and the United States Government is helping 14 us to get that, and we need additional 15 space. 16 Now, on the funding and space issue, I 17 just wanted to point out that our program 18 would not be where it is today if it was not 19 for federal funding of some sort. I'm happy 20 to say that this is the first legislative 21 change we had this session where we now have 22 a permanent budget in our state, just 23 general revenue, so I don't have to keep 24 looking for grants in the future after this 25 year. It's great to have that. It's not 175 1 2 always going to be grants and donations. We 3 now have a permanent place in our 4 legislature, but it took ten years of, I 5 think pretty good success to do that. So 6 we're very happy to have that. 7 In Florida, as well as across the 8 country, there's a 67 percent recidivism 9 rate amongst violent offenders, and really, 10 we're seeing it across all offenses really, 11 but violent offenses is the study that we 12 have. 13 There are eight to twelve sexual 14 assaults on average per offender. Now, 15 that's average, so there's some with many 16 more, there's some with less. The eleven 17 sexual assaults I mentioned between 18 Washington DC and Jacksonville occurred in a 19 ten-month period of time. So there's some 20 out there with a lot, lot more. 21 In Florida, we have 13,224 forcible 22 sexual assaults a year. That's what's 23 reported. Our crime lab system, which 24 includes the state system and our local and 25 city crime labs in our state, only worked 176 1 2 3,755 serology submissions, and I consider 3 our state very aggressive in the cases that 4 we work. 5 Now, I've called investigators, and 6 not every case in which there is a reported 7 sexual assault is there viable evidence to 8 be turned in. Some of them are, they report 9 them six months after they occurred, so 10 there is no evidence, but, a conservative 11 estimate: I called over 20 law enforcement 12 agencies in our state and asked them, how 13 many cases are you not submitting to us that 14 it would be nice to have DNA results on, and 15 the range from 20 percent that they're not 16 submitting to as high as 80 percent in some 17 areas. 18 So we're estimating there's about 40 19 percent of the cases we are not receiving. 20 And when asked why, I said, "look, we sent 21 out letters. The State of Florida FDLE sent 22 out letters saying, 'please, submit your 23 sexual assault kits to the crime lab. We're 24 staffed. We have a faster procedure now. We 25 can get these things analyzed.'" 177 1 2 But investigators know that if they 3 have a case that they're trying to go to 4 court in a few months s or a high-profile 5 case, they know if they send every case they 6 have, that that's going to get lost, or 7 that's what they're afraid of. 8 So we really need to get the personnel 9 and the buildings in place to handle the 10 crime rate. We've always set our budgets 11 and always set our personnel requirements 12 based on what we received last year or what 13 went to trial. 14 We need to set our priorities on what 15 is the crime rate in your area and build a 16 facility to handle it, and that way, you'll 17 solve this problem. Many sexual assault 18 cases are not received, as I mentioned, by 19 the laboratory. 20 We can't keep our current casework 21 acceptance analysis policy, We can't keep 22 that the same. One possibility is we can 23 work with local law enforcement to identify 24 sexual assault cases that are not being 25 submitted. 178 1 2 Limit the analysis on these cases 3 initially to only the sexual assault kit, 4 for example, the liquid blood sample that's 5 the standard or the swabs that are taken in 6 a sexual assault kit. 7 What this will do is, there's 8 arguments out there that, I don't want the 9 case unless I get all the evidence in the 10 case. Well, I've got news for you. Looking 11 at the sexual assault kit is better than not 12 look at the case at all. So I say submit 13 the sexual assault kit. 14 When you limit the type of material, 15 like, for instance, as I mentioned, we have 16 automated our DNA database. We need to now 17 move to automating our casework examinations 18 in some way. If you limit the type of 19 sample you receive, if it's a liquid/blood 20 sample or it's a cotton swab, you've limited 21 the types of samples you get, and possibly 22 you can streamline and potentially automate 23 this procedure. 24 Search the DNA profiles against the 25 database to aid in the investigation, and if 179 1 2 no semen is identified, the contributor may 3 want to submit the remaining of the evidence 4 and follow the current case accepting 5 policies, keeping in mind -- well, I'll go 6 into that a little later. 7 We're going to identify 200 to 500 8 sexual assault cases, probably in one of our 9 counties. We found out a county we've had 10 the most hits with, and, in fact, in one 11 month-period of time, we solved two serial 12 rapes, they told me they had 600 cases they 13 hadn't submitted to our lab. I'm just at a 14 loss. I don't know how to make it any 15 clearer that we'll take them. 16 The analysis of these cases could be 17 performed using existing funds, and existing 18 crime laboratory resources in each region 19 could perform this pilot. We thought also 20 of utilizing the DNA database or the 21 caseworking staff for the initial pilot, and 22 then roll out to the regions when the 23 manpower for the new caseload is addressed. 24 Now, there's pros and cons in using 25 each of these entities, the database or the 180 1 2 caseworking. The pros for using the 3 caseworking lab is there's less training 4 required for the crime lab analyst. They're 5 already doing casework-type samples, so 6 they're fully trained. 7 We'll provide the crime laboratory 8 analysts valuable experience in the 9 interpretations of mixtures using STR. 10 Training is a big issue right now. We have 11 lab people coming out of STR training, and 12 they need experience with some fairly 13 reasonable samples to make these calls, and 14 a swab from a rape kit would be good. Once 15 they'd been validated and trained, They 16 could use these swabs to get results and 17 help hone their skills as a caseworking 18 analyst in interpreting mixtures. 19 The cons are, our crime labs already 20 have our current case commitment and court 21 requirements. They can't just stop and do 22 this because they're constantly going to 23 court for the case that they were given last 24 week that's going to court next week. And 25 also, they do have their existing case load 181 1 2 to maintain. So those are the cons. 3 The pros on the database side is that 4 database is familiar with streamlining and 5 automating techniques. I've got to tell 6 you, the DNA technology is not the tough 7 part of working in a forensic lab or doing 8 molecular biology. The toughest part of 9 working in a crime lab today is getting 10 people to step outside of the box that 11 they're used to being in and realizing 12 there's other ways to get something else 13 done. 14 The database does not have court 15 commitments or rush cases to focus on, so we 16 could get to the pilot quickly before any of 17 those case started going to trial. 18 Now, the cons are most database staff 19 would have to require extensive training to 20 be casework qualified. Now, our database 21 has two or three that are already is 22 casework qualified, but that's just, in 23 general, the cons. 24 And database would only want to be 25 involved in the pilot, therefore, we'd still 182 1 2 need to implement in the casework lab 3 statewide. 4 The case work section at the same site 5 at the DNA database, they volunteered to 6 work on this project. The reason we did it 7 at the database site is because we had the 8 automation capabilities there, so if we 9 started developing ideas, we're there to 10 help see if we can implement some automated 11 technique for casework analysis. 12 A memorandum of understanding has been 13 drafted by our attorneys, and I've 14 identified the law enforcement agencies that 15 have signed that. Basically, what this is 16 saying is, if you get a negative result on 17 this sexual assault kit back, it does not 18 mean the case is closed. There could still 19 be other evidence that you haven't submitted 20 to us, but for the purposes of this pilot, 21 we only want to look at the sexual assault 22 kit for right now. 23 We're going to do 250 sexual assault 24 kits during the current fiscal year, and it 25 does have the full support of our FDLE 183 1 2 Administration. Now, I'll tell you, as I 3 said we had the problems out in the field, 4 this is the idea. 5 It was put on hold in September or 6 October because the staff of six DNA 7 analysts in Tallahassee was reduced to three 8 in a matter of three weeks due to 9 repopulation of the earth and taking better 10 jobs elsewhere where the pay is better. So 11 they cannot possibly undertake this now. 12 Even though we are all geared up, now 13 they're in the process of re-training their 14 people. 15 So we fell victim to our own problem 16 of keeping qualified people on hand, but 17 they are committed to getting this done as 18 soon as the whole staff is back and trained. 19 Benefits to this approach. There's 20 work up front, definitely, but as can be 21 said in our state this year, it's taken ten 22 years, but success breeds support; and for 23 the first time we now have funding that I 24 don't have the worry about from year to 25 year. We have funding to do the job that we 184 1 2 need to do. 3 So being able to examine more sexual 4 assault cases is going to help apprehend 5 sexual offenders earlier in their careers 6 and preventing the future of sexual 7 assaults, and also using the results of this 8 pilot, if positive, we can obtain more 9 physical space, more crime laboratory staff, 10 and also special agents to focus on violent 11 crime in our state. 12 So we feel like if these results show 13 the power and hit over the head of people 14 out there that are holding onto these rape 15 kits, we can accomplish a lot, much of what 16 Commissioner Safir said earlier. And that's 17 all I have. Thank you. 18 (Applause.) 19 MS. CASEY: I, too, welcome you to the 20 Big Apple. It is a pleasure for me to be 21 here today. It's a tough act to follow 22 Commissioner Safir in his luncheon address, 23 but I can tell you that he means every word 24 that he says in terms of his commitment to 25 this issue and to you. 185 1 2 And the one thing, I've been working 3 on this issue for probably ten years. I 4 started up at the Division Criminal Justice 5 Services. Since the Commissioner took this 6 on as a priority on his agenda, I've seen 7 more progress in the last two years than I 8 have in the last eight. 9 And he means everything that he says 10 and he also appreciates the fact that we 11 have to look at the whole system. We can do 12 all we want to at the front end of the 13 system, but if we don't advocate for 14 training and laboratory space for the 15 scientists that are out there, all the 16 collection that we do is not going to mean 17 anything. 18 The topic of this panel is model 19 solutions, and Commissioner Safir challenged 20 me last year in learning about what could be 21 done in our department without legislative 22 change. 23 Obviously, his proposal to take DNA 24 from everyone we arrest, requires a 25 legislative change, but he wanted to know 186 1 2 what we could do to implement and use DNA 3 more effectively in our department. 4 And we're looking at it from a number 5 of different fronts, as he indicated, but 6 one of the things that he wanted me to look 7 at was the issue of rape kits and what rape 8 kits get analyzed; and as we started 9 looking at the current policy, what I wanted 10 to talk to you about first is where we are 11 and where we're going. 12 The policy prior to January 1 of 1999 13 was that only kits with a known suspect were 14 analyzed. Part of this had to do with a 15 capacity issue in the medical examiner's 16 office, and I think part of it just had to 17 do with a lack of understanding of what we 18 were doing. 19 When Commissioner Safir learned of 20 this, he immediately changed the policy, and 21 after January 1 of 1999, all rape kits 22 collected in the city go to the medical 23 examiner's office for DNA analysis. 24 The result of this policy, however, 25 left the New York City Police Department 187 1 2 with a staggering number of rape kits, and I 3 can say that Commissioner Safir is probably 4 one of the first law enforcement officials 5 in the country who has, number one, 6 acknowledged the size of his backlog, and 7 number two, has challenged us to do 8 something about it. 9 As you will see in the next picture 10 that unfolds here, that is some of the 11 16,000 rape kits that we have sitting in 12 your freezers. 13 When he started talking about this 14 issue, he said, "What are my options?" I 15 said, "Well, we do what we're doing, which 16 is nothing; number two, we look at existing 17 resources," as you just heard Dave Coffman 18 talk about. But the reality for us is that 19 it would basically be the same as our first 20 option up there, which is the status quo. 21 Our medical examiner's office, while 22 doing a great job for us, really only has 23 the capacity to handle the current caseload 24 of sexual assaults and homicides. They just 25 cannot keep up with the demand of anything 188 1 2 else. 3 So we had to look at our third option, 4 which is outsourcing, and I can tell you, it 5 was just about a year ago as I started 6 talking to my mentors in this field like 7 Paul Ferrara from Virginia about this idea 8 of outsourcing our rape kits, I was met with 9 a great deal of skepticism. 10 But when you work for someone like 11 Howard Safir, to him, that's a challenge, 12 and he said, "Find a way to do it." So what 13 I wanted to do is to next spend a few 14 minutes talking to you about the process. 15 As David mentioned, in order to do 16 this as efficiently and as effectively as we 17 thought we could and still handle the volume 18 and get some useful information, we needed 19 to look at different ways to streamline the 20 processing of these rape kits. 21 So all of our rape kits are currently 22 with the property clerk in a freezer, as I 23 mentioned. What we intend to do is contract 24 with one or more vendors. Obviously, the 25 labs would have to be NFTC certified or 189 1 2 ASCLD lab accredited. 3 The process, as we envision it, the 4 laboratory will receive the kits, in total, 5 approximately 175 kits per month. They will 6 be responsible for inventorying the kits, 7 screening the four primary swabs, looking at 8 the vaginal swab, anal swab, oral swab, and 9 then the dried secretions, and obviously 10 looking at the victim controls; if they find 11 DNA on any of the swabs, do the analysis and 12 then create the profile data, as you see; 13 and return the profile information to the 14 medical examiner's office, which will then 15 upload that into our local databank and then 16 the state databank. And then the rape kits 17 and contents will then be returned back to 18 the police department. 19 In the event we have a hit at the 20 local or state level, the remaining sample 21 will be reanalyzed by the medical examiner's 22 office. 23 In terms of our timetable, we, as I 24 mentioned, we started developing this last 25 summer. We issued our negotiated 190 1 2 acquisition proposal in December. The 3 written proposals were submitted in 4 February. March and April had us doing the 5 evaluations and interviews and doing site 6 visits. 7 We are now in the process of contract 8 negotiations. We received six proposals. 9 We intend, if all goes well, knock on wood, 10 with the contract negotiations to be doing 11 business with three private labs in the 12 country, and we hope to be making our 13 contract award, the formal award in June and 14 make our first shipment of kits shortly 15 thereafter. 16 As you saw in the previous slide, our 17 hope is have a 45-day turnaround, so if our 18 first kits go out in late June or early 19 July, we'll be getting some data back in 20 late July early August. 21 What do we hope to achieve here? And 22 I was speaking to Debbie Smith earlier. I 23 think that if you listen to her story, there 24 is no better result that we can hope to 25 achieve by doing this than to solve some 191 1 2 crimes for some of these crime victims. 3 And we have been met, as I said, with 4 a certain degree of skepticism about the 5 16,000 rape kits. Not all of those kits are 6 within the statute of limitations. Some of 7 those kits are beyond the statute of 8 limitations, but we intend to analyze them 9 all. 10 I think that even if the statute of 11 limitations expired, if we can bring some 12 closure to some of these victims, it would 13 mean a lot. And our hope is to gather 14 support for the extension or elimination of 15 the statute of limitations proposal that's 16 been made by Governor Pataki. 17 As, I think, Lisa Forman said and Dave 18 Coffman said, you know, success in this 19 business is measured by results, and results 20 in this business are measured by hits; and 21 we need those stories to take to our 22 legislators and make our case. 23 And speaking of taking those stories 24 to our legislators, obviously, one of the 25 things that we hope is by getting those 192 1 2 hits, we're going to get some money. The 3 Police Commissioner has already made one 4 trip to Washington to meet with a number of 5 Congressmen and Senators, and we plan on 6 doing it again and doing it as many times as 7 are necessary to get the federal government 8 to step up to the plate. 9 I think the state government, 10 particularly here in New York behind the 11 leadership of Governor Pataki and Katy Lapp, 12 as you heard this morning, they're doing 13 everything that they can, but we need the 14 assistance of the federal government. 15 And certainly, last but not least, you 16 know, the results are the hits. You may 17 have heard about this case, although this 18 was not part of the official backlog that 19 we'll be contracting out, the rape kit that 20 was included in our local databank last 21 summer was part of a city-wide rape pattern 22 that we had going on. 23 But it just demonstrates the story. 24 This individual, Jonathan Williams, was 25 arrested on a homicide. There was semen 193 1 2 left at that crime scene. The D.A.'s office 3 got a court order. They did the DNA 4 analysis, they up loaded that information 5 into our local databank, and he was linked 6 to a rape in Harlem, a June 1998 rape for 7 which he was not a suspect. And that's what 8 we're all in this business about. 9 So David talked about possible 10 solutions. We are turning this possible 11 solution into a reality, and as somebody 12 said, I don't know, Lisa, if I'm going to be 13 up here singing with the horns and hat on 14 there, but hopefully, next year at this 15 time, we will be back to tell you about all 16 our successes that we will have as a result 17 of this project. So thanks very much. 18 (Applause.) 19 MR. GAHN: Good afternoon. I'm very 20 pleased to be here to talk to you about what 21 we're doing in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin 22 with DNA. Back last September, early 23 September, I issued a criminal complaint and 24 a warrant for a John Doe based upon his 25 genetic profile. It got a little bit of 194 1 2 press in the Milwaukee, in The Milwaukee 3 Journal Sentinel, and the reporters went out 4 and interviewed the defense bar and some of 5 the law professors in the area. 6 Although no one came out and said that 7 I was a crazy man, the clear implication was 8 there. And about 45, 50 days passed until I 9 received a telephone call one afternoon from 10 a reporter from The New York Times who said 11 he was looking in the internet and saw 12 something in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 13 and he thought that it was somewhat 14 intriguing, and he wanted to know a little 15 bit about it; and I told him what I did. 16 Then this appeared not long after on 17 the front page of The New York Times and the 18 all of a sudden it became cool. So go 19 figure how this stuff works. 20 I'm going to give you a little bit of 21 history about what came up and how this came 22 about. I'm not a creative person, and I'm 23 not an innovative man, but I'm willing to do 24 things for others, and you'll find out that 25 there were some sharp City of Milwaukee 195 1 2 police detectives who came up with this idea 3 and hounded me to do it. 4 But a little bit of history for you. 5 We really didn't understand in Milwaukee 6 County what the effect of the databanking 7 would be, and our databank didn't really get 8 going until May of 1998. 9 And we met the police detectives of 10 the sexual assault unit and a few 11 prosecutors and crime lab met, and we set up 12 those goals that we wanted to get all the 13 old unsolved cases entered into the index, 14 that non-suspect cases immediately be taken 15 to the crime lab. In other words, if a 16 crime occurred in Milwaukee County last 17 night, hopefully, today it at the crime lab 18 and it is being analyzed today. 19 Surprisingly, we're somewhat close to 20 this, but we're mostly concerned with older 21 unsolved cases entered into the case index 22 and how we could go about that and get as 23 many as we possibly could. In May of 1998, 24 though, our databank was only at 4,500, and 25 by December of 1998, it was at about 8,500. 196 1 2 So it wasn't all that large, but, 3 initially, we had just tremendous results in 4 those first eight months of 1998. We had 8 5 hits against a convicted offender index, 13 6 against the case index, and when we got 7 hooked up to NDIS, we had one in Cooke 8 County and one in Minneapolis, Minnesota, 9 but the successes were terrific once we just 10 started the databank. 11 We came up, naturally, with a few 12 problems. This was a case that the crime 13 lab, they got the cold hit out of the 14 convicted offender databank on December 2nd 15 of 1998, and this was a rape that occurred 16 on December 5th of 1992; and eight hours 17 before the statute expired, I managed to get 18 a criminal complaint and warrant out in this 19 case. 20 But this started the police detectives 21 thinking, what about all those other cases 22 that statute is about to expire, or has 23 expired, what are we going to do with these? 24 And they were fast approaching because 25 we were trying to analyze everything from 197 1 2 1992 and 1993 and get into the databank. 3 But the statute was passing for many of 4 them, and we really were very concerned 5 about that. 6 I don't know how many prosecutors are 7 out there, but I suspect all of you have, 8 there's a police detective somewhere, 9 usually in the sexual assault unit, who kind 10 of, we have on who's kind of like a pit 11 bull. They just hound you and follow you 12 around to get you to issue warrants and 13 search warrants and things. 14 And we have one. Her name is 15 Detective Gail Leoni. But I say it with 16 great warmness and great fondness and 17 respect because she's just absolutely 18 terrific. 19 And she had come back from a 20 conference in Santa Fe last year, and she 21 says, "If you think this DNA's so great, why 22 don't you start issuing them based upon 23 these genetic profiles before the statute 24 expires?" 25 And she would hound me on this, 198 1 2 throughout the whole summer she would hound 3 me. And I said, "All right, I'll do it, but 4 you bring me a case. I want it a serial 5 sexual assault case. I want it to be very 6 powerful DNA evidence. I want it to be 7 semen from either vaginal or surgical swabs, 8 and and I want the MO to be pretty much the 9 same." And sure enough, she found one. 10 In the meantime, though, I started 11 looking at our statute on warrant or summons 12 on complaint and on the provisions, and it 13 stated that, "To issue a warrant, you must 14 state the name of the person to be arrested, 15 if known, or if not known, designate the 16 person to be arrested by any description by 17 which the person to be arrested can be 18 identified with reasonable certainty." 19 I felt that our statute was robust 20 enough to embrace what Laurie wanted me to 21 do to issue these complaints based upon the 22 genetic code. I knew that the history of 23 this when the statute was written was based 24 upon physical identifiers, something that a 25 police officer could drive by and look at 199 1 2 and see whether it be tattoos or some other 3 physical markings that you could identify 4 with reasonable certainty if you don't know 5 the name. 6 But I believe the technology today 7 that we will someday, I hope, be successful 8 in arguing this in front of a court that 9 genetic code certainly matches our 10 requirements for a warrant. 11 So I went ahead and issued those in a 12 felony warrant as John Doe, unknown male 13 with matching deoxyribonucleic acid, and 14 here is the one, this is PCR case. This is 15 John Doe Number Four. 16 We're continually doing these now in 17 Milwaukee County every time they come up. 18 This is the criminal complaint, the top part 19 of the complaint. This John Doe Number 20 Five. This is an RFLP profile. And we put 21 these in the system. I've got about 20 of 22 them on my desk now, cases that we will be 23 issuing. Again, this is top portion of the 24 criminal complaint. 25 When we talked about this, I feel that 200 1 2 with this technology, I almost believe that 3 as a prosecutor, it is your duty and 4 responsibility to do this when you're armed 5 with this wonderful technology. I believe 6 we have to aggressively take this technology 7 and push the envelope and do everything we 8 can to preserve these cases. 9 It's been wonderful for the victims in 10 Milwaukee County, the surprise when we 11 contact them and tell them what we're doing, 12 and they ask, "You still care? You're still 13 going to work on it?" 14 It sends sort of a nice warm blanket 15 over the community and we've seen this, that 16 they know the police are not stopping and 17 that we'll use everything available to us to 18 do what our job is as police and a job as 19 prosecutor. 20 I think it's the most wonderful job in 21 the world to get paid for seeking truth and 22 seeking justice, and I think that's 23 precisely what we're doing. 24 What also this spawned in Wisconsin 25 was that we teamed up with the women's 201 1 2 coalition against sexual assault and some 3 other groups, and we're trying to change the 4 statute of limitations. Basically, if you 5 get a hit, a cold hit out of the databank, 6 you have one year to issue the criminal 7 complaint. 8 And I hope that we can get this 9 passed. It's met with resistance from some 10 of the legislators. We then got the people 11 from the Innocence Project from the 12 University of Wisconsin, Madison who want to 13 push through the post-conviction motion. 14 We've teamed up with them, and still 15 we haven't been successful in getting this 16 through, but we won't stop and we'll pursue 17 this because I certainly don't want to keep 18 issuing John Doe warrants forever. 19 And that's basically what we're doing 20 in Milwaukee, and I thank you very much for 21 your kind -- I told you one thing, what 22 happened with our databank. I don't know if 23 it's happening in any of your jurisdictions, 24 but I prosecuted an individual by the name 25 of Anthony Turner. 202 1 2 I don't know if you can see this. 3 This is a copy of the crime lab report. But 4 we had a six-probe RFLP match on the sexual 5 assault and 13 loci from the STRs, and when 6 we put that profile into the case index, 7 three additional sexual assaults were linked 8 to him. 9 Throughout the course of the trial, 10 Mr. Turner maintained his innocence claiming 11 that there was someone else in Milwaukee, 12 Wisconsin who had the six RFLP probes and 13 the 13 loci that he had despite the numbers 14 being in the quintillions. 15 But he persisted in this and kept 16 telling us that that is the case. After 17 convicting him of the rapes and before 18 sentencing, our state crime lab received a 19 letter from Mr. Turner stating that, "If you 20 will check with a victim, her name is 21 Samantha," that "In March of 1999, Samantha 22 was raped, and if you will please analyze 23 that evidence, you will see that there is 24 someone in the city who matches my genetic 25 code, since I have been in prison all this 203 1 2 time, I could not have done it." 3 Well, we went back and found that 4 there was a case reported by Samantha in 5 March of 1999, and to humor him, we did 6 analyze it, and the 13 STRs came out to 7 match Mr. Turner, which, of course, would be 8 impossible because he was in prison when 9 that rape occurred. 10 I then told the detectives, "Well, go 11 find Samantha for me." And they did, and 12 she was in jail on a drug charge. And they 13 went up and found her, and sure enough, 14 Mr. Turner had mailed his semen from the 15 prison in one of those little condiment 16 packets and paid her $50 to rub it on her 17 and report the rape. 18 So we've had two of those incidents in 19 Milwaukee County, and I guess that's quite a 20 testimonial to the reliability of this when 21 the defendants are now trying to use it. So 22 thank you again very much for your 23 attention. 24 (Applause.) 25 MR. WERRETT: Hearing that last 204 1 2 comment, we had a dissimilar but sort of 3 similar experience in the UK when the law 4 became retrospective and we could now 5 collect samples from prisoners who were 6 still in prison and had been convicted of a 7 sexual offense. So that started and there 8 was quite a thing in the Wormwood Scrubs of 9 swapping spit so that you could confuse the 10 taking of the DNA sample. 11 I think it's quite ingenious the 12 things people get up to to try to avoid 13 getting their DNA profiled. Anyway, I'm 14 part of the duo and the duo would like to 15 thank the NIJ very much for bringing us over 16 from the UK to talk to you today. 17 I'm going to talk to about some basic 18 data on the database, and then Becky Sparkes 19 is going to talk where we're going in terms 20 of the kinds of innovative things we're 21 doing in the future. 22 Just to recap, I'm part of the 23 Forensic Science Service, and we serve the 24 43 forces of England and Wales. We have six 25 sites around the country. It's my job to 205 1 2 oversee all the casework and the DNA in 3 those six sites being delivered. 4 We have got more than 1,900 staff and 5 they're all state employees, but we charge 6 for every single thing that we do, and 7 income was in excess of $75 million last 8 year. We charge about $50 to have a sample 9 put on the DNA database, analyzed in the 10 10 STR systems, and you challenge the database 11 and you get matches back, hopefully. 12 The DNA database is centralized. It's 13 run from the center of England and Wales 14 based on buccal scrapes, which I echo how 15 it's safer, it's being a good way of 16 collecting samples, and we can collect from 17 both suspects and from convicted, arrestees 18 is the way, I think, you referred to them. 19 We supply to the database as the FSS, 20 but others do as well, for example, Cell 21 Mark Analogy C, so it's a commercial 22 environment in which we're working; and all 23 the other UK laboratories within Scotland 24 and Northern Ireland also supply profiles to 25 the database. So it's a UK database. 206 1 2 The numbers which Howard Safir 3 referred to at lunchtime look something like 4 this. It's grown over the years since 1995 5 when we first introduced it, and we're 6 currently at about 760,000 samples from 7 suspects on the database. Crime scene 8 stains are 75,000 files on the database, and 9 matches that we've issued to the police 10 amount ten and a half thousand linking 11 scene-to-scene matches and just over 70,000 12 suspect-to-scene matches. 13 Last year we reported about 22,000 14 matches, but those include partials as well, 15 I might add, in that a partial profile from 16 a scene stain matching a suspect. 17 The database is now likely to be 18 growing about a thousand samples per day, 19 and we're issuing 400 to 600 matches per 20 week to the police. The little circle up 21 there is a synopsis of the serious crimes 22 which we issue to the police each week of 23 what we're reporting. In this case it was 24 10 murder matches, one attempted murder 25 match, 19 rapes, control of drugs and supply 207 1 2 of drugs, 7. 3 These are all matches with undetected 4 scene stain profiles. So this is not to do 5 with casework at all. These are these 6 undetected scene stains. The turnaround 7 time for a suspect going onto the database 8 is about 14 days. For your undetected case 9 stain is now about 28 days, but we want to 10 get that down to 14 days this year. 11 The match scene stains are removed now 12 on request, so it's hard to see the match 13 rate, if I can get the arrow up there, but I 14 can assure you that if you collect a sample 15 from a scene of crime, then as a policeman 16 you stand about a 40 percent chance of 17 getting it to match currently on the 18 database. If it's a suspect, then it's about 19 8 percent. 20 And the issues really now relate to 21 the way the police handle the information. 22 I'd echo all those that have gone before 23 saying this isn't just about DNA technology, 24 this is about everybody being joined up, 25 seeing how we handle information. 208 1 2 You might think all of that is rather 3 a lot of matches, but compared to the crime 4 in Britain, I think we're just touching the 5 tip of the iceberg. For burglaries, we have 6 nearly a million a year, and we're reporting 7 about 10,000 matches a year; for theft of 8 vehicles, about a million again, and we're 9 reporting out about 7,000 matches; for 10 violent crimes, about 660,000, and we're 11 reporting out just over a thousand. So 12 there's a long way to go, I think. 13 For undetected rapes, which is about 14 1,200 in the UK, I think the impact is much 15 greater, and year on year, we're reporting 16 about 336 matches to rape cases, so there, I 17 think the impact could be quite large for 18 the police. 19 And for murders, similarly, we're 20 reporting out about 106 murder matches a 21 year out of a total of 711 murders in 1997 22 in the UK. Now, out of that 711, the vast 23 majority will be, as we call them, 24 "domestics" where it's obvious who's 25 murdered who. So if that's going to the 209 1 2 heart of the undetected murders, then 3 there's really a lot of police saving in 4 investigative time. 5 But there's room for improvement. We 6 think there's much greater potential to 7 contribute to volume crime detection, and we 8 also believe that the contribution to 9 serious crime detection is good, but 10 intelligence leading to early detection, we 11 could improve on that. 12 Looking at a distribution of what 13 people were arrested for and what they've 14 matched against is on this table. I 15 apologize for those at the back it being 16 small, but I'm just going to pick some 17 highlights out here. 18 Across the top, we've got the arrest 19 offense, and that's what the person came in 20 for; and down on this side we have what 21 they're matching against. So you can see, 22 as I think Dave Coffman referred to, that 23 for burglary, we've got certainly burglars 24 matching more burglary scenes at the top 25 there, but lower down, we've got a 210 1 2 significant small proportion of burglars 3 matching other sexual offenses, rape, 4 attempted murder, and even murder. 5 Interestingly, for those arrested for 6 violent crime, they cover the whole gambit 7 matching from burglary, burglary dwelling 8 and there's 16 matching rape against 9 somebody arrested for just violent crime. 10 So interesting crime patterns are emerging 11 from this. 12 Overall, of the 2,464 matches that 13 I've surveyed there, 98 were for volume 14 crime arrests matching to a serious crime 15 scene stain, so that's about 4 percent, just 16 kind of an significant number in terms of 17 detections. 18 Building the DNA model, we wondered, 19 as politicians are interested in outcomes, 20 how we could express this in terms of 21 actually an outcome, and so I attempted to 22 build a model, which I admit is very crude, 23 but it served its purpose, I feel, as you 24 will see. 25 What we did is we looked at the number 211 1 2 of property crimes, and we're looking at 3 volume crime here, property crimes and car 4 theft crimes, and we reckon through surveys 5 that we can recover in about 5 percent of 6 those cases DNA. 7 If you take that 5 percent and 8 translate that into the potential number of 9 scenes then that we can get DNA from, that's 10 about 70,000, and if you look at the percent 11 successfully analyzed in our laboratory, 12 that comes out at about 75 percent; and then 13 you take the percent match figure of 40 14 percent, we reckon on reporting about 15 $21,000 matches, which is close to what we 16 are doing. 17 Then I got the criminologists to look 18 at it and said, "Well, what effect does that 19 actually have?" And they said, "Well, if 20 that's the case, you have to look at how 21 many of those matches turn into detections." 22 And we did a pilot constabulary called 23 Sussex, which is one of the 43 in England 24 and Wales, and they said, "If you get the 25 matches back to us quickly, then about 60 212 1 2 percent of those, we convert into 3 detections." 4 The criminologists said, "Well, yeah, 5 if you can detect them, then you can 6 multiply that by three because most of these 7 guys are committing more than one crime." 8 So in terms of crime reduction, you're doing 9 actually doing better than just a mater 10 matches and detections. So I multiplied it 11 by three and got up to 37,000. 12 And then they turned around to me and 13 said to me, "Yeah, but if you take out the 14 ringleaders, which you could do through this 15 process, you stop the recruitment to the 16 criminal fraternity," and they've shown that 17 in several studies. "So multiply it again 18 by two for a deterrence effect." 19 Now that 74,000 or 75,000 there 20 represents about 5 percent of the property 21 and burglary crime that's going on in the 22 UK, which is nicely close to what the 23 government's trying to achieve in terms of 24 crime reduction. 25 Obviously, it depends hugely on what 213 1 2 happens at the front end of the supply chain 3 with the police collecting the samples and 4 at the back end when the courts deal with 5 these people. 6 But it was a persuasive model, crude 7 though it is, and so persuasive that the 8 Prime Minister announced plans to increase 9 the size of the database in 1999, and the 10 government set aside now 34 million pounds, 11 an extra 34 million pounds, over the next 12 two years to expand the database. 13 The goal is to make the databases 14 around 3 million samples, which would then 15 be close to the level of the fingerprint 16 database and five times its current size. 17 This is line with key government aims 18 to reduce serious and volume crime, the 19 latter by 30 percent over the next five 20 years. So it kind of echoes Dave Coffman's 21 point that if you get some success, it tends 22 to attract more money. 23 What does this mean in terms of the 24 samples we're likely to analyze this year? 25 Well, I think about 400,000 is what we're 214 1 2 going for in terms of suspect and convicted 3 samples, which is close to the new number of 4 criminal record of these numbers that are 5 issued each year. 6 We'll probably analyze about 50,000 7 stains from undetected scenes of crime, the 8 non-suspect cases that you referred to, and 9 we're also going to have a police 10 elimination database. We're going to do DNA 11 profiling of all the police in the country 12 in the country on volunteer basis so that we 13 can immediately eliminate them as a 14 potential source of DNA for contamination 15 purposes. 16 That's the subject of debate amongst 17 police forces, but the chief constable's 18 assured me that that's what shall be done. 19 So I'll put it up. 20 And we're also going through a 21 training program where we're targeting 22 training every single police officer in the 23 country so that if they're the first officer 24 attending the scene, they at least have a 25 rudimentary knowledge of what to do and what 215 1 2 not to do. 3 And we're going on to launch a new 4 type of analysis, DNA analysis, which is 5 really based on looking at contact traces 6 for both serious crime and volume crime, and 7 at that exciting point in the juncture, I'll 8 hand over to Becky Sparkes. 9 MS. SPARKES: Good afternoon. Dave 10 has just talked to you about the national 11 DNA database, and I think we can all agree 12 that the principle of databases and the 13 database in the UK has been a large success 14 scientifically. 15 But now I think we've come to the 16 point where we really need a strategy to 17 support the improvement of scene stain 18 recovery. As you saw from one of Dave's 19 earlier slides, we're only having an effect 20 in about one percent, particularly in volume 21 crime cases. 22 And really we have to question whether 23 the police are now making the full use of 24 the potential of the database. What are 25 they actually doing with the number of DNA 216 1 2 matches they're receiving week on week. 3 There's a phenomenal amount in information 4 going out to the police forces. What are 5 they doing about it, and what can we, as 6 forensic scientists, help them to understand 7 that? And then to introduce to them the 8 concept of the scene linking sort of within 9 and between force boundaries. 10 Focusing first on the improvement of 11 stain recovery, the FSS is operating what we 12 call our low-copy number or call single-cell 13 analysis, and there's actually two strands 14 to this service. 15 The first is for serious crime, and 16 for that we have a specialist unit that's 17 been in operation since January 1999. This 18 really is an enhancement to the existing 19 service that we offer, and it's available 20 for cases where conventional DNA profiling 21 has failed or is not appropriate. 22 It's been extremely successful, but 23 it's really lengthy, and each case is 24 approached on a very individual basis, and 25 this has really required a completely new 217 1 2 reporting strategy for us. 3 So in addition to the application for 4 serious crime, we're now looking at the 5 development of a volume crime project. For 6 this we need something that's completely 7 different. Obviously, it needs to be rapid 8 and it needs to low cost. Expensive, 9 lengthy turnaround times are not really very 10 suitable for volume crime cases, and if we 11 could actually develop something that was 12 rapid and low cast, then we could forecast a 13 very high demand. 14 So this is the kind of thing that 15 we're doing. This is sort of reflecting the 16 traditional serious crime approach, if 17 you'll forgive our mock-up scene, we would, 18 traditionally, be looking at the analysis of 19 blood from the point of entry; the recovery 20 of hair from balaclavas or from in a 21 victim's hands, for example; blood from the 22 victim on a weapon that might be left on the 23 scene; cigarette ends that might be 24 recovered at the scene of the crime. 25 The kind of thing we've been doing 218 1 2 this the specialist unit is this: we're now 3 looking at contact traces, hand prints or 4 facial prints at the point of entry; 5 dandruff being recovered from balaclavas; 6 cellular material from ligatures or knots, 7 for example, from victims that have been 8 bound; again, cellular material on knife 9 handles, on weapon handles, on bottles, 10 other things discarded at the scene, or on 11 bag handles, anything like that. 12 And just to summarize the success, 13 we've profiled, I think, about 200 to 300 14 cases in the last 12 months, and if a case 15 required re-extractions, so we had to do 16 something to extract a stain that had been 17 previously extracted, the success has been 18 about 75 percent and some of them have just 19 been cases that failed for conventional DNA 20 profiling but have just required a 21 re-amplification, and that's been 69 22 percent. So it has been extremely 23 successful. 24 So if we talk about supporting the 25 national DNA database and implementation of 219 1 2 the strategy, what we're now looking at 3 doing is responsive partnership projects 4 where we actually take specially trained 5 forensic intelligence officers, and a lot of 6 these are individuals that have spent the 7 last five years working on the DNA database 8 and so are very experienced with DNA, and 9 we're moving them from the laboratory and 10 out to the scene, we're moving them into the 11 police forces to actually begin to work with 12 police personnel. 13 What we want to do is we want to adopt 14 a new approach, and if you talk about 15 contact traces, it very much a new approach, 16 new tools. Some of these individuals would 17 actually go to the scene then go back to the 18 laboratory and carry out their own analysis. 19 We're looking at new ways of thinking 20 about evidence collection which will have 21 the obvious effect of increasing the use of 22 forensics many fold, and from an R&D 23 perspective, we're using them as a platform 24 to field-test new techniques and develop new 25 tailored services. It's okay developing 220 1 2 things in a laboratory environment. Once it 3 goes out of the police forces, it's a very 4 different effect. 5 So I have approximately 30 staff in 6 that role, and we're currently involved in 7 about 26 different partnership projects 8 throughout the country, and I've really only 9 got time to tell you quickly about one of 10 those today. 11 And that was "Operation Autoguard," 12 and this was really, with its application to 13 volume crime, it was targeting autocrime. 14 As Dave said, it's very much in our 15 political arena at the moment. The police 16 are very switched on to autocrime at the 17 moment and trying to do something about it 18 forensically. 19 Traditionally, very little forensic 20 evidence collected from vehicles. Even if 21 cigarette butts or cans, drinks cans, are 22 found in a vehicle, no interview of the car 23 owner is carried out, so these aren't even 24 collected. 25 But what this pilot was actually about 221 1 2 was field testing new DNA recovery 3 techniques and considering in a volume crime 4 application. So we were piloting it. We 5 were evaluating best areas within a vehicle 6 to target and considering things like would 7 the owners profile be required for 8 elimination, and if it was, that probably 9 wouldn't be appropriate because, obviously, 10 not many owners of vehicles are going to 11 give their samples for DNA; developing best 12 methods of evidence recovery and kind of 13 trying to assess what training needs would 14 be required, so, okay, the scientist's doing 15 it, but once it's handed over from research 16 phase to the police, what training needs 17 would be required. That's at the front end 18 of the process. 19 At the back end of the process, we 20 were then looking at, supposing we got 21 results these vehicles, managing the 22 intelligence, working with the police and 23 ensuring that the police fully understood 24 what the results we were giving them back 25 meant, making the best use of even partials, 222 1 2 and trying to use the intelligence 3 intelligently in many ways, targeting hot 4 spots, targeting areas, even targeting 5 particular individuals within the criminal 6 population. 7 And just to give you a feel for the 8 results from that pilot, we placed six 9 scientists, this OCU down the side is the 10 Operational Command Unit on six Operational 11 Command Units within one police force, and 12 during the three-month pilot, they attended 13 a total of 161 scenes with the 14 scene-of-crime officers. 15 And from those 161 scenes, we obtained 16 75 searches, and of those database searches, 17 we got 47 matches. So 46 percent of the 18 vehicle scenes that we had attended that had 19 given no forensic evidence gave us a 20 searchable profile, and from those 46 21 percent of scenes, 30 percent gave us a 22 match. And these were cases that previously 23 the police had no other information on, 24 would never likely be followed up. 25 So the possibilities, we're talking 223 1 2 about solutions this morning, if we consider 3 that we have .5 million autocrimes in the UK 4 per year, that accounts for 20 percent of 5 all our crime, and theft of accounts for 6 250,000, the project demonstrated that the 7 best area for DNA recovery was the cowling 8 or the steering column. 9 If we only analyzed samples from that 10 area, we had no need to take profiles from 11 the owner of the vehicle. We did not see 12 mixtures in that area, and the police 13 figures show that 40 percent of all stolen 14 vehicles have the cowling tampered with in 15 some way. Then the potential here is for 16 recovery of DNA from about 100,000 vehicles 17 per year. 18 Just very quickly, one of the other 19 projects that we're involved in is 20 distraction burglaries. This is where 21 serial offenders work in pairs generally 22 distracting aged victims. These offenses 23 often result in violence. Although on one 24 hand, it's considered volume crime, on the 25 other, it's actually a very serious crime. 224 1 2 DNA in these cases was often much more 3 difficult to detect. The offenders are very 4 clever. They're very educated. They're 5 very forensically aware. As one policeman 6 said, "The offenders are better at their job 7 than the policemen are at theirs." 8 The success rate for that wasn't as 9 successful as the vehicle crime, but we have 10 had success with abandoned property, 11 property left by the offender at the scene, 12 even some visual marks after dusting; and 13 we're actually doing more project work at 14 the moment to expand on that. 15 We've also had limited experience but 16 some success with gun cartridge cases, 17 credit cards, and drug syringes, and, again, 18 those are products that we're going to 19 develop this year. 20 So, finally, what I think we really 21 want to stress, is this isn't just about new 22 technology. For us it was about placing 23 scientists with the forces to help the 24 forces, to raise understanding that this 25 process was just as important. 225 1 2 We're offering DNA awareness training 3 to officers of all levels in serious and 4 volume crime, and we firmly believe that the 5 future for us is about partnership, 6 partnership with police forces, basically, 7 together, using the matches more 8 effectively. Thank you very much. 9 (Applause.) 10 DR. BERGER: We have some time for 11 questions. Anyone? 12 SPEAKER: It seems to be that we're 13 moving towards a new era in forensics where 14 we're beginning to look at stain samples for 15 which it's not obvious up front whether its 16 having to do with the crime scene. 17 Traditionally, this blood, this semen 18 sample looks probative, something that the 19 investigator is able to recognize as 20 probative. The dangers are that criminals, 21 they, of course, they're smart. 22 My question is, in the UK, suppose you 23 find a blood stain that's in a location or 24 of a particular nature, et cetera, and pick 25 up ten different samples of DNA? 226 1 2 MR. WERRETT: A lot of the work we're 3 doing, a lot of the success is from 4 cigarette ends. It is possible to pick up 5 somebody else's cigarette and transport it 6 to the scene of the crime. 7 One of the things that we've got in 8 the UK from the police is intelligence 9 information, and we never take a case to 10 court on DNA levels. I think that's 11 foolhardy. 12 The intelligence officer has to go out 13 and build his case around that piece of 14 information. I think those kinds of 15 safeguards need to be built into that 16 approach that we've just shown you. 17 SPEAKER: I was intrigued by the 18 remark about elimination samples from the 19 police. 20 I think there might be much broader 21 view of the concept of DNA, just like 22 fingerprints, if, just like fingerprints, 23 law enforcement officials were volunteering 24 that DNA for the database. 25 I'd like to hear more about how that's 227 1 2 accomplished in the United Kingdom and how 3 well that works. 4 MR. WERRETT: I'll just backtrack on 5 that a little bit. We started with our own 6 staff, and as a member of the boards, we 7 started with the boards. Actually, none of 8 this came up positive. 9 Then we've done most of the DNA staff 10 who handled the evidence, and we're going on 11 a laboratory basis to do the rest of the 12 forensics of the staff. 13 From a base point of view, the Chief 14 Constable supported it and persuaded the 15 rest of the police community to support it. 16 I must say, so far we've received 17 about 3,000 samples, and we've got 70,000 to 18 go. I'm sure we'll get a good update. 19 SPEAKER: There's been no mention of 20 the immigration and child custody arena. 21 Is that something that's not under the 22 responsibility of these groups, or is that 23 handled separately? 24 MR. WERRETT: The UK has been a leader 25 in using DNA profiling in immigration coming 228 1 2 into the country. DNA has been used in 3 immigration and for paternity and child 4 support situations. 5 SPEAKER: What about taking the child 6 out of the country? 7 MR. WERRETT: Out of the country, I 8 don't know. 9 SPEAKER: Does the UK have the 10 Innocence Program where you're looking at 11 previously convicted offenders and actually 12 questioning whether they're the wrong 13 people? 14 MR. WERRETT: There's two parts of 15 that: the criminal part which is set up by 16 the government to look into cases where 17 there are mixtures, of prisoners 18 complaining, and they're going through all 19 those cases and relooking at the evidence 20 and seeing if they can be reanalyzed to 21 either confer or refuse; there's another 22 sort of branch to that, and the police and 23 the forensic service are carrying out 24 cold-case reviews where we're going through 25 previous cases carrying out DNA analysis 229 1 2 where it is deemed appropriate. 3 In the criminal case review, several 4 of the cases involved are where prisoners 5 have previously complained of conviction and 6 asked for their case to be reviewed. 7 It may have gone through the legalese 8 part of appeals not being allowed. 9 DR. BERGER: So to the Commission 10 rather than the court. 11 Any other questions? 12 Maybe someone on the panel would like 13 to comment on some of the other 14 presentations. 15 MR. COFFMAN: The only thing I'd like 16 to say is, I wish we got to the point where 17 we got 4,200 people per month. 18 DR. BERGER: Time for a break. 19 (Applause.) 20 (Break.) 21 PANEL IV: LEGISLATIVE SOLUTIONS 22 MR. GREENBERG: Good afternoon. My 23 name is Bob Greenberg. I am the Senior Vice 24 President of G&H International Services in 25 Washington DC. We support private 230 1 2 companies, not for profits, government 3 agencies and a range of institutions in that 4 area. 5 Several speakers stated today that in 6 order to take full advantage of DNA 7 technology, that it requires legislative 8 action in a number of areas. There are a 9 number of issues to be resolved in order to 10 attain the best use of DNA. There are also 11 a lot of issues with regard to development, 12 training processing, and improved 13 facilities. 14 The speakers on the panel today will 15 be addressing a broad range of these issues 16 and discussing the status of some of these 17 issues. 18 First, I'd like to address of Dr. Boyd 19 in which he cited the key to success is 20 making the best use of DNA. In his opening 21 remarks today, David Boyd, The Director of 22 the National Institute of Justice cited 23 progress being made in that area. 24 He talked about a number of programs. 25 He talked about the five-year DNA R&D 231 1 2 program, and he talked about the need for 3 funding in order to clear up the CODIS 4 backlog. 5 There is real progress being made. 6 You can see it in the federal 7 administration. I'm addressing exclusively 8 the federal end. Congress is listening, 9 Congress is interested, at least to some 10 extent. 11 The fact of DNA technology and what it 12 can bring has meant a lot to that area. It 13 is the cases that they're interested in, 14 and, in my view, and I think the view of 15 some other people here, there is an 16 opportunity to get some action on Capital 17 Hill from the administration in order to get 18 the increased resources that are required to 19 do the things we've been talking about. 20 But I want to give a word of caution 21 and a word of advice. Some people have 22 heard me say this. This is sort of my 23 schtick. The progress that got us this far 24 has been pretty hard fought, but in order to 25 make significant new progress, it's going to 232 1 2 be even harder fought. 3 And the reason is simple. While 4 Congress and government are interested in 5 DNA, it is also the case that Congress is 6 interested in a lot of things, and while DNA 7 might have been the issue of the day or the 8 issue of the year in 1999, Congress is now 9 concerning itself with other issues that 10 take its attention away from DNA and from 11 forensic science. 12 Look at counterterrorism. Look at 13 cybercrime. If you look at it, you can say 14 they are interested, they are intensely 15 interested, in cybercrime and 16 counterterrorism. 17 Looking to the point. The DNA R&D 18 program Dr. Boyd talked about this morning 19 is a significant advance. NIJ was very 20 pleased with the $5 million a year, and 21 we're looking at that as significant money. 22 The Forensic Laboratory Improvement 23 program is about $35 million and CODIS 24 backlog, I think they allocated $15 million. 25 That's a significant advance. 233 1 2 However, if you look at the 3 counterterrorism program, they're talking 4 cyberterrorism, the administration proposed 5 a $2 billion program to combat cybercrime, 6 $6 million for ten computer forensic 7 centers. There's a public crime kind of 8 center, which is $15 million for ten of 9 those. They're spending a lot of time and a 10 lot of money in these areas. 11 Earlier, I said that Congress was 12 interested, to some extent, in DNA and 13 forensic science. They're interested but 14 they're not interested enough. By the same 15 token, a lot of members of Congress, and 16 this I can tell you from experience, a lot 17 of members of Congress feel they've already 18 done their bit in that area. 19 They look at line legislation in which 20 they had crime lab improvement of forensic 21 science, money set aside. They look at the 22 monies that David Boyd talked about, and 23 they say, look, we've done our thing. 24 The other thing that Congress often 25 says, and is very frustrated about, is that 234 1 2 they often frequently will get visits from 3 people from the forensic science community 4 who will give them a little different 5 message with a little different emphasis. 6 The comment I've gotten is, who am I 7 supposed to believe, who am I supposed to 8 take the lead from? 9 In my view, the key to being able to 10 make the kind of progress that we're talking 11 about, that the Commissioner was talking 12 about, and to take advantage of the window 13 of opportunity, the key is for the forensic 14 science community, as a whole, those working 15 with DNA and the forensic science, to work 16 together and speak with one voice and 17 develop a common agenda; go to Congress with 18 that agenda, learn to work Congress because, 19 at least many people I've come across in 20 this community do not know how to work with 21 Congress. Speak with one voice to get us 22 together. 23 There are two efforts going on now to 24 contribute to that. One is the States 25 Coalition legislating for the National 235 1 2 Science Improvement Act, which would provide 3 significant new resources for forensic 4 science, and the other is a newly formed, 5 forming, forensic science consortium which 6 is made up of eight different organizations, 7 including the American Academy of Forensic 8 Scientists; ASCLD/LAB; the National 9 Association of Medical Examiners; the 10 National Centers for Forensic Science, that 11 organization is just coming together. It 12 will actually have its first meeting at the 13 FRNSI Conference. 14 The forensic science community needs 15 to come together with one voice to speak to 16 Congress about what the forensic science and 17 DNA communities need if they're going to be 18 able to do what they want to do more 19 efficiently and effectively. 20 As my schtick, I'm going to leave it 21 at that, and with that, I'd like to 22 introduce the first member of our panel. 23 Mark Dale was assigned to the police 24 in 1973. His interest in science prevailed 25 when a position became available in the New 236 1 2 York State Police Mid-Hudson Crime Lab in 3 1982. He progressed through the laboratory 4 administration and then became assistant 5 director to the lab system as a captain in 6 1996 to become the Director of the 7 Washington State Patrol Laboratory System in 8 Olympia, Washington. 9 He was lured back to the New York 10 State Police in 1997 and was reinstated as 11 an Inspector in charge of the New York State 12 Police Forensic Investigation Center and 13 Laboratory System. 14 Inspector Dale was the President of 15 the American Society of Crime Laboratory 16 Directors in 1994 and currently serves on 17 the New York State Commission on Forensic 18 Science. 19 He received a Bachelor's degree in 20 biology from Florida State University in 21 1970. Mark. 22 MR. DALE: Thank you, Bob. First, I'd 23 like to like to say that I've been slowly 24 deleting from my presentation so I would not 25 be redundant, but I think I still have a few 237 1 2 things left to say. 3 I've also said a few prayers to the 4 Microsoft god, hoping that my presentation 5 here works. Good afternoon. I usually get 6 a response from the State Police Academy, 7 but it's a good start. 8 First, I'm honored and it is, indeed, 9 a pleasure to stand before. Bob Greenberg, 10 Don Schellberg, and I discussed how to focus 11 our presentation in order to provide the 12 audience with the most significant material 13 in our short time period. 14 I'm going to provide you with a 15 snapshot of the NYSP DNA program from the 16 beginning, the present and a glimpse into 17 the future. 18 You can see a picture of Adam and Eve 19 on the screen, and what more appropriate 20 place to start discussing DNA. Now, if you 21 look at the picture real close, you can see 22 Eve has an apple in her left hand, and she's 23 trying to hide it. It's behind her a little 24 bit there. 25 She also as a serpent in her right 238 1 2 hand, and you can see Adam is kind of 3 leaning over in that direction; and you know 4 every time he makes a move for that apple, 5 the serpent is going to get him. And that's 6 really probably where this all started, with 7 Adam and Eve and the serpent. 8 Now, when did policies for bioevidence 9 start with the New York State Police. Let 10 me read you a few quotes from the archives. 11 And I quote: 12 "Two excellent publications have been 13 issued this year by the Citizen's Committee 14 on the Control of Crime in New York City. 15 Both would prove very interesting and useful 16 to the commanding officers of police units 17 in general and especially to those who are 18 interested in the statistical phases of the 19 crime problem. 20 The first of the two bulletin deals 21 with sex offenses in New York City. Besides 22 statutory definitions of sex crimes covered 23 by the report and excellent statistical 24 data, the bulletin deals with the problem of 25 mental deficiency in sex crimes reviewing a 239 1 2 number of cases of unusual interest. 3 The bulletin emphasizes the importance 4 of the Mayor's order that all persons 5 convicted of impairing the morals of 6 children or of sex crimes involving 7 perversion be rearrested," 8 Let me repeat that. 9 "be rearrested on their release from 10 prison and brought before a magistrate under 11 Section 81 of the mental hygiene law. The 12 recidivistic characteristics," 13 Let me repeat that. 14 "recidivistic characteristics of the 15 sex offenders are especially emphasized. 16 Reviewing the case history of rapes and 17 murders of three little girls; Einer 18 Sporrer, Paula Magagna of Brooklyn, and Joan 19 Kuleba of Richmond." 20 This is one of the earliest New York 21 State Police records or mentions of 22 recidivism and sexual offenses I could find. 23 Who was the mayor of New York City? Mayor 24 La Guardia. What was the date of the 25 citation? New York State Police BCI 240 1 2 Bulletin, Volume Three, Number Ten, October 3 1938. 4 Think about it. In 1938 and probably 5 earlier, we were concerned with recidivism 6 and actually mandating a psychiatric 7 examination of a sexual offender upon 8 release from prison. 9 The second citation starts as follows: 10 "A number of inquiries reached us as 11 to the attitude of the New York State Police 12 in relation to the taking of blood samples 13 for whatever purposes they may be. 14 State police officers, in the 15 performance of their duties, are under the 16 explicit orders of their superior officers." 17 They've always got to put that in. 18 "Relative to the issue under 19 consideration, the following is the order: 20 Subject: Human Blood as Evidence. 21 One, our laboratory has recently 22 received samples of human blood taken from," 23 And I emphasize this, 24 "living human beings for the purpose 25 of analysis to determine certain chemical 241 1 2 contents which might be present in such 3 blood; 4 Two, there are many conflicting 5 opinions on the subject of taking samples of 6 blood from living human beings, and the 7 procedure presents somewhat of a question, 8 the legal aspects must be determined at some 9 future date;" 10 Here we are. 11 "Three, blood chemistry is extremely 12 technical because of chemical changes which 13 take place in human blood by reason of the 14 time element between the taking of a sample 15 and its analysis;" 16 I thought that was very interesting. 17 "And Four, this subject is under 18 consideration until the legal and chemical 19 viewpoints are finally determined." 20 Taking blood from living human beings, 21 what a novel idea. What citation is this? 22 New York State BCI Bulletin, Volume Three, 23 Number 11, November 1938. 24 Now, let's move ahead about 60 years 25 later to 1993. This is the time when Dawn 242 1 2 Herkenham was counsel at DCJS and took an 3 interest in forensic science. Dawn began to 4 attend the New York Crime Laboratories 5 Advisory Committee meetings. NYCLAC is made 6 up of all New York crime laboratories with 7 representatives from district attorneys', 8 court, and the academic community. 9 Dawn soon learned forensics and began 10 to formulate the first DNA databank law for 11 New York State. Her work led to the passage 12 of Article 49B of the executive law that was 13 made up of four main areas. 14 The first was the mandate that all 15 public forensic laboratories in New York 16 State be accredited by ASCLD/LAB or either 17 ABFT. The second was the establishment of 18 the Commission of Forensic Science, the 19 third was the establishment of the DNA 20 Subcommittee, and the fourth was the 21 authority to draw blood from convicted 22 offenders. 23 The ASCLD/LAB accreditation program 24 was established in 1980 by the American 25 Society of Crime Laboratory Directors. This 243 1 2 program now has over 200 laboratories in the 3 United States, Canada, Australia, and the 4 Far East that can share standards of quality 5 for all types of forensic disciplines. 6 The program is done on a five-year 7 cycle that consists of 138 criteria. There 8 are 58 essential, 50 important, and 30 9 desirable criteria that consist of all the 10 administrative technical safety issues in a 11 forensic laboratory. 12 The toxicology laboratories also have 13 an alternative of participating in the 14 American Board of Forensic Toxicology 15 Accreditation program. 16 New York State can now proudly state 17 that all 15 forensic laboratories and 8 18 toxicology laboratories are now accredited 19 by either ASCLD/LAB or ABFT. 20 Specifically, New York City PD 21 Laboratory was recently accredited by 22 ASCLD/LAB and at the same time moved into a 23 new laboratory. One of these feats alone is 24 worthy of commendation. I, personally, 25 applaud the efforts of Inspector Pulaski, 244 1 2 Dr. Wilk, and Tim Dunphy on their commitment 3 and enthusiasm to get the job done. 4 How is the Commission on Forensic 5 Science put together? The New York State 6 Commission on Forensic Science is set up as 7 follows: The chair is the Director of 8 Criminal Justice Services, Katherine Lapp, 9 who oversees the Commission on Forensic 10 Science. 11 Operations of the DNA databank, the 12 DNA databank's technical operation and 13 sample analysis are performed by the New 14 York State Police Forensic Investigation 15 Center. 16 The operations of the DNA databank are 17 supervised by the DCJS Office of Forensic 18 Services under the new direction of Mr. John 19 Hicks. 20 What is the make-up of the Commission 21 on Forensic Science? As I mentioned before, 22 the chair is Katherine Lapp; One DCJS 23 recommended law enforcement agency 24 representative, which is my boss, 25 Superintendent, James McMahon; the 245 1 2 Commissioner of the Department of Health is 3 an Ex-officio, Antonia C. Novella; the chair 4 of NYCLAC, which is Dr. Robert Shaler; the 5 Director of Forensic Science for DCJS is 6 Mr. John Hicks; two DOH recommended 7 scientist, Morton K. Schwartz and Ann 8 Willey; and one DCJS recommended prosecutor, 9 William Fitzpatrick from Onondaga County. 10 The Defense recommends one public and 11 one private defense attorney. Who other 12 than Peter Nuefeld and Barry Scheck; two 13 members at large, one recommendation from 14 the Senate and one recommendation from the 15 Assembly, Ken Bruno, from the Rensselaer 16 County District Attorney's office and Vince 17 Crispino, the Director of the Suffolk County 18 Laboratory; one member recommended by the 19 Court of Appeals with attorney or judge 20 background in ethics and privacy issues, 21 Ivar Goldart. 22 The DNA Subcommittee, Chair appointed 23 by Director Lapp, Jack Ballantyne, who you 24 heard earlier today, and DOH recommends four 25 scientist, a molecular biologist, Thomas 246 1 2 Stows; lab standards, Lorraine Flaherty; and 3 a forensic scientist, Charles Hirsch, the 4 Medical Examiner for the City of New York. 5 DCJS recommends a population 6 geneticist, Ranajit Chakraborty; and a 7 forensic scientist, David Werrett, Forensic 8 Science Services. 9 Now, what are some specifics of the 10 1994 New York legislation. As was mentioned 11 earlier today there was 21 designated 12 offenses that resulted in approximately 13 3,000 samples a year. 14 We began collecting samples January 1, 15 1996. The State Police Forensic Center was 16 authorized to begin analysis of convicted 17 offender samples July 2nd, 1998. All 18 samples were analyzed with the old law by 19 November 1999, but then the law was 20 expanded. 21 Now, Dawn is back from her sabbatical 22 with the New York State Office of Child and 23 Family Services, the FBI Unit Chief in 24 charge of the CODIS and NIBIN programs. 25 Dawn worked hard with Dr. Barry 247 1 2 Duceman, the New York State Police Director 3 of Biological Sciences, Superintendent 4 McMahon, Director Lapp, and DCJS' Ken 5 Connolly to negotiate passage of the new 6 expanded DNA databank law. 7 The new law now includes over 60 8 percent of all felony convictions in New 9 York State. 60 percent of 50,000, 10 obviously, is approximately 30,000 offenses 11 annually. 12 The law also includes a retroactive 13 component for designated offenders in 14 custody on December 1st, 1999, with the 15 exception of controlled substances; changes 16 in the definition of sample from blood to 17 DNA sample; and adds an E felony for the 18 misuse of DNA databank. And most 19 significantly the law was accompanied by 20 substantial fiscal support. 21 Here is where the new samples come 22 from; Approximately, in the new pool, 23 approximately, 21,000 from the Department of 24 Corrections; none, obviously, from parole 25 yet; 50 from Office of Child and Family 248 1 2 Services; Sheriffs contribute about 2,000 3 samples; Upstate Probation, 3,000; New York 4 City Probation, 5,000; New York City DOCs, 5 2,000, for a total of 32,000 samples a year. 6 Now, the new retroactive pool, where 7 will those samples come from? DOCs, again, 8 68,000; Parole, 14,000; Office of Child and 9 Family Services, 300; Sheriffs, 2,000; 10 Upstate Probation, 7,500; New York City 11 Probation, 12,500; New York City DOCs, 500, 12 for a total of 105 samples in the 13 retroactive pool. 14 The fiscal impact of legislation is 15 significant. We were adamant that to be 16 successful, we needed a 30-day turnaround 17 time for all bioevidence in case work. 18 Staffing, $3 million; equipment, $2.2 19 million; consumables, $1 million; 20 contracting with an outside laboratory, $7.7 21 million for a total of $13.9 million. 22 What does the staffing component look 23 like? It's a total of 65 positions. 1 M5 24 Assistant Director of Biosciences; 8 Grade 25 25 supervisors of DNA; 7 forensic 249 1 2 scientists, Grade 20; 38 senior lab 3 technicians; 7 keyboard specialists, Grade 4 9; 1 Sergeant; 2 evidence clerks; 1 computer 5 programmer. 6 How are we doing on our hiring? We 7 designed a website and went on the net 8 December 1st, 1999, and I have to say, I was 9 astonished by at the response we received. 10 We received over 500 applications solely by 11 downloading an application over the net. 12 We've targeted 278 of those folks for 13 interviews. We've scheduled 245 interviews. 14 We've conducted 184 interviews. We have 127 15 backgrounds in progress, and 17 of the 65 16 positions are filled. Most of them are from 17 internal promotions at this time. 18 A sample update, and some of these 19 numbers you've heard. As I mentioned, we 20 were authorized to receive samples January 21 '96. We were authorized to analyze the 22 samples July 1998. We've received 43,000 23 samples since January of '96. We've 24 received 33,000 samples since December 1st, 25 1999. We've analyzed approximately 8,300 250 1 2 samples by April 1st, and they are in SDIS 3 and NDIS. We have uploaded approximately 552 4 forensic unknowns into SDIS, and we have, at 5 the time I did this a couple of days ago, we 6 33 high stringency matches; and they tell me 7 now, we have maybe close to 50 high 8 stringency matches. 9 Now, those numbers right there, I 10 think, are incredible. We're astonished at 11 that early success. If you think about a 12 ten percent high stringency match rate 13 against a forensic unknown that are bounced 14 against a database of 8,300, that's just 15 simply incredible. 16 Case work update for the first three 17 months of the year 2000 at the Forensic 18 Center in Albany. Our staff analyzed 189 19 bio cases, if you will, in three months. 20 There was 1,419 items that were 21 presumptively tested for blood and semen. 22 222 of those items were analyzed at the 13 23 STR loci and resulted in 23 matches, 4 24 exclusions, and 12 trials. 25 Those numbers, also, are a small 251 1 2 snapshot, I realize, but it's a very 3 interesting relationship where you get 4 approximately 200 cases, there's 1,400 items 5 analyzed from those about 200 cases; 220 6 items were analyzed for DNA, 23 matches and 7 4 exclusions. And the numbers are 8 constantly going up, obviously. 9 Our contract with Myriad Lab, how is 10 that working out? We've sent 100 QA 11 samples. They've analyzed those. 12 Obviously, those were samples in which we 13 knew the answer, and they passed that with 14 flying colors. 15 We've already sent them 3,000 16 convicted offender samples, which they're 17 working on now, and myself and Peter Wistart 18 are going to visit them in a few weeks to 19 review their technical review and security 20 measures that they have in place for our 21 samples. They've projected that they can do 22 about 3,000 a month, not the 4,200 of 23 Florida, but we're getting there. 24 Now, working with local industry to 25 develop bioevidence storage. We need to 252 1 2 apply more technology upstream at the crime 3 scene. We need to maximize bioevidence. We 4 do not want to lose bioevidence due to 5 degradation or contamination. 6 Crime scene technicians need our 7 support to provide them with equipment they 8 need to properly process a scene. We must 9 maximize potential of evidence that is at 10 every scene and protect our personnel 11 blood-borne pathogens also. 12 We can apply technology to reduce 13 contamination, reduce exposure to 14 blood-borne pathogens and biodegradation by 15 providing storage that includes cool, 40 16 degrees; dry, 15 percent humidity with total 17 air filtration using HEPA filters for all 18 input and exhaust air. 19 This, we have done with a local 20 manufacturer in Albany, New York. What you 21 see there is a first prototype. It's an 8 22 by 20 foot unit consisting of two 8 by 9 23 foot compartments. The two compartments are 24 separated by a mechanical room that houses 25 the HVAC and HEPA filters. 253 1 2 Legislation. A few of us old timers 3 in forensic science who can remember 4 anything comparable to what you see on this 5 slide. There have been many solicitations 6 from NIJ, OJP, and BJA over the years that 7 helped tremendously. 8 Individual states have also supported 9 forensic science with facilities, training 10 and hiring initiatives. Personally, our 11 laboratory system is benefitting from 12 tremendous support from Superintendent 13 McMahon, Director Lapp, and Governor Pataki. 14 I realize this is the exception, and 15 many laboratories and states need help to 16 support their forensic science programs. I 17 know the numbers are constantly changing and 18 will change again before any funds hit the 19 street, but forensics is now in the 20 political game; and we must respond as 21 professionals with a single voice and a 22 single purpose. Everyone must have the same 23 story, and we're going to stick to it. 24 What single plan will provide the 25 bedrock for continued short-term and 254 1 2 long-term improvement of forensic science in 3 the United States? What mechanism, if put 4 in place, would even be a legacy to provide 5 the structure and framework that will 6 deliver the best forensic science to the 7 criminal justice community? 8 What better way for NIJ to end their 9 annual DNA seminars than with a bold vision 10 for the future? I would like to offer one 11 plan that could act as a starting point for 12 discussion and a way to focus our priorities 13 for the anticipated federal funding of the 14 future. 15 Let's focus on the future and maximize 16 the benefits from unprecedented forensic 17 legislation. We don't needs to go back to 18 bubble diagrams and strategic planning. 19 We've done that, and we all know what need 20 to get the job done. 21 We all know that a quality assurance 22 program entails all aspects of a forensic 23 science program. It includes all criteria 24 of the ASCLD/LAB accreditation program and 25 should also include a marriage with the new 255 1 2 ISO 17025 guidelines. 3 I also believe the single most 4 problematic issue we have is training. 5 There are hundreds of police academies that 6 graduate thousands of police cadets ready 7 for the street. Why can't we have regional 8 forensic quality assurance centers that 9 specialize in the different disciplines of 10 forensic science. 11 We must evolve away from our 12 traditional method of mentor training. 13 Illinois, Virginia, California, and Florida 14 made an excellent start in this area. In 15 New York we're now forming relationships 16 with the State University of Albany and 17 Rensselear Polytechnic Institute to develop 18 forensic programs. 19 The national laboratories and NASA, 20 they must have a major role in this plan. 21 How can we broker and transfer this 22 technology into the field of forensic 23 science? 24 A national quality assurance program. 25 How can we put together a national program 256 1 2 that will address all aspects of quality 3 assurance, a program that will apply the 4 best technology to the best evidence, a 5 program that will be administered nationally 6 and provide a consensus of what needs to 7 done in the forensic community, a program 8 that will graduate scientists as case work 9 ready, a program that will lead the way with 10 research and development, a program that 11 will take advantage of the technology 12 available in our national laboratories, and 13 finally, a program that will provide 14 international recognition using ISO 17025 15 and ASCLD/LAB guidelines. 16 This is the model that I offer to you 17 today. As a starting point for our 18 discussion, let's consider the development 19 of a national quality assurance forensic 20 program that will take advantage of three 21 existing components, the accredited forensic 22 laboratory; the universities; and the 23 national laboratories. 24 These relationships are starting to 25 form and have provided several promising 257 1 2 programs. Let's build on the positives. 3 Let's develop quality assurance regional 4 sites using this three-part team. There's 5 plenty of work to go around, a national 6 office or entity can provide direction and 7 funding for the total program. A little bit 8 out of the box? Maybe, but I think it's 9 time to get out of the box. 10 Regional quality assurance sites can 11 be established where the teamwork of the 12 universities, national labs, and accredited 13 forensic labs have shown they can work 14 together. 15 Personally, I would like first dibs on 16 Florida and New York, so I can go to Florida 17 in the winter and stay in New York in the 18 summer. 19 Now, we're back at the beginning, and 20 I think this really is the beginning. The 21 New York State program is off to a great 22 start, and I have to mention a few names 23 here. 24 Largely, because of Dawn Herkenham, 25 and let's not forget Carl Solovka when he 258 1 2 was Director of Forensic Science in New York 3 State; Vince Crispino in Suffolk County with 4 Joe Galdi; Bob Shaler and Paul Gonsoroff, 5 New York City Office of the Medical 6 Examiner; Fred Drummon and Bob Adamo at 7 Westchester County; Barry Duceman and Peter 8 Wistort of the State Police Forensic Center; 9 Tim Rohrig and Cathy Carota at Onondaga 10 County; Nancy Scibetta at Monroe County; 11 Mike Dujanovich and John Simmich at Erie 12 County; Julie Pasquini; and now the addition 13 of John Hicks at DCJS, working with Barry 14 Brown and Steve Niezgoda at the FBI and all 15 other states programs will guarantee a 16 successful program. 17 And that was all one sentence. But 18 they need help. Let's put our heads 19 together and develop a national forensic 20 quality assurance program that will lead us 21 for years to come. 22 We've come a long way from 1938 when 23 the taking of blood from a "living human 24 being" was being questioned scientific and 25 legally. Hopefully, future legislation, 259 1 2 funding and national oversight can provide a 3 plan that will provide the criminal justice 4 community with the highest quality forensic 5 science. 6 I thank you for your time and hope 7 that this short presentation will lead to a 8 discussion here at the forensic conference 9 and other seminars to build a consensus, a 10 single vision, a single voice for Congress 11 and the state legislatures to act upon. 12 Thank you very much for this 13 opportunity to speak here today. 14 (Applause.) 15 MR. GREENBERG: Our next speaker, Jane 16 Siegel Greene, is the Executive Director of 17 the Innocence Project which currently 18 represents more than 200 inmates seeking 19 post-conviction release through DNA testing 20 at the at Cardozo School of Law. 21 The Innocence Project has been 22 responsible in whole or in part for 23 exonerating 40 clients. Ms. Greene was a 24 member of the Post-conviction Issues Working 25 Group for the National Commission for the 260 1 2 Future of DNA Evidence and helped to draft 3 the Department of Justice's recent report, 4 "Post-Conviction DNA Testing: 5 Recommendations for Handling Requests." 6 Ms. Greene was formerly a litigation 7 associate at the law firm of Winston & 8 Strawn. She received a BA from the 9 University of Pennsylvania in 1991 and a law 10 degree from University of Pennsylvania Law 11 School in 1995. Jane. 12 MS. GREENE: Hi. I'd like to thank 13 NIJ for inviting me to speak today, and, 14 fortunately, I have a very low-tech 15 presentation, so I don't have to worry about 16 any computer glitches. 17 But, as Bob said, I'm the Executive 18 Director of the Innocence Project, which is 19 a clinical program set up at Cardozo Law 20 School. We deal with DNA cases solely on a 21 post-conviction basis, so it's a fairly 22 limited mission, and all we do are cases 23 where there's evidence susceptible to DNA 24 testing. We search for the evidence, get 25 for DNA testing, and hopefully, if there's 261 1 2 and exclusion, we get the person exonerated. 3 And there have been, so far, 70 DNA 4 exonerations total; there have been 64 in 5 the United States and 6 in Canada. We're 6 actually about to get another one, 7 hopefully, in the next few days, somebody up 8 in Boston should be getting out of prison. 9 So it's pretty exciting, and the rate 10 of exonerations is actually increasing 11 exponentially now. In the first few years 12 of our existence, they came much fewer and 13 farther between, and now they happen at a 14 pretty rapid rate. 15 But we face several obstacles on the 16 path to a DNA exoneration. Two of the main 17 problems, and typically our cases take years 18 to work through our system, but the two main 19 problems we have are, one, that we can't 20 find the evidence, the biological evidence. 21 In about 70 percent of our cases, it's 22 been destroyed or lost, and then the 23 question of whether we can get access to it 24 is moot, of course, because there's just 25 nothing that we can do; and these people are 262 1 2 often destined to spend the rest of their 3 lives in prison and often they're facing the 4 death penalty. 5 The second main problem is, even if we 6 do find the evidence, we can't get access to 7 it. Typically, we would approach the 8 prosecutor after we find the evidence and 9 try to get their consent to release the 10 evidence for testing and thereby avoid 11 having to go to court, which, typically, 12 will take years. 13 But unfortunately, prosecutors, 14 frequently, won't agree to this, and then we 15 do have to go to court and litigate; and as 16 I said, often it takes year. 17 For example, we have a case in 18 Louisiana right now where we found the 19 evidence after a couple of years of 20 searching. We found the evidence in 1995. 21 We first filed in the state court in 1996. 22 We've been denied on every level in state 23 court. 24 We've gone to federal court now where 25 we have both a federal habeas petition 263 1 2 pending and a 1983 civil rights action 3 pending. I'm not sure of our chances of 4 success. The problem in that case is, the 5 evidence, there was not a great deal of it 6 to begin with, and we know, based on our 7 experience, that in Louisiana, because of 8 the high humidity and the way the evidence 9 is stored, that often there's a great deal 10 of degradation; and we're concerned that 11 even if we do fight and win in court and 12 we're allowed DNA testing, there won't be 13 anything left that's meaningful to test. 14 So it's very frustrating for us. 15 Both of these issues are addressed in 16 Senator Leahy's recent bill that he 17 introduced, which Chris Asplen mentioned 18 earlier this morning, called the Innocent 19 Protection Act, and this act is a 20 comprehensive piece of legislation that 21 would really address most of the problems in 22 post-conviction DNA issues. 23 First, it requires that evidence be 24 preserved while the prisoner is 25 incarcerated, and if the state plans to 264 1 2 destroy the evidence, it has to give ample 3 notice and an opportunity to have a hearing 4 on whether the evidence should be destroyed 5 or not. 6 We have terrible problems finding the 7 evidence, as I said. Often, either people 8 won't return our phone calls, or they say, 9 oh, sure, sure, we'll look, we'll look or 10 they say we looked, it's gone. And we say, 11 well, can you put this in writing so we know 12 it's been destroyed, and they won't put it 13 in writing; and we go to court to get them 14 to verify that it's destroyed, which is, of 15 course, a terrible drain on our resources 16 which are very limited and the court's 17 resources which are also limited. 18 And even in a place like New York 19 State, which obviously has a very strong 20 commitment, as you heard from several people 21 speaking today, strong commitment to the use 22 of DNA in all aspects of its power, even in 23 this state, we have problems that we can't 24 get people to help us look for the evidence, 25 or we can't find it and it's just gone. 265 1 2 So it's really crucial to have 3 legislation that requires states to preserve 4 evidence until the person is released from 5 prison, and there has to be uniformity of 6 preservation. Even right now, each locality 7 within a state has a different procedure for 8 preserving the evidence. So it also takes a 9 lot longer to go find it because there's no 10 one place to look. 11 The second, and most important part, 12 of the Leahy bill is that it would require 13 states to pass legislation that would 14 provide a meaningful opportunity to have 15 post-conviction DNA testing. 16 The leahy bill would condition federal 17 funding for the DNA databanks, for prison 18 construction, for crime lab construction on 19 the passage of such legislation, and the 20 standard used in Leahy bill is whether 21 there's a reasonable probability that the 22 DNA evidence would have resulted in a 23 different verdict at trial. 24 So this limits the number of cases 25 that would be suitable for the DNA testing. 266 1 2 Only, so far, two states have DNA statutes 3 or statutes allowing DNA testing, New York 4 and Illinois, and in those states there have 5 been 7 and 14 exonerations, respectively. 6 That's no coincidence. They have this 7 number of exonerations because there's 8 legislation in place that allows for 9 legitimate claim to heard. 10 Also Washington State has passed 11 similar legislation. Although that's very 12 limited. It limits the class of people that 13 can apply under the statute to those who 14 have been convicted with either a life 15 sentence or on death row. 16 So, clearly, there's a whole class of 17 people that need DNA testing. There is 18 biological evidence in their cases, and just 19 because they haven't had the requisite 20 sentence, they're not going to be able to 21 avail themselves of this statute, so that's 22 unfortunate. 23 And people often ask me, why do 24 prosecutors say no? Why don't they just let 25 you get the testing? There's no downside to 267 1 2 it. We tell everybody, if we have a client 3 and the client goes to testing and he's 4 included, we close the case. We don't 5 pursue it further. 6 We're looking for cases of actual 7 innocence. We're not trying to do anything 8 funky with the test results, and, in fact, 9 in almost 50 percent of our cases, the 10 client is, in fact, guilty. And it's always 11 disappointing because we've spent years 12 working on their cases, but it's just a 13 reality of the way these things work. So we 14 deal with it. 15 But there's no real principled reason 16 for denying access. The reasons most often 17 cited by prosecutors and courts are statute 18 of limitation grounds and the need for 19 judicial finality. And while these are 20 certain legitimate concerns, when measured 21 against a person's life, and sometimes, 22 literally their life, if they're on death 23 row, it certainly pales in comparison. 24 For example, we have a client who, 25 also another Louisiana case, where his name 268 1 2 is Clive Charles, and some of you may have 3 heard about him. He was recently released 4 from prison after 19 years in Angola Prison, 5 and he had been convicted for rape. 6 And he had been asking for DNA testing 7 for nine years, and it wasn't until the 8 Innocence Project got involved and we filed 9 a civil rights lawsuit and we were lucky 10 enough to be in front of a magistrate judge 11 who really took our case seriously, and she 12 said to us and to the prosecutor, "I want 13 you guys to get an agreement reached, and I 14 don't want to hear about it until you come 15 back with an agreement." 16 And we were able to work out a 17 protocol for testing, and Clive Charles was, 18 of course, excluded and ultimately 19 exonerated, but he lost nine additional 20 years of his life for no reason other than 21 the prosecutor's reluctance. And there was 22 no legal right for Clive to get the testing. 23 Therefore, the prosecutors weren't going to 24 do it. 25 We do find now with the number of 269 1 2 exonerations and with the public awareness 3 and appreciation for what's going on, we do 4 find the prosecutors more frequently will 5 consent to DNA testing, or if we go into 6 court, we are more frequently successful; 7 but it's still always a fight and it always 8 takes years, and these are precious years to 9 these people just sitting in prison. 10 The other argument that prosecutors, 11 in conjunction with these other arguments 12 why they're against allowing post-conviction 13 DNA testing, is that the flood gates will 14 open and they'll be bombarded with thousands 15 of people seeking DNA testing, and it will 16 cost the states billions of dollars. 17 These arguments are fallacious for 18 several reasons. First of all, there's only 19 a very small number of cases that actually 20 have DNA, biological evidence in the first 21 place, and the number of cases where, as I 22 said, it's not been destroyed is even a 23 smaller fraction of the cases. 24 We receive, at the Innocence Project, 25 we receive thousands of letters every year. 270 1 2 We probably accept maybe 10 to 15 cases each 3 year. So, as you can see, most of the cases 4 are never going to go anywhere. 5 And we have a rigorous screening 6 process, which we recommend to anybody 7 involved in these kinds of cases, to screen 8 out frivolous requests or requests where it 9 would just not be dispositive of innocence. 10 For example, if it's a gang rape case, 11 and there have been four assailants and the 12 victim was unclear as to how many people 13 ejaculated and who did what to her, we may 14 not take that case because just because we 15 don't find our guy's DNA doesn't mean he's 16 actually innocent. 17 So we really try to be very rigorous 18 in the cases that we take on because we 19 don't want to set bad precedents. We want 20 people to take our cases and realize that 21 there are these actually innocent people out 22 there. 23 Additionally, the standard, as I said, 24 in the Leahy bill where there's a reasonable 25 probability that the evidence would result 271 1 2 in a different verdict just necessarily 3 limits the cases. 4 Also, we pay, in most of our cases 5 right now, the way things stand, we pay for 6 the DNA testing. There's no cost to the 7 state. Sometimes the state would prefer to 8 have their own lab do the testing, which we 9 can work out a protocol that's amenable to 10 both of us, and that's fine. But, usually, 11 the client himself will bear the burden of 12 the costs. 13 In today's client where there's the 14 increased enthusiasm for using the death 15 penalty and where states and on the federal 16 level are continually speeding up the 17 process post-conviction in terms of death 18 penalty cases. There was, of course, 19 antiterrorism, and, in fact, the Death 20 Penalty Act passed several years ago now, 21 which severely limits the number of 22 petitions that a prisoner can bring and the 23 time period for when a person can bring it. 24 So the process is happening much 25 quicker, and if we don't have the right to 272 1 2 go back into court and get DNA testing, 3 there are going to be many more innocent 4 people executed. That's just an 5 inevitability. 6 And, in fact, there was a recent 7 gallop poll that showed that 92 percent of 8 the population at large is actually in favor 9 of DNA testing on a post-conviction basis 10 where the person didn't have an opportunity 11 to do so at trial. 12 And this has to be reconciled with 13 politicians and prosecutor zeal to get their 14 convictions and to be tough on crime, and 15 those things are all great, but they really 16 have to be administered and thought about in 17 a little bit more judicious and in fairer 18 manner. 19 And, of course, the flip side to 20 getting DNA exonerations is that in all of 21 our cases, we strongly advocate putting the 22 resulting DNA profile into the databanks, 23 and, in fact, in a few of our cases, we've 24 actually gotten a hit and found the true 25 perpetrator in that fashion. 273 1 2 And, of course, the mission of the 3 criminal justice system should be, and is 4 still, although it's often overlooked, to 5 get the true assailant, not just any 6 assailant; and we think that with passage of 7 the Leahy bill or similar state statutes, 8 this mission would be more fairly 9 accomplished. Thank you. 10 (Applause.) 11 MR. GREENBERG: We're obviously going 12 to go a little bit over because we want to 13 take some questions. The third speaker, Tim 14 Schellberg, is a partner in the governmental 15 affairs and law firm of Smith Alling Lane, 16 P.S. His firm has offices in Tacoma, 17 Washington, and Washington DC. 18 Outside the state of Washington, 19 Mr. Schellberg's focus is dedicated to 20 representing high-tech companies in need of 21 governmental affairs services. He 22 represents these clients in numerous local, 23 state, and federal government agencies. 24 One of Mr. Schellberg's most 25 significant clients is PE Biosystems, a DNA 274 1 2 equipment manufacturer based in Foster City, 3 California. While representing PE 4 Biosystems, he has developed a comprehensive 5 understanding of the forensic DNA debate 6 taking place in many state legislators. 7 His presentation will focus on the 8 forensic DNA legislation introduced during 9 the 2000 legislative sessions. He the will 10 discuss the outcomes, trends, and politics 11 of DNA legislation. 12 Mr. Schellberg received his 13 undergraduate degree from Washington State 14 University in 1988 and his law degree from 15 Seattle University in 1991. Tim. 16 MR. SCHELLBERG: Good afternoon. 17 Again, what I'm going to talk about is 18 basically the year 2000 legislation 19 throughout the country, and being that my 20 knowledge base is mostly with the DNA 21 expansion issue, that's where I'm going to 22 spend most of my time talking about the 23 bills themselves and the trends, and then 24 briefly talk about just some of the bills 25 dealing with post-conviction and the statute 275 1 2 of limitation issue. 3 I apologize in advance for those of 4 you who have already heard this 5 presentation. I know, looking around, that 6 there's a handful of you, and I have changed 7 it slightly, so, hopefully, it will keep 8 your interest. 9 We do represent a DNA equipment 10 manufacturer that deals with most of the 11 states in the country, and what they have us 12 do is basically track the legislative debate 13 around the country so they can keep tabs on 14 what's going on. 15 In addition, we serve as a resource to 16 various legislators that are introducing 17 bills and staff that want to see what are 18 the trends and what are the hot spots to 19 stay away from when they're introducing 20 these bills. 21 First, getting into, prior to looking 22 at the bills themselves in 2000, I think 23 it's always important to kind of remind 24 ourselves of what has been the evolution of 25 the state statutes around the country, and, 276 1 2 of course, we all started with the sex 3 offenses, moving down to the violent crimes, 4 into burglary. 5 Six states now have all felon laws. 6 We're going to see some in the misdemeanors, 7 and the next generations will be into the 8 arrestees, and, perhaps, even some of the 9 sweeps like Great Britain does. 10 Here's the map, of course, of all the 11 sex offender states. The states here in the 12 white, are the ones that do sex offenders 13 only; the ones in the pink shade are sex 14 offenders and murder only; and the ones in 15 the orange shade are sex offender murders 16 and all violent crimes. 17 Here are the 17 states that have 18 currently passed laws dealing with requiring 19 burglary, and, of course, here the six 20 states for all felons. Now, so far, there 21 are 17 states in the country here in the 22 2000 legislative sessions that have 23 introduced expansion bills, and here they 24 are. There may be a couple more prior to 25 the end of the legislative sessions. Most 277 1 2 sessions are wrapping up, although a handful 3 of them go throughout the year. 4 I'm going to quickly go through the 5 bills. It should just take a couple of 6 minutes. In Alaska, they wanted to add all 7 burglaries. This bill was defeated based on 8 policy grounds. The Legislature said, "We 9 currently have enough information about 10 individuals, and we don't want anymore." 11 Arizona, different result. This bill 12 was a significant bill because they were a 13 just a sex offender state, adds all violent 14 offenses and burglary. I think there might 15 have been two dissenting votes throughout 16 the legislative process, and the bill has 17 been signed by the Governor. 18 California, the only expansion bill 19 they've seen this year is Assembly Bill 267. 20 Failed in committee based on policy grounds 21 to expand all felonies. 22 Colorado has two bills that are 23 passing. The first bill, 1166, adds 24 burglary. They're currently a violent 25 offense and sex offender state. That bill 278 1 2 has passed both houses, but just needs to go 3 through a few procedural hoops. 4 Next bill deals with adding the people 5 on parole or probation that we've talked 6 about earlier today. Another interesting 7 clause in this bill, and this bill has 8 passed the legislature, it allows them to 9 take samples from all convicted felons if 10 they were convicted of a qualifying offense 11 at a previous time. So that's a very unique 12 clause to to get them into the database. 13 Connecticut is the most comprehensive 14 bill our nation has seen yet. It deals, 15 basically, with what the Commissioner was 16 talking about today, everybody arrested. 17 And it's it's modeled after the ISAP 18 association's resolution, the International 19 Association of Chiefs of Police. It has 20 experienced a very significant debate up 21 there. It is likely that it will not pass 22 this year in its current form, but, perhaps, 23 they'll end up with all felonies or 24 something just short of that. 25 Florida, the bill's on the Governor's 279 1 2 desk for all burglaries. Georgia has passed 3 an all felons bill. A very different 4 result, and we'll talk about this in a 5 moment. I don't believe there were any no 6 votes on this bill as it zipped through the 7 legislative process. 8 Hawaii had two bills grabbing violent 9 offenses and burglary. These bills have 10 failed, but not on policy grounds, strictly 11 on financial concerns. 12 Kentucky has a couple of bills that 13 have failed. 671 adds all the violent 14 offenses. We're looking into the reason why 15 this bill failed. 16 And another bill has failed. It was 17 trying to add some of the lower sex 18 offenses, even some misdemeanors, but that 19 bill was defeated. 20 Mississippi had an all felons bill 21 that was defeated, we're told on policy 22 grounds. New Jersey, a very large populated 23 state that is looking to add the violent 24 offenses. The main bill is Senate Bill 25 43839. It has passed the Senate and is 280 1 2 currently moving through the house. 3 Ohio, somewhat of a disappointment 4 because it's a larger state, and it doesn't 5 have the burglary or some of the other 6 violent offenses in its database. This bill 7 was moving forward, and this provision was 8 stricken from the bill, so it doesn't look 9 like Ohio's going to deal with this issue 10 this year. 11 Pennsylvania has a few bills that are 12 moving around. They haven't had hearings on 13 these bills this year. They were introduced 14 last year, but we're told that some of them 15 won't move forward. 16 Rhode Island introduced a bill as an 17 all felons bill, Senator McDonald up there, 18 but his leadership told him to tone down the 19 bill or it would go nowhere, so he's turned 20 it into a burglary bill, and Senate Bill 21 2184 will be the one to advance. 22 South Carolina has a very significant 23 bill. They were just a sex offender only 24 state, adds all the violent crimes, 25 burglary, and as far as I know, it's the 281 1 2 first state in the nation, because this bill 3 has passed, well, it needs to go through 4 concurrence and back to the governor, but it 5 will be the first state in the nation to 6 have misdemeanors on the database. And the 7 misdemeanors they chose were the stalking 8 offenses and those types of misdemeanors. 9 Washington State has an all felons 10 bill, 2732. Being from that neck of the 11 woods, I was able to attend that hearing 12 personally where I watched the far right and 13 the far left join hands, create a very 14 unusual alliance to defeat this legislation 15 saying it was too broad and brought too many 16 privacy concerns. 17 West Virginia rounded out the violent 18 offenses adding burglary and is the first 19 state in the nation, absent the all felon 20 states to add lower level property crimes. 21 Now, looking at these bills throughout 22 this year and, perhaps, looking at the past 23 couple of years, there are definitely some 24 trends that we notice. 25 First of all, the more populated 282 1 2 states are moving towards all felons, or at 3 least attempting to. Prior to this year, 4 you, basically, the only large populated 5 state you had do this was Virginia, but 6 we're seeing movement out of Florida, 7 California, Texas, New Jersey, so that is 8 definitely a trend in the making. 9 The next trend is that burglaries seem 10 to, obviously, be the baby steps that policy 11 makers, the lawmakers, around the country 12 are comfortable moving to when they move 13 outside of the violent offenses and into the 14 non-violent offenses. 15 State funding is definitely ly on the 16 rise. I don't have to remind you folks that 17 state legislatures around the countries have 18 negligently ignored funding DNA databasing. 19 But things are definitely starting to 20 change. New York, Governor Pataki, in his 21 budget, $11.8 million; Governor Grey Davis 22 in California, 5.5; Illinois has 2.3 for the 23 backlog; and I mentioned Florida, and I've 24 done this the last couple of presentations 25 because I just want to remind everyone I 283 1 2 speak to that this is a textbook way of how 3 to pass legislation, what Florida did. 4 What Florida did, is they went to the 5 Governor's office, and they said, we'd like 6 to add burglaries to our database, convinced 7 the Governor prior to the start of the 8 session to add the money in his budget 9 request to legislature, then they went and 10 got a legislator to introduce the bill, the 11 bill moved, the budget moved, and they both 12 passed during the same time; and that is a 13 perfect way to pass these expansion bills. 14 Unfortunately, that's not the way it 15 typically works in most states. Usually, a 16 legislator gets the idea on their own to 17 introduce the bill. It's too late to get 18 the money. The bill passes. There's an 19 unfunded mandate, and then you're trying to 20 catch up. 21 Another trend is that, obviously, 22 Congress is going to give you more money, we 23 hope, than they did last year. They were 24 blessed with $15 million, but this year, I 25 suspect, there's going to be quite a bit 284 1 2 more. 3 There's a slew of bills out there to 4 fund DNA databanking and things like that, 5 and Representative Gilman's bill, if you 6 compile all the money that he has 7 recommended in that bill over the next 8 couple of years, it reaches nearly $90 9 million. 10 We took a quote out a recent article 11 by Representative McCullum out of Florida, 12 who's the Crime Subcommittee Chair, and he's 13 quoted as saying, "This is definitely the 14 year that something big is going to happen 15 on DNA." So that's good for all of us. 16 Another trend is that we're starting 17 to see a merger of the expansion bills and 18 the post-conviction bills. Usually, these 19 bills are introduced separately in the 20 various state legislatures, but the state of 21 Arizona merged the two bills together and 22 passed it. The state of Georgia did the 23 same thing, and I expect we'll see much more 24 of it in the future. 25 However, there are definitely pros and 285 1 2 cons to this. The pros are that you, 3 basically, take all the various interest 4 groups that are attached to each bill, put 5 them together, and they create a united 6 front to push these bills through. 7 On the expansion side, you usually 8 have your prosecutors, your law enforcement 9 groups, your victims' groups; and on the 10 post-conviction side you usually have the 11 ACLU, the defense bar, and when you merge 12 them together, they can't oppose each other. 13 And that, sometimes, is a good thing. 14 However, the downside is that each 15 state's politics are sometimes different. 16 Perhaps, in one state you might have a bill 17 introduced by different parties, and when 18 you try to merge those bills, things happen. 19 So that is definitely a con that might come 20 when merging these bills. 21 While many DNA expansion bills have 22 passed, unfortunately, a majority of them 23 have failed, and I think that it's common, 24 and dealing with you folks and hearing you, 25 I think it's common for all of us to say, 286 1 2 oh, we're going to be in all felonies in a 3 couple of years anyway. 4 Well, I agree that eventually, you'll 5 probably end up at all felonies, perhaps, 6 more. But I think it's not a two-year 7 process. I think you're looking at more 8 like a ten-year process. 9 And the reason that these bills are 10 failing has to do with the intense level of 11 privacy and politics in the various policy 12 bodies in the country and how law 13 enforcement proposals, such as DNA 14 databasing are experiencing some resistance 15 from legislators. 16 This next slide kind of illustrates 17 what some of the black helicopter crowd 18 legislators view on legislation giving law 19 enforcement more power, and they see it as a 20 "Big Brother" at its best; and it's 21 something that the DNA issue's going to have 22 to deal with. 23 And it brings up many questions. How 24 do we explain the different results on the 25 all felonies bills? Why did the Georgia 287 1 2 bill zip through the legislature with hardly 3 a no vote? But yet we saw four states go 4 down on policy grounds. 5 And I used to think that the reason 6 for this, perhaps, had to do something with 7 the northern state/southern state, democrat/ 8 republican, whether it was a veteran sponsor 9 or not. 10 But what really what it is, it's 11 depending on each individual state and how 12 bombarded that state's been on policy 13 issues. And a state like California, I'm 14 saying this facetiously, but half of the 15 state's bills in that state deal with 16 privacy issues, and they're very cautious 17 about it. So it's building and something 18 that's going to effect us in the long run. 19 Next question is, what is the impact 20 of other non-forensic DNA legislation going 21 to be DNA database expansion? In 1999, 22 There were 150 bills dealing with DNA in the 23 state legislatures. In 2000, that number 24 has doubled. Most of those bills don't deal 25 with forensic DNA. They deal with other DNA 288 1 2 issues, such as telling insurance companies 3 that they can't use DNA to rate you. 4 They're telling employers that they can't 5 use DNA to screen you for jobs. 6 And what happens is, they're starting 7 to develop some bad feelings about DNA 8 because they're having to deal with these 9 privacy problems, and then when a good bill 10 comes in like expansion, sometimes the 11 legislatures are too upset about it; and 12 they'll ignore the expansion bill. 13 Will the power of advancing DNA 14 technology have a negative effect on 15 lawmakers? I believe it may. When some 16 lawmakers hear about law enforcement using 17 the advancing technology to pick up 18 cigarette butts of somebody that's not even 19 a suspect, but somebody they have a hunch 20 on, when they hear about that and they know 21 that that technology is readily available or 22 soon will be, they get nervous. 23 And then when the expansion bills come at 24 them, they start asking questions, and you 25 know how legislatures can be. 289 1 2 However, can privacy concerns be 3 addressed in the legislation? And prior to 4 answering this question, I think we need to 5 compare, and it was already done earlier 6 today, it to the AFIS systems, the finger 7 imaging databases. 8 Why is it that AFIS doesn't have any 9 problems? It's, basically, the same type of 10 thing. They take it, actually, for 11 everybody, not just convicted of a crime, 12 but everybody arrested. 13 But it doesn't seem like the ACLU 14 minds. It doesn't seem like the legislators 15 mind. How can we make DNA similar to that 16 in legislation, in giving the legislators 17 the comfort they need? 18 Well, we all know that the reason why 19 they are different and the reason why some 20 legislators have concerns is because DNA 21 provides you with much more information 22 about the individual as opposed to the 23 finger imaging. 24 So what can we do to make them the 25 same and to protect these privacy interests? 290 1 2 We could say things in the legislation that 3 says that the DNA sample must be kept within 4 the law enforcement family. We all know 5 that you're going to do that anyway, but if 6 you write it in a law, it gives these 7 legislators concerned about privacy 8 something to hold onto. 9 Another issue that Chris Asplen 10 brought up before was the issue of 11 destruction of evidence. I believe that is 12 what would make most legislators 13 comfortable. If you could take the 14 evidence, profile it, destroy it, so you 15 can't give that sample out to the nasty 16 insurance companies, that would make these 17 legislators comfortable. 18 I know there's huge issues involved 19 with that, and I'm glad to hear that it's 20 still on the plate of NIJ to keep evaluating 21 this issue. 22 Next, final, question is, is the 23 opportunity to expand forensic DNA 24 databasing going to close? If this is 25 possible, should forensic DNA advocates take 291 1 2 the statutory authority now, and worry about 3 the funding later. 4 I know, as many of you, being crime 5 lab directors, it makes you very nervous to 6 have a statutory authority on the books and 7 not to be doing it. However, you may want to 8 continue taking some alternatives. 9 For example, what Arizona did is, they 10 didn't have the money to roll out a full 11 bill this year, so they did it in stages. 12 And they said, contingent on legislative 13 funding, we will do burglary later, that 14 type of thing. 15 Because if you wait -- let me back up. 16 Obviously, whenever these bills are 17 introduced, you must advocate the funding 18 throughout the whole process. But let's say 19 at the end, leadership comes to the 20 advocates and says, we just don't have the 21 money this year. Do you just let the bill 22 die or do you take the authority contingent 23 on later funding. 24 And I would argue that you take the 25 authority contingent on legislative funding 292 1 2 later because we're going to see our 3 opportunity to expand these things close, I 4 believe, because of these privacy issues, 5 and if we don't get it all in place in the 6 next five years, you might experience 7 resistance down the road. 8 Quickly, on post-conviction DNA 9 testing, there are a number of events that 10 have propelled this issue before our 11 nations' legislatures, of course, the 12 National Commission's work; The Innocence 13 Project, which has done an outstanding job 14 of advocating this issue; Governor Ryan's 15 moratorium; and the US Senator Patrick 16 Leahy's bill; and the extensive media 17 coverage. 18 All of that, in one year, has caused 19 this; 17 state legislatures to introduce 20 this bill, and that is quite a phenomenal 21 response, when you compare it to other 22 activities. 23 Statute of limitations issues, which 24 as we heard earlier, was started up in 25 Milwaukee, and the result of that cool idea 293 1 2 that they had up there, nine states want to 3 make sure that that's okay; and they've 4 introduced statute of limitations extensions 5 for when you're dealing with DNA evidence. 6 I believe Connecticut's bill is 7 passed, Colorado's bill is passed, and it's 8 close in Minnesota, and Washington, of 9 course, had a little bill pass, but others 10 are still working it through. 11 Quickly on the missing persons, As DNA 12 technology advances, some legislators are 13 saying, hey, why don't we do this for 14 missing persons too. Why don't we create 15 these separate missing persons databases. 16 The FBI is doing this. 17 However, what I've noticed is that 18 some of these bills may be inconsistent with 19 developing FBI program, and they may want to 20 look at these bills and when these bills are 21 introduced, the FBI go out and make sure 22 it's consistent with sending the right 23 information to the FBI. 24 Finally, my last slide here is a "help 25 wanted sign." It says, "A nonprofit group 294 1 2 with no government advocacy restrictions or 3 corporate interest that will make the 4 expansion and funding of criminal DNA 5 databasing their primary mission." 6 Many individuals throughout this 7 country in various states have been 8 extremely active in advocating the expansion 9 issue. In New York, we heard from the 10 Commissioner and the Governor promoting this 11 in their own states. 12 In Arizona, somebody, Judge Reinstein 13 from the Commission, went out, and he's 14 pretty much the main reason why that bill 15 passed down there, a lot of individual 16 efforts. 17 But you don't have a collective group 18 capable of advocating to the various 19 legislatures, getting press releases out. 20 NIJ, they've got federal lobbying 21 restrictions. The National Commission can't 22 do it, very restricted on what they can and 23 can't do. 24 A corporate lobbyist, we can provide 25 information and, perhaps, meet with some of 295 1 2 the legislators we deal with, but we're 3 tarnished by having the corporate label, and 4 we really can't be the ones out front 5 advocating. 6 So what I believe is needed is some 7 nonprofit group, similar to the Innocence 8 Project, that's had that phenomenal success, 9 to focus on this issue and go out and do 10 press releases, make appearances at 11 hearings; and I make that a challenge to 12 anyone sitting in the audience today to kind 13 of lump onto this idea and see if there's 14 somewhere you can run with it. 15 In closing, I want to say that in 16 order for me to give my presentations and 17 the get the information I have, what it's 18 based on is weekly searches we do of all the 19 various state legislation, all the 20 government publications, and newspaper 21 articles dealing with forensic DNA. 22 And what our office does is we put it 23 together in a nice little summary, a 24 paragraph about each bill, a paragraph about 25 each newspaper article, and we mail it on to 296 1 2 our clients, PE Biosystem. They've 3 graciously allowed me to distribute that 4 report, that weekly summary to anyone who 5 wants it. 6 We currently have 200 people that get 7 a weekly e-mail with this summary attached. 8 And if you give me your business card with 9 your e-mail on it after the presentation 10 today, we will add you to that list and give 11 you that weekly e-mail. Thank you very 12 much. 13 (Applause.) 14 MR. GREENBERG: We have a little bit 15 of time. If people will stick around a 16 little bit, we'll take questions. 17 SPEAKER: Yeah, I'd like to ask your 18 opinion of the Oregon law, which gives an 19 explicit property interest in the DNA 20 information. 21 MR. SCHELLBERG: I'm not familiar with 22 that. I believe Oregon is a pretty limited 23 in the database they have, and it's probably 24 a good question for Dawn Herkenham since she 25 was probably involved in that. 297 1 2 SPEAKER: It's not a forensic DNA 3 issue. It's from the other genetic privacy 4 issues, but instead of just keeping it 5 privacy, they have included property in it. 6 You'll find it in other legislation. 7 MR. SCHELLBERG: That's the first I've 8 heard of it, but that definitely shows that 9 legislature's very concerned about DNA 10 being, the issue about the insurance and 11 employers and things like that. 12 I suspect if that was a recent 13 creation by that legislature, and it 14 probably was, that if they try to expand 15 their database to all felons, that some of 16 those legislators expand the database and 17 deal with some of those issues. 18 SPEAKER: On the limited sample that 19 you have so far in your program what would 20 you estimate to be the number of wrongly 21 incarcerated rapists in the U.S., could you 22 put a number on it? 23 MS. GREENE: I don't have that exact 24 number on those, but we use, we often 25 extrapolate from an FBI study that was done, 298 1 2 where they've done DNA testing every year 3 since 1989 of main suspects in rape cases, 4 and I think it's 25 percent of people that 5 you do at that stage are excluded and never 6 go to trial. 7 But based on that number, if you go 8 look at state conviction rates, which is 9 about a 62 percent conviction rate, out of 10 those numbers of people that would have gone 11 on to be convicted that should have been 12 excluded, you can tell you have thousands of 13 people, but it's not of innocent people in 14 prison. 15 But again, it's a pretty limited 16 number, you know, in general, in the 17 relative scheme of things. It's pretty 18 easily remediable as well. 19 SPEAKER: Can you put a number on it 20 based upon your own experience, not the 21 FBI's experience, having worked through "X" 22 number of cases. 23 MS. GREENE: Well, I mean, on our 24 cases, as I said, we only can take a few of 25 the cases of the thousands of people that 299 1 2 request our assistance just because there's 3 not DNA testing that would be appropriate to 4 test. 5 And out of the cases that we test, 6 about 40 to 50 percent are, in fact, guilty. 7 So, I mean, I can't really give a 8 general number for the whole prison 9 population, but there's clearly hundreds if 10 not thousands of innocent people out there. 11 I just can't get much more specific than 12 that, based on the numbers we have. 13 SPEAKER: Did I understand you 14 correctly that half the cases that you take, 15 would you say they are guilty, these are 16 people who have come to you, approached, you 17 said, I'm innocent, please get me this 18 testing, and they just don't understand the 19 technology, they don't understand that it 20 could prove them guilty? 21 MS. GREENE: Right. Well, that's a 22 good question, one that everybody always 23 asks. I mean, you wonder how they can so, 24 particularly where they actually pay for DNA 25 testing. 300 1 2 So if it's an average of $5000, you 3 would probably think that that would prevent 4 them from going forward with it, but I think 5 some of them: a. have actually convinced 6 themselves that they're actually innocent; 7 b. some of them don't really understand DNA 8 testing and the power of it and the accuracy 9 of it, so they think, oh, well they have 10 nothing to lose. They're in prison anyway, 11 maybe, by some fluke it will exclude them 12 and they'll get out; and some of them, it's 13 to their benefit in prison, the rapists and 14 particular if they've been involved, if it's 15 a sexual assault on a child, they're treated 16 really badly. 17 So it's to their benefit to say, I'm 18 innocent. The Innocence Project is working 19 on my case, and they know it will take us 20 years to actually get to the point where DNA 21 testing. So they can kind of string us 22 along for a long time. 23 SPEAKER: I think if I was in prison 24 and I was truly guilty, I would have nothing 25 to lose by contacting the Innocence Project 301 1 2 because my great hope is that, okay. They 3 found my semen. I'm guilty anyway. There's 4 a chance maybe some people go to for this at 5 some point is fact that it doesn't matter 6 that people know at some point. 7 So it's actually beneficial to me not 8 to lose. If I was in prison, I'd have 9 nothing to lose by contacting the Innocence 10 Project. 11 MS. GREENE: Right. I mean we try to 12 scare people off a little bit and say if you 13 have other post-conviction relief petitions 14 pending, it could hurt you. You could hurt 15 your chances for parole. 16 I don't know how accurate that is, but 17 we try to at least caution them to think 18 about it before they go through with the 19 testing, and sometimes at the last minute, 20 they'll say, okay, we really don't want to 21 do the testing. 22 SPEAKER: What effect do you think the 23 international practice will have on DNA 24 testing? 25 MR. SCHELLBERG: I'm sorry. 302 1 2 SPEAKER: What effect do you think the 3 international practice on DNA testing will 4 have on U.S. law making. 5 MR. SCHELLBERG: I think, for example, 6 what you're saying is, what is the impact of 7 Britain going to have on us when they're 8 already doing all their arrestees. 9 I think it does show that we're 10 stopping short of that, and it allows us to, 11 perhaps, convince the lawmakers that 12 somebody's doing more, so they should at 13 least give us half way. 14 But, then again, I was at the 15 Washington State meeting and the chair of 16 the committee, it was told to her that 17 Britain is solving 600 cases a week or 18 whatever they do, and they say, yeah, but 19 they collect DNA from you when you're born 20 and we don't do that in the United States, 21 Those types of perceptions. 22 I don't know. I don't really see them 23 having large impacts, other than the story 24 of results and the surveys of people that 25 support it by 80, 90 percent. Those 303 1 2 statistics would help, but the gut feel of 3 the privacy is something unique to our own 4 legislators around the country. 5 MR. GREENBERG: Any other questions? 6 Okay. Well, with that, I'd like to thank 7 our panel for their insights and innovative 8 suggestions. 9 (Applause.) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 304 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T E 3 STATE OF NEW YORK ) 4 : ss. 5 COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 6 7 I, JEAN VALARIE GAFA, a Notary Public 8 within and for the State of New York, do 9 hereby certify that the within is a true and 10 accurate transcript of the proceedings taken 11 on May 8, 2000. 12 I further certify that I am not 13 related to any of the parties to this action 14 by blood or marriage and that I am in no way 15 interested in the outcome of this matter. 16 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto 17 set my hand this 18th day of May, 2000. 18 19 20 _____________________ 21 JEAN VALARIE GAFA 22 23 24 25 305 1 2 The National Institute of Justice 3 U.S. Department of Justice, Presents 4 5 THE FIFTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE 6 ON THE FUTURE OF DNA 7 8 Implications for the Criminal Justice System 9 10 Co-Sponsored By New York State Division 11 of Criminal Justice Services 12 New York State Police 13 New York City Police Department 14 Northeastern Association of Forensic Scientists 15 Marriott East Side Hotel 16 New York, New York Stuyvesant Room 17 Tuesday, May 9, 2000 8:45 a.m. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Reported by: JEAN VALERIE GAFA 25 JOB NO. 104648 306 1 2 A P P E A R A N C E S 3 4 GEORGE F. SENSABAUGH Professor of Forensic Science 5 and Biomedical Sciences School of Public Health 6 University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, California 7 R.E. GAENSSLEN 8 Professor and Director of Graduate Studies Forensic Science Program 9 University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago, Illinois 10 DAVID A. ROWLEY 11 Professor of Chemistry and Forensic Sciences Chair 12 Department of Forensic Sciences The George Washington University 13 Washington, DC 14 VICTOR W. WEEDN Director of Biotechnology and Health Initiatives 15 Principal Research Scientist Carnegie Mellon University 16 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 17 KENNETH J. CONNOLLY Deputy Commissioner and Counsel 18 New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services 19 Albany, New York 20 KEITH COONROD Director 21 Toxicology and Drug Chemistry Services New York State Police Laboratory System 22 Albany, New York 23 24 25 307 1 2 TERRY W. FENGER Director 3 Forensic Science Program Chair 4 Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics 5 Marshall University School of Medicine Huntington, West Virginia 6 KIM HERD 7 Senior Attorney Program Manager 8 DNA Legal Assistance Unit American Prosecutors Research Institute 9 Alexandria, Virginia 10 WILLIAM J. TILSTONE Executive Director 11 National Forensic Science Technology Center Largo, Florida 12 DAVID G. BOYD 13 Deputy Director National Institute of Justice 14 U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 15 C. THOMAS CASKEY 16 Chief Operating Officer and President Cogen Biotech Ventures, Ltd. 17 Houston, Texas 18 JAMES R. CROW Professor-Emeritus 19 Department of Genetics University of Wisconsin at Madison 20 Madison, Wisconsin 21 HENRY A. ERLICH Director 22 Human Genetics Department Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. 23 Alameda, California 24 25 308 1 2 NORMAN A. GAHN Assistant District Attorney 3 Sexual Assault Unit Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office 4 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 5 KENNETH K. KIDD Professor 6 Department of Genetics and Psychiatry School of Medicine 7 Yale University New Haven, Connecticut 8 JOSHUA LEDERBERG 9 President-Emeritus Sackler Foundation Scholar 10 The Rockefeller University New York, New York 11 MARK BATZER 12 Associate Professor Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 13 and Biometry and Genetics Louisiana State University 14 New Orleans, Louisiana 15 MICHAEL HAMMER Associate Research Scientist 16 Division of Biotechnology University of Arizona 17 Tuscon, Arizona 18 TERRY MELTON President and Chief Executive Officer 19 Mitotyping Technologies State College, Pennsylvania 20 REBECCA REYNOLDS 21 Section Manager Human Identity Program 22 Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. Alameda, California 23 JOHN BUTLER 24 Research Chemist Biotechnology Division / DNA Technologies Group 25 National Institute of Standards and Technology 309 1 2 DAN EHRLICH Director 3 BioMEMS Laboratory Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research 4 Cambridge, Massachusetts 5 MARK W. PERLIN Chief Executive Officer 6 Cybergenetics Co. Pittsburg, Pennsylvania 7 RONALD SOSNOWSKI 8 Director of Molecular Biology and Assay Development Nanogen Inc. 9 San Diego, California 10 LISA FORMAN Deputy Director 11 Investigative and Forensic Sciences Division Office of Science and Technology 12 National Institute of Justice U.S. Department of Justice 13 Washington, DC 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 310 1 2 PANEL V: THE FUTURE OF EDUCATION IN THE FIELD 3 DR. SENSABAUGH: Good morning. My name 4 is George Sensabaugh, and I have the 5 pleasure of introducing the first session of 6 the morning. The topic of this session is 7 education and science. 8 The scene over the last decade has 9 seen a change in forensic science and the 10 way it is crafted, and quite a bit of that 11 can be attributed to the application and the 12 inference of the science. Let me just spell 13 out some of the ways in which the landscape 14 has changed in the last decade. 15 First off, forensic science has become 16 far more visible in years past, the public 17 knows who we are as a field. They have a 18 perception of who we are. Unfortunately, 19 some of that perception is changed and 20 shaped by what they see on television, both 21 the fictional form as well as real cases. 22 But more to the point, forensic 23 science has come under increased scrutiny 24 for the quality of its work product. 25 There's far more criticism. Everyone's mind 311 1 2 is on quality control in years past. The 3 quality of evidence created by DNA has 4 raised the quality bar in all other areas of 5 forensic science as well. 6 Secondly, the legal system greatly, as 7 a consequence of the Dalbert Decision but 8 also by the emergence of DNA technology, is 9 taking a new look at the scientific 10 underpinnings of the forensic evidence that 11 we use in forensic science. 12 These are some of the more apparent 13 changes in the landscape, but there are 14 somewhat more subtle ones as well. The 15 economics of criminal investigation have 16 changed. There's a new reemphasis on the 17 quality control, that is, how evidence is 18 recognized, collected and brought into the 19 laboratory. 20 There's more of an emphasis on the 21 collection of high-information yield 22 evidence, sometimes to the detriment of 23 other forms of evidence that have less 24 information. 25 It is worth noting that in the Becky 312 1 2 Sparkes presentation yesterday, she spoke of 3 the development of a scientific task force 4 that would go to scenes of crimes to 5 maximize the collection of evidence, the 6 value of evidence that was collected at 7 scene. 8 This is, incidentally, reminiscent for 9 me of my mentor, Paul Herm at Berkeley, who 10 advocated some 50 years ago that science 11 should be much more involved in the criminal 12 information process, in criminal 13 investigation. 14 Another aspect of this is that from 15 the emergence of the potential of databases, 16 forensic science is being thought of both as 17 an intelligence tool as well as an 18 investigative tool. This is forensic science 19 in the proactive mode rather than in a 20 reactive mode, and that is a new way of 21 thinking for the field. 22 Lab operations have changed in scope 23 and in scale. We now talk casually about 24 analyzing thousands or tens of thousands of 25 samples rather than the case-by-case 313 1 2 analysis that has been the mode for the last 3 40 or 50 years. 4 We talk of clinical lab models. Dave 5 Coffman spoke yesterday of submitting only 6 rape kits for analysis and ignoring the 7 general work-up of the case until after the 8 rape kit had been worked. This reflects, in 9 part, on the distribution of the use of 10 resources in the laboratory, a change in the 11 distribution between the scientific and the 12 technical roles within the laboratory. 13 There is a pressure for increased 14 specialization, and DNA has brought this to 15 a sharp relief, but the requirements for 16 specialized training are spreading 17 throughout the field. 18 The technology and knowledge base 19 within the field are expanding, and this is 20 putting at risk a generation of people who 21 were trained 10 and 20 years ago, who either 22 have to be retrained or elevated into 23 administrative positions, as often is the 24 case in government when we find we can't do 25 anything else with them. At least it 314 1 2 happens in our government. 3 So all of this reflects this major 4 change that has occurred to the landscape of 5 forensic science. So in this period of 6 change, we can ask, where is the next 7 generation of forensic scientists going to 8 come from? How will they be prepared to face 9 the challenges of tomorrow? This is where 10 the question of education comes in. 11 Historically, the professors have 12 turned to academia to provide the education 13 for its practitioners. This is what we, as 14 a group, up here are going to address today. 15 There are a series of questions which 16 we are going to focus on. No one individual 17 is going to focus on any or all of them 18 specifically, but, overall, we hope to touch 19 on all of them. 20 The set of questions are here: 21 1. What are the elements of core 22 curriculum in forensic science? 23 2. What is the balance in specialized 24 training, and what are the mechanisms for 25 achieving the balance? 315 1 2 3. What is the appropriate level for 3 education programs, undergraduate and 4 graduate both? 5 4. What is the proper scope of 6 forensic science; should it address, 7 particularly, the needs of crime 8 laboratories, or should it address more 9 broadly the diverse uses of science in the 10 legal system? 11 5. How do we transmit the core values 12 of the field, the ethics of the field? 13 6. How do we transmit the future 14 directions of the field? 15 7. What is the role of research; 16 should it be a part of the educational 17 curriculum, and what about the role of 18 Ph.D.? 19 8. How do we fund forensic science 20 education? 21 With these questions in mind, let me 22 introduce the panel. We have Dave Rowley 23 from George Washington University; Victor 24 Weedn from Carnegie Mellon University; and 25 R.E. Gaensslen, currently known of the 316 1 2 University of Illinois, Chicago. And Dave 3 will make the first presentation. 4 DR. ROWLEY: First of all, I want to 5 NIJ for inviting me to give this 6 presentation. It's always nice to stand up 7 and talk about things that you strongly 8 believe in. 9 What I'd like to try to do today is to 10 discuss what I think is the importance of 11 the education in the forensic science field; 12 to give some examples, specifically, the 13 example of our programs at George Washington 14 University; and then to finish off by giving 15 you sort of my thoughts and recommendations 16 about what needs to be done to promote 17 education in the field of forensic science. 18 I thought maybe I'd start out by 19 talking briefly about the knowledge base 20 that we all share. In my mind, the 21 underpinning of the knowledge base is the 22 education that you pursue from your 23 elementary school right through to Ph.d. 24 Probably, the most important course 25 that I took, and I was in school for many 317 1 2 years, my wife at one time called me a 3 professional student, was plane geometry in 4 high school. It was a course that taught me 5 how to think, how to solve problems. 6 It's a method that I use daily in the 7 things that I do, and I think, maybe if you 8 look back and decide on the course that you 9 think was the most important kind of thing 10 to the development research, it is a 11 critical component of knowledge. 12 What you try to do in research is 13 developing hypotheses, designing research 14 projects, carrying out the project, and 15 analyzing the material. 16 Training. I'd like to differentiate 17 between education and training. Yesterday, 18 I heard the word "training" used almost 19 exclusively. I can't remember hearing more 20 than once or twice during the time that 21 people talked about education. 22 They talked about training. Training, 23 to me is learning and using and doing very 24 well with a particular technique. You are 25 not interested in solving problems, 318 1 2 necessarily. You wanted to accomplish a 3 goal with a particular technique. And to 4 me, that's the major difference between 5 education and training. 6 Education. We just talked about the 7 fact that there are people in the 8 laboratories, people in the society, that 9 have a certain education, tools, and they 10 need to be upgraded. Continuing education 11 is clearly an important component, and that 12 can take many different forms. 13 That can take the form of going back 14 to school, getting another degree. It can 15 take the form of courses. It can be 16 training, if you have arrived at different 17 kinds. 18 The one bullet that I didn't put up is 19 life experiences. That is the clear heart 20 of the knowledge base that we all have, and 21 our interaction with our peers gives us a 22 great deal of knowledge with which to work. 23 I just want to make one comment, and 24 that is that I think we need to be careful 25 that we don't succumb to this topic of the 319 1 2 day, education. 3 Today we're going to teach one thing 4 because it's important today. Because it's 5 quite possible that by the time that you 6 finish your education, that particular topic 7 is no longer going to be the topic of the 8 day, and there's going to be something else 9 in its place, we need to have a broad 10 educational program. 11 In my opinion, education provides the 12 basis for life-long learning. When you talk 13 about education in the forensic sciences, 14 the three sort of general areas are, of 15 course, Undergraduate education, the 16 Master's program, and the Ph.D. 17 I'd like to comment on all three of 18 those. At the Undergraduate level, what 19 you're trying to do is provide the 20 individual with a well-rounded education, an 21 education in which the student knows what 22 learning is about, knows how to communicate 23 when they finish, and has a fundamental 24 understanding of his own particular arena. 25 At the Master's level, you're talking 320 1 2 about a discipline-oriented program or 3 multidiscipline program, programs that 4 combine chemistry, they combine physics into 5 a particular program. Even broader at the 6 Master's level. 7 Ph.D., again, this is a research 8 degree, a degree in which people get an 9 in-depth knowledge of the particular field 10 they're interested in. They learn how to 11 formulate hypotheses, carry out experiments, 12 and analyze the experiments, critically 13 analyze the experiments. 14 If you look at the fields of study for 15 forensic science, you can again talk about 16 the three areas. The Undergraduate degree, 17 in my mind should not be a degree in 18 forensic science. It should be a degree in 19 a discipline. 20 As I said, I was a chemist. So it 21 might be chemistry, but it could be any 22 other field. You could prepare for 23 forensic science as a person in religion or 24 philosophy. I would think that if you 25 pursued degrees of humanities, you would 321 1 2 want to have a strong science base, 3 chemistry, physics, biology. You would not 4 take only the discipline, but the science 5 base as well if you're not in the science. 6 The Master's degree, for me, is for 7 forensic science. It is an 8 interdisciplinary degree. It is not a 9 discipline-based degree at this time. 10 You would be taking courses in 11 forensic DNA, forensic chemistry, law, a 12 variety of different kinds of things at the 13 Master's level. 14 Then we go back to the Ph.D., back to 15 the discipline. I don't think at this point 16 that forensic science is ready for a Ph.D. 17 program. We are still looking at 18 discipline-oriented programs. We may look 19 at forensic science, but it is a 20 discipline-oriented program. 21 Let me give an example or two. At 22 George Washington University, we have two 23 programs in forensic science. In this is 24 one, our Master of Science in Forensic 25 Science, we have a second track, which is 322 1 2 not here, which is our Master of Forensic 3 Science, which is a general program which 4 provides an arena. 5 We have our Master of Science. Three 6 tracks requiring an Undergraduate degree in 7 biology, biological sciences, biochemistry. 8 We have our Forensic Chemistry program 9 and our Forensic Toxicology program. I'll 10 show you the curriculum for the Forensic 11 Molecular Biology. 12 If you look at this, two things sort 13 of jump out at you. It's interdisciplinary; 14 it's law, it's molecular biology. In 15 addition to the focus on DNA, we have the 16 criminal law component of it. 17 We have physical aspects. We feel 18 that people need to have a broad forensic 19 science background in addition to the 20 in-depth study of DNA. 21 You'll see a couple of other kinds of 22 things. There are internships that we 23 strongly encourage our students to do. 24 Research is required. This is a 25 thesis-oriented program. 323 1 2 In addition to this, we have a seminar 3 series at the University which provides the 4 opportunity for people to meet practitioners 5 in a variety of areas, not only DNA, but 6 forensic photography. We had the Chief 7 Inspector of Fairfax County, a variety of 8 programs for students. 9 So when they come out of the program, 10 they're not narrowly focussed in DNA, but 11 they have a wide experience in a variety of 12 different areas. Not only do our faculty 13 teach this, but our students observe DNA 14 profiling up in Rockville. 15 We have people on staff and people out 16 in the community working in the area 17 teaching the programs. We have internships 18 with a variety of different organizations: 19 The private production laboratories, I 20 guess, is a way to characterize that, Bode, 21 Fairfax Laboratory and these groups work 22 with us and provide paid internships; the 23 public, AFDIL, the FBI(Quantico) provide a 24 variety of different kinds of things, and 25 these internships typically are half-time, 324 1 2 so the student is working in these 3 laboratories. 4 Some of them are paid, some of them 5 not. Some of them carry tuition, some of 6 them don't. For those who aren't, we can go 7 to the administration and get money for them 8 for tuition. 9 We talked a little bit, one of the 10 things that they wanted us to say something 11 about was future research, and you already 12 heard about this, but some of the things 13 that we can do is not human research. 14 People at Bode are working very hard 15 on plant DNA, the characterization of 16 pollen, for example, can help identify the 17 location of a particular person, whether or 18 not they were at or likely to be at a crime 19 scene. 20 Remote sensing, we talked about. We 21 had the opportunity just recently to talk 22 with people at NASA and their teleforensic 23 program, and it looks like we'll be working 24 with them to try to develop something along 25 those lines. 325 1 2 Miniaturization, of course, the 3 lab-on-a-chip. That keeps coming up. 4 You'll hear that a lot. They've been 5 talking about a lab-on-a-chip for probably 6 seven or eight years. Some day it will come 7 to fruition. It's not there yet, but 8 hopefully. 9 Training. We talked about just 10 briefly before. Let me give some examples. 11 You may need to have people that are 12 competent in a particular piece of 13 equipment, an example, of course, being the 14 ABI 310, a common workhorse that many of the 15 laboratories use. 16 Learning how to use that is training. 17 Learning the basic principles of operation 18 and problem solving, I think, is more 19 education. There are two things you can do. 20 The same would be true, of course, for other 21 kinds of opportunities, and, of course, a 22 very important consideration is this whole 23 on-the-job training. You're going to be 24 learning as you go on many kinds of 25 different things. I learn every day. 326 1 2 Finally, what I'd like to do is hope 3 that I've convinced you that education is 4 critical, that it is a necessary component, 5 and in order to continue education to make 6 the forensic science programs as strong as 7 possible, I think there are some things that 8 need to be done. 9 I think there are sort of, in my mind, 10 three important and critical areas that need 11 attention, that there is no attention or 12 little attention to at this point for the 13 forensic science community. 14 Funding for graduate students. We 15 have, and I'm sure this is true of all the 16 programs I've talked about, in Michigan they 17 have some highly-qualified applications 18 they're turning away. We have, for our 19 Master of Science program, probably over a 20 hundred students that are qualified. 21 We take, for the Microbiology Program, 22 eight students. The reason we don't take 23 more is that we don't have the money for 24 them. We don't have space for them. We 25 don't have money for research. These are 327 1 2 the things that are limiting in forensic 3 science education at this point. I would 4 encourage the group to think carefully about 5 that. 6 It is critical that we have 7 well-educated people in forensic science, 8 and we're going to need to do that. We're 9 going to help do that by increasing the 10 funds for forensic science education. Thank 11 you very much. 12 DR. SENSABAUGH: Our next speaker will 13 be Bob Gaensslen from the University of 14 Chicago, Illinois. 15 DR. GAENSSLEN: Thank you, George. I'd 16 like to thank the Institute for inviting me 17 here today to talk about this subject. I've 18 been a forensic science educator all my 19 adult life. 20 I'd like to introduce to you a new 21 model which we have put together with the 22 Illinois State Police and suggest to you 23 that this model might be exportable. It 24 might be extrapolatable to other 25 jurisdictions and other places. My 328 1 2 colleagues in this work have been my friend, 3 Adam Negrusz, A. Karl Larsen, and Peter 4 Striupaitis. 5 Normally, we talk about how to educate 6 forensic scientists, how we've done it up to 7 now, and, typically, at a minimum, there's 8 pretty many people working in forensic labs 9 who have forensic science degrees. 10 More recently, say in the last 20 11 years or something like that, we've tended 12 to see people with either Undergraduate 13 hard-science degrees and Masters in Forensic 14 Science. That's pretty typical, and that's 15 the one we probably favor for, perhaps, not 16 altogether unselfish reasons. 17 You also can see people who have 18 Undergraduate degrees in Forensic Science, 19 sometimes who also go on to get Master's 20 degrees in Chemistry or Biochemistry or 21 things like that. 22 And lately, because of the DNA push, 23 people have come into the field with 24 Molecular Genetics and Microbiology. Those 25 people have been necessary to the 329 1 2 development of DNA programs. Technically, 3 they don't have any forensic science in 4 their educational background. 5 One of the global questions, as I go 6 along too, is why should we have forensic 7 science degree programs at all? Who the 8 hell cares? Why don't we let the lab 9 directors decide? Everybody can pick up 10 this stuff on-the-job, right? 11 I think most of us think that's not 12 right. If we're going to be a profession, 13 there has to be some underlying principles 14 to define our profession. As George was 15 saying, there are ethics issues. There are 16 approaches that we follow that are not the 17 same as those used by traditional 18 scientists, and if you want to pass that 19 along to another generation, education has 20 to play a role in that. 21 I'll just mention two of them that I 22 think are important. One, is our dealings 23 are strictly with the legal system, almost 24 exclusively. We don't deal with fellow 25 scientists. We deal with lawyers, sometimes 330 1 2 with citizens when we testify. 3 That's a different exercise in 4 education than writing articles, and it 5 requires some additional knowledge and 6 training and ways of thinking about things 7 that are not common in the sciences. 8 The second thing, is 9 individualization. We, uniquely among 10 scientists, are interested in 11 individualizing people and things. No other 12 chemist in the world cares about 13 individualizing things that are mostly 14 unseen. 15 I agree that basic science training 16 doesn't deal with problem solving, and as a 17 profession, we probably should encourage 18 education and training so that there will be 19 an education base for our profession that we 20 can pass on from one generation to the next. 21 This whole residency concept came 22 about by trying to relate educational 23 preparation and science degrees, basic 24 science. A Forensic science degree is a 25 knowledge and background in forensic 331 1 2 sciences, and that's about where we stop 3 most of the time. 4 The laboratories need both of those 5 things, but they also need, as I pointed 6 out, high laboratory skill levels and they 7 need high level skill levels in specialty 8 areas. 9 I think the way it shapes out is, the 10 first two are typically met by the education 11 most people get when they hit the job 12 market, but these last three are probably 13 not. 14 This program is in response to that 15 need which has been articulated in some 16 quarters by the lab directors. Most are 17 engaged in a lot of training. They hire 18 somebody -- Illinois is an extreme example 19 of this. Illinois training is one year and 20 can be as long as three years depending on 21 the specialty. There is an enormous need 22 for people that are trained up to case work 23 level at the point of hire. 24 That's what we're trying to do here. 25 We would like to incorporate their training 332 1 2 programs, which are acknowledged as being 3 good, and have academic components added 4 into them, into our existing curriculum. 5 This is a marriage, if you will, of 6 education and training. 7 Dave Rowley is absolutely right. 8 There is a complete difference between 9 education and training. They're not 10 identical. They shouldn't be seen at 11 identical. We think we can meet the 12 education roles of the university so we can 13 actually claim that a person has a Master's 14 level training but also incorporate lab 15 training in the same program. 16 This "Clinical" Model Concept 17 originated, actually, in an old issue of the 18 Journal of Forensic Sciences. Any way, the 19 usual concept of internship doesn't quite do 20 it, so let's look around us. 21 We're in a medical environment where 22 we are. What do these words mean? What do 23 people do to train themselves? We decided 24 to use this term "residency" to distinguish 25 it from internship, primarily, because the 333 1 2 internships are way too short and sometimes 3 they're not even structured properly. 4 The residency follows along, clinical 5 residency, where you have a basic level of 6 education. Now, you're really learning your 7 education, and in this case, it's forensic 8 science. It doesn't take a lot of change 9 for us in order to incorporate this into our 10 current curriculum. 11 You will find that people who believe 12 in core curricula at George Washington, 13 Michigan state, are all going to have 14 similar core programs. We all accept what 15 Criminalistics covers. So there will be a 16 course in each one of those things. 17 Basically, this is the underlying 18 philosophy: Drug ID / Toxicology and 19 Pattern Evidence. You've got to have a 20 research component, and people call this 21 different things, but they're all going to 22 be there in some form or another. 23 In order to integrate that training, 24 what we will do is take some of the common 25 elements the Illinois State Police presents 334 1 2 to their new employees and build that into 3 the criminalistics core, which is very easy 4 to do. 5 Electives. We simply can build in 6 specialized academic courses that will be 7 required or residency credits. There will 8 be about a credit a month for maintaining 9 the residency. 10 For students, they have to apply for 11 this, including taking a polygraph. We do 12 lose a fraction of our people to polygraph 13 when they're trying to get internships. 14 Admission to the program cannot be 15 guaranteed. Admission into the University 16 of Illinois doesn't guarantee you admission 17 to an internship, so it's an option. 18 You have to select, at least in 19 Illinois, you have to select a specialty, 20 and the way we conceptualized it, in any 21 specialty selected. We're going to let 22 students try to do this at the end of year 23 when they start to have an idea of what 24 their specialties are. 25 There's a huge time and effort 335 1 2 commitment that will have to be met, and 3 finally, you can fail, you cannot make it 4 through residency. Success is not 5 guaranteed by admission. 6 Just to give you a quick idea of the 7 Illinois State Police Forensic Program, the 8 components of their training program are, 9 number one, academic. There's a lot of 10 classroom work, there's a lot of testing. 11 There's test you must pass, practical 12 laboratory work. 13 Then at the end of the supervised case 14 work, this is where you do case work in one 15 to three years, as I said depending on the 16 state. It's highly structured. It's very 17 formal. 18 They put a lot of resources into it. 19 It's performance and outcome based, tailored 20 to a particular area, as I said. It is 21 internationally recognized for its 22 excellence. They have to just get their 23 training. 24 Illinois has trouble retaining people. 25 They come to get the training, they put the 336 1 2 time back in, and they leave. It is easily 3 integrated into a formal education program 4 such as ours. 5 In terms of the academic program, we 6 will take some of their academic stuff and 7 put it in our core. And then the laboratory 8 training skills part. The supervised case 9 work will not be an included in the 10 residency program. 11 The University M.S. program in 12 Forensic Science is a two-year deal which, 13 is not too much in variance with what we do 14 right now. The way we will shorten what is 15 otherwise a longer training program on their 16 part is simply by incorporating some of this 17 academic material and training into the 18 University's program and eight months to a 19 full year depending on the specialty area 20 for the practical laboratory program, and 21 that would be done as soon as someone is 22 hired, it seems to us. 23 For the University, obviously, we're 24 better integrated to the operational 25 laboratory needs. It's better for students 337 1 2 who go for an interview to say, I'm trained 3 in trace DNA and molecular whatever it is. 4 And, of course, it's designed in such a way 5 that other laboratories and universities 6 could use it as a model. 7 For operational laboratories, they 8 have a chance to select residents from a 9 pool of highly qualified and geographically 10 diverse students that we can provide to the 11 national application pool of something like 12 a hundred people every fall, and all very 13 good students. 14 They get a prescreened pool. They've 15 already been polygraphed and we've trained 16 them. It would be a good thing for the 17 scientists. This is the kicker: They get 18 free trainees. Their stake in it 19 economically is, they didn't have to pay the 20 trainee. We've written this up in ASCLD 21 News, Spring 2000 for those who may be 22 interested in reading more about it. 23 Back to the global questions for a 24 moment to try to relate this idea to those 25 questions. Do we need forensic science 338 1 2 programs? My answer is, yes, we do. We 3 would favor a hard science Master's degree. 4 We love chemistry. Biology is acceptable. 5 We do believe in core curriculum 6 elements. If we're going to be a 7 profession, there's a basic quality of 8 knowledge that we should convey to everyone. 9 The Illinois State Police accept this. Even 10 though they're very specialty oriented, they 11 do accept it. 12 And I think that's true, if only, and 13 I would go beyond this, if only because they 14 may some day be supervised, and they may 15 have to supervise people who have to do 16 other things and we may reach that. 17 Not every case is still a DNA case. 18 So the pattern evidence and DNA evidence are 19 still going to continue to be necessary. 20 The integration of education versus 21 training. We are going to continue to do an 22 M.S. Degree for people, broader scope 23 training, even training cops to try to 24 understand how to work scenes and how to do 25 forensic science. That's very important. 339 1 2 Probably the single thing that's 3 missing is lab scene communications and lab 4 scene relationships. We are addressing them 5 and it's going to take time. 6 This program does in a way transmit 7 the core values to a new generation, 8 something that I deeply believe in. 9 Research continues to play a big role. 10 I would probably argue that we would 11 not expect a lab person to do a reasonable 12 validation study that would not even be able 13 to be considered research. 14 How can forensic science education be 15 funded; the key question. Right now we fund 16 it from our own monies. Each university 17 program does that. We're Master's programs 18 for the most part. 19 I would agree with Dave that there's 20 no room here for a Ph.D. in forensic science 21 because forensic science is a discipline. 22 With all the Ph.D. programs on our campus, 23 about 57 of them to try to support these 24 grad students. 25 We do succeed in getting money, but 340 1 2 not every year. We can support four to 3 five, so it doesn't need to be a problem. 4 The last thought, or let's say second 5 to last thought. One word they didn't put a 6 bullet for, distance in the classroom. In a 7 way, we're uniquely positioned, I suppose, 8 within our system to provide this kind of 9 education. 10 My answer is sometimes to this 11 question, it depends on what you're doing. 12 We haven't figured out how to do laboratory 13 instruction by distance. There are some 14 things that don't seem to work very well. 15 Court testimony training doesn't seem to 16 work very well by videoconference. It 17 requires you to be there in person. 18 The last thought which I didn't put a 19 bullet point for is, lately we've been 20 getting these wonderful student 21 applications, and they all want to do 22 research and they all want Ph.D.s. 23 With all the assurance and quality 24 control being as stringent as it's become, 25 are we going to be able to keep these kids' 341 1 2 attention simply because the lab work is too 3 drudgy, because you have to follow the 4 protocol instructions. 5 We need to figure out how to keep kids 6 interested, how to keep them in this field. 7 Thank you, I appreciate that. 8 DR. SENSABAUGH: Thank you, Bob. Part 9 of my role as moderator is to provide 30 10 seconds or so of talk while they get the 11 next computer lined up. 12 Our next speaker is Victor Weedn who 13 is at Carnegie Mellon. 14 DR. WEEDN: I too am very honored to 15 be here today to tell you about something I 16 am emotional about. I am charged up about 17 the idea of education in the forensic 18 sciences. When I say education, I am not 19 talking about the preemployment foundation, 20 the degree that you need to go and get a 21 job, but really about the concept that 22 education provides a concept, a meaningful 23 conceptual frame work as opposed to 24 competence training, something that has been 25 echoed by three of the speakers before me. 342 1 2 Education and giving this 3 understanding is important to forensic 4 science and the forensic science community. 5 It allows one to troubleshoot when one 6 encounters problems, particularly, when our 7 evidence comes from the plethora of 8 situations it comes from, from any 9 environment it's obtained, from this or 10 that. It's different types of evidence, when 11 we're certainly confronted with nonstandard 12 evidence to test. 13 It also provides us with a changing 14 environment, an exposure to what's coming 15 down the field. So you train people to look 16 down to what's the next step. Also, there's 17 a way of thinking here so that you use this 18 life-long learning experience, so that 19 you're in the process of watching for that 20 next step. 21 Lastly, is the ability to give 22 effective testimony. If you no more than 23 know how to push buttons, I don't think you 24 can effectively testify. This requires 25 understanding. 343 1 2 Education also teaches one how to 3 think. For instance, in medical school, I 4 might learn how to think like a doctor. If 5 I go to law school, I might think like a 6 lawyer -- Although some people wouldn't 7 think that's a necessarily good thing. 8 So, as we relate it to forensic 9 science, it allows us to scientifically 10 approach a problem. But also, and I think 11 it should be recognized, are these last 12 things. It allows us to put into approach 13 the case work. It is what is the relevant 14 evidence. 15 What are the questions that need to be 16 answered by the district attorney? Are we 17 answering those? I think there is a more 18 wholistic approach that cannot only come 19 from a good education in forensic science. 20 Education also confers a certain 21 amount of credibility to the jury. Of 22 course, it's important when you're on a 23 witness stand. It's important to say, I've 24 had the following educational credentials. 25 It's important to public to know that the 344 1 2 forensic science community is educated so 3 we're credible. 4 Bottom line, and I think this is a bit 5 harsh, but I want to say professionals are 6 educated and technicians are trained. We 7 use the word "trained" as opposed to 8 education. 9 In preparing for this speech, the one 10 thing that I read was in a book called "The 11 Authority of Experts," and it had a whole 12 chapter on the early learned professions and 13 it specifically talked about Connecticut and 14 Massachusetts and the development and the 15 rise of the profession of medicine. 16 It turns out, at the start of this 17 nation, the clergy was well organized, and 18 to become a member of the clergy, you had to 19 have a college degree. Everybody respected 20 the clergy. It was a very well respected 21 profession from the get-go of our nation. 22 Lawyers, they came along a little 23 later, but from the get-go, they required at 24 least a college degree, and they were a 25 respected group (not always admired, but 345 1 2 respected.) 3 Physicians. I was surprised to learn 4 that at the beginning of the founding of 5 this country that physicians were largely 6 considered charlatans. They were out there 7 for money. Those people who were practicing 8 the trade were also practicing other things 9 because they really couldn't support 10 themselves. 11 It was around the 18th century that 12 physicians began to align themselves with 13 universities and to say that you needed an 14 educational background. This was a very 15 important concept. 16 The physicians that were present, and 17 there was first about a half dozen in 18 Massachusetts, something less in 19 Connecticut, during the very early years of 20 the 1700s, and those people came from 21 Europe, they were educated in the European 22 tradition, but they applied it in America. 23 What they specifically resented was a 24 journeyman background to ply their trade. 25 They said, we are a scientific discipline, 346 1 2 and we're grounded in education and the 3 scientific approach, and with the rise of 4 that as a model for the practice of the 5 physique, medicine began to be a credible 6 profession within our community. 7 I think that's an important historical 8 background because I think there are 9 implications. The evolution of the M.D. 10 today, and I do this to point out a 11 comparison, I'm not advocating that this 12 should be the model necessarily in forensic 13 science, but to be a physician today, you 14 need four years of undergraduate background 15 scientific knowledge with a core curricula 16 among that undergraduate program to apply to 17 medical school. 18 Then there's four years of medical 19 school. Then you're licensed. There is a 20 licensing exam. Then there's a pathology 21 residency, if you go into forensic 22 pathology, that's five years. Then you have 23 a specialty year, after those basic five 24 years of forensics, so that would really be 25 a sixth. 347 1 2 And then you're board certified, not 3 only in pathology, but if you want to take a 4 subspecialty exam in forensic pathology. 5 So there's a whole series of 6 education, training, and exams that this 7 profession has evolved to. The legal 8 profession, really, is not that much 9 different with an undergraduate, a graduate 10 school, some informal training, and 11 licensure examinations. 12 We also have the advantage of being a 13 scientific discipline, to the extent we, in 14 fact, are a scientific discipline, and I 15 think that confers itself on this 16 credibility because science is, after all, a 17 quest for a truth. 18 We understand this to be a search for 19 deeper understandings of what is truly 20 happening, and it involves experimental 21 verification, not just abstract assertion 22 out there, but the science says we have to 23 test these hypotheses. Of course, it's only 24 true if it's not a sham. 25 What do laboratory directors want? I 348 1 2 think there's a mismatch here. When I was a 3 laboratory director, I asked other 4 laboratory directors, what did they look for 5 in this theme. 6 And, generally, they said, "Right now, 7 I have a hole here and I need to plug it. 8 I've got all these cases, and right now I 9 need someone to step in and do that job. 10 I've always felt that that was a 11 short-sighted answer. Certainly, it would 12 satisfy the immediate true need. 13 But that's not what I looked for. I 14 looked for someone who had a broad 15 education, who could, for the longer term, 16 better fulfill my requirements. 17 Although, I recognized I needed to do 18 some on-the-job training to tell them how, 19 in my laboratory, we mechanistically assured 20 quality and we pressed these right buttons. 21 I'll point out that this book 22 published by NIJ just last year talking 23 about a review of status and needs, has a 24 whole chapter devoted to training and 25 nothing devoted to education, and I think 349 1 2 this speaks to the general problem we have 3 in forensic science. 4 I also want to comment about the 5 forensic science academic communities 6 because, outside of the teaching of the 7 students and the professionals in the field, 8 there is true value in having the academia 9 itself. 10 First off, it's from that academia 11 that you get most of your scientific 12 underpinnings of the disciplines, and I 13 don't believe that any one or two labs can 14 do that entirely. 15 What the scientific community needs is 16 a plethora of people all working at 17 scientific issues, and together they come up 18 with a consensus that builds a foundation 19 that's understandable and credible to the 20 public at large and to other sciences. 21 I believe we need a forensic science 22 expert pool. The typical attorney defense 23 expert will go to a university because 24 they're the experts, right? And they'll go 25 to that biologist or chemist, but if they 350 1 2 haven't had any exposure to forensics, then 3 guess what, we have a problem. 4 We need a neutral and objective third 5 party. Who can you go to? We can't go to 6 the laboratories themselves. That's the fox 7 guarding the chicken house. We need a 8 neutral objective third party that knows 9 something about what we do in forensic 10 science. 11 This group also produces a literature 12 that we refer to, and I think that's 13 important. It truly has to do with the 14 credibility of the forensic sciences. 15 Then what is the health of our current 16 forensic science programs today? I don't 17 want to use the word "abysmal," but it isn't 18 good. We have a small community. Most 19 programs are one or two deep. One or two 20 You're expecting a professor to be an 21 expert in ballistics, in toxicology, in 22 chemistry, in molecular biology. We're 23 fooling ourselves. No wonder there is some 24 credibility gap here. We need enough 25 forensic faculty, or at least four or five, 351 1 2 to cover the bases in each of those 3 programs. 4 Our current situation is that most of 5 that faculty really were hired during the 6 LAAA years, and most of the forensic science 7 professors in our nation today are very near 8 to retirement; and in most cases, but not 9 all, there's nobody to backfill. 10 I feel like we're standing on a 11 precipice here, and we're about to go over a 12 cliff because this is a community that has 13 not been supported, and they're going to 14 retire and we're going to see many good 15 programs close. 16 A real changing environment, 17 nonexistent infrastructure. This has 18 largely meant that we now do not have, in 19 many programs, many programs do not have 20 laboratory-based training. 21 Let's get real here. This is science, 22 and to say that these people graduate with a 23 degree without laboratory training, I have a 24 problem with that. No wonder that some of 25 our academic peers perceive a problem in the 352 1 2 forensic sciences. 3 First, it's just too applied. It's 4 applied science, not basic science. Two, 5 they feel that there's an inadequate 6 research base. Therefore, it's only the 7 fringe that go into it. Now, I don't 8 believe that, but I tell you, many of my 9 colleagues do. 10 What's needed is an adequate grant 11 support for basic research because that, 12 fundamentally, will end up supporting the 13 academic community, and, particularly, it 14 does so in a winnowing process, the good 15 survive, the poor don't. 16 What is the grant support now? Well, 17 I'll just mention that NIJ over the last 18 couple has had about $5 million research, 19 almost all of it DNA, almost all of it not 20 going to the forensic science academic 21 community. So what's left to support this 22 academic community? No wonder we have 23 problems. 24 I've been dealing with the Dean of the 25 Medical School in Pittsburg, and he's going 353 1 2 around saying a typical start-up package is 3 about a million dollars for every research 4 that he brings into the University. These 5 are basic research start-up packages. 6 Clearly, could be much higher. In 7 fact, many would say this is a low dollar 8 figure, but a million dollars a researcher, 9 just to bring them in, just to get them 10 started. Let's say all that $5 million were 11 targeted. We're talking five people. It's 12 not what we're looking for. 13 In my own case, now, I'm not doing 14 forensic science research, and I consider my 15 situation to be a little atypical, but not 16 all that much. I need to be 100 percent 17 grant-supported within three years. That's 18 it or they'll just say, good-bye. That is 19 my quest, and within these first six months, 20 I've submitted for $12 million here, with 21 other people, that's several times the NIJ 22 budget for research for the whole nation. 23 We have a problem here folks, in my view. 24 Then forensic science has no place to 25 apply for infrastructural support. You can 354 1 2 apply for research, but unless you get 3 political and apply for legislation you 4 won't get anything. As I mentioned before, 5 many of the programs are not lab-based. 6 Educational degrees. I had several 7 things to say, but they've been largely 8 said, and I think I'm running out of time. 9 Master's of Forensic Science. Why 10 should you do that as opposed to biology or 11 chemistry, et cetera? I think there's a 12 place for the other, but there is clearly, 13 in my view, a need for a Master's degree of 14 Forensic Sciences that is, in fact, useful 15 to our community, our profession. 16 There is a preparation issue for the 17 American Board of Criminalist's exam. I 18 think this exam is becoming more important. 19 It certainly hasn't arrived with full force, 20 but I'll point out that the other learned 21 professions need certifying examinations. 22 This is a part of credibility issue. And to 23 do this, I don't think we want just DNA or 24 forensics, but I believe that there should 25 have a general knowledge exam at the 355 1 2 beginning. 3 Preparation for lab directorship. If 4 somebody is only taught in chemistry or only 5 in biology, how are they going to be well- 6 heeled to then migrate up to the full 7 directorship. 8 The bigger issue, in my view, is case 9 synthesis. You need somebody to look 10 wholistically, not just, well, what DNA 11 typing did we do here, or what chemistry 12 test did we do here. They need the context. 13 And lastly, networking. If you go to 14 a forensic science program, you're shoulder 15 to shoulder with other forensic scientists, 16 future forensic scientists, and I think that 17 is terribly important. That will be missing 18 from a typical biology degree. 19 Traditionally, forensic science has 20 been populated by baccalaureate degrees. 21 Most of our crime lab directors have no more 22 than a B.S., and they're fine crime lab 23 directors. I don't mean this as a slight, 24 but I do want to point out the issue of 25 attitudes. 356 1 2 While there are many Master's degree 3 people in the system, I think the biggest 4 impact is going to happen because of DNA. 5 We just, at this time, have many DNA 6 individuals who grew up in that field coming 7 into power in the crime laboratory 8 directorships, and I think that there will 9 be a different attitude about education, 10 generally, because of that group. 11 There is this major mismatch alluded 12 to by Dr. Gaensslen about expectation to 13 solve mysteries, and they come in, "well, 14 all I do is push buttons." That causes us a 15 retention problem. 16 And, in fact, our instrumentation is 17 becoming much more like a black box and the 18 crime labs much more like a factory. That 19 exacerbates this problem, but I don't 20 believe that that negates the need for a 21 true forensic science education. Because of 22 the wholistic approach, that instrument is 23 just that. 24 There is this issue about how many 25 graduates, and I guess, for time, we don't 357 1 2 have time to talk about that. But I'll just 3 end on this note because, to me, this is 4 truly the bottom line. It is the foundation 5 for respect among scientific professions. 6 Thank you. 7 (Applause.) 8 DR. SENSABAUGH: Thank you, Victor, 9 and I thank all of the panel for their 10 presentations. I think it is clear that all 11 of us, and even me, have a passion for 12 forensic science and the value of a core 13 education in the field. This is the way 14 that we believe that the field will 15 propagate itself in gaining credibility and 16 respect that we think it deserves. 17 The question is, how can this be 18 achieved? And, perhaps, it is time to 19 think, as the sciences and other professions 20 do periodically, of taking an inventory of 21 where we are, where the field is headed, and 22 where should be done to prepare for the 23 education of the next generation of forensic 24 science, the next generation of forensic 25 scientists. 358 1 2 And just to get, since I've had less 3 to say than everyone else, I will throw in a 4 quote, a short statement made in a 5 millennium essay that appeared in nature in 6 March of this year by Frederick Sites, a 7 very prominent American scientist. It was 8 called "The Decline of the Generalist." 9 Just selecting from that. 10 "Few scientists under 50 are familiar 11 with or express much interest in areas of 12 research outside their immediate 13 professional concern. 14 This trend is partially a result of 15 the growing complexity of research. Most 16 students are not being prepared to become 17 broad experienced leaders in a highly 18 professional area. 19 Barring the guidance of highly 20 motivated and broadly based leadership, most 21 fields of cultural development will either 22 drift towards dole mediocrity or degenerate 23 into uncoordinated islands governed by 24 individuals of minor stature possessing 25 narrow idiosyncratic viewpoints." 359 1 2 A rather draconian view, that, but we 3 are, I think, at a juncture of forensic 4 science where, if we do not have the kind of 5 broad-based professional education, we run 6 the risk of moving in that direction. 7 And so with that then, I would open 8 the floor for questions. We have about 15 9 minutes before our time is officially up. 10 SPEAKER: I have a question about 11 technique. You hear a lot about education 12 and training. It's been our experience that 13 we are fortunate that we can have one out of 14 four candidates successfully complete our 15 background investigation, and these are kids 16 with excellent educations. 17 Is there any component in your 18 program, has it been your experience to have 19 a problem with technique. 20 DR. GAENSSLEN: I guess I would just 21 say that my experience is, by the time we 22 see that it's too late, they've done stuff 23 in college. That's the problem. By the 24 time we get a hold of them, and they all of 25 a sudden realize, oh, my God. This is law 360 1 2 enforcement. I am really facing the 3 background. They're really going to 4 polygraph me, and I'm not going to be able 5 to lie myself through this, whatever the 6 standards are. 7 And the standards, actually, are not 8 that stringent in most jurisdictions. It's 9 just too late, and it's a tragedy. You're 10 absolutely right. We've lost some fairly 11 good students to things like that. 12 I don't know what to do about it. 13 It's part of a larger societal problem. I 14 think undergraduates could, perhaps, could 15 do a little bit more. Undergraduate 16 students, perhaps, could do a little bit 17 more about this. 18 Some of these kids don't know they 19 want to be in forensic science until pretty 20 late in their undergraduate life, and that's 21 part of it as well. 22 SPEAKER: I think it's a concern, 23 particularly, with more case work going to 24 private laboratories. 25 DR. GAENSSLEN: That's a really good 361 1 2 point. 3 DR. SENSABAUGH: I think Bob it's an 4 issue, and Bob is absolutely right. They 5 come to us after they've completed their 6 undergraduate years and their high school 7 years, and there are lots of things that 8 happen during those times that you just 9 don't have any control over. And they 10 realize it all of a sudden, which is too 11 late. 12 SPEAKER: I don't know what the answer 13 is, but I wish that maybe something could be 14 done on the front end to wake these kids up. 15 DR. ROWLEY: I must also say that 16 I've seen three or four students fail 17 polygraphs that I think were false failures. 18 I think that happens too. 19 I'm not a huge believer in polygraphs, 20 but I think the agencies probably figure 21 it's better to throw the baby out with the 22 bath water. They're not going to take the 23 risk if they don't have to, and I understand 24 that. 25 SPEAKER: There seems to be this trend 362 1 2 to send case work also to private 3 laboratories, and there's a lot of excellent 4 private laboratories, but I hear no 5 discussion on the integrity issue across the 6 board. 7 DR. SENSABAUGH: We used to tell our 8 students when they came into the program 9 that if they had smoked something 10 inappropriate in their past that they should 11 take note that they may not have a future. 12 Some disappeared at that point. 13 But also, we had, perhaps, because we 14 were in California, and some laboratories 15 are a little bit more liberal, we had one 16 laboratory director who once told me, if I 17 don't get a student who hasn't experimented 18 in high school or college, I'm not sure I 19 want a person of such narrow intellectual 20 scope. So it takes all kinds. 21 SPEAKER: Here's a follow-up question 22 to that. Are there any programs focussed on 23 high school students in providing them with 24 the vision of themselves as, for example, 25 forensic scientists or as scientists in 363 1 2 general. 3 DR. GAENSSLEN: I know there are such 4 programs, and I certainly accept invitations 5 to go to high schools or sending graduate 6 schools out to high schools. We all do this 7 stuff. 8 This is a message you always give to 9 students. "If you are thinking of a career 10 in law enforcement, don't to it." Because 11 that's a message they need to get through 12 their heads. 13 And George is right. We do tell them 14 at the front end. "If you have a serious 15 drug problem or a serious honesty problem or 16 if you've been convicted of a felony or 17 something coming in the door, you're 18 probably not going to be able to be employed 19 in this profession. It's just too little, 20 too late a lot of times. 21 DR. SENSABAUGH: To follow up on your 22 question, though, there seems to be a rather 23 interesting trend, at least in some of the 24 schools in our area, to use forensic science 25 as a kind of platform for providing a mode 364 1 2 to scientific thinking or an introduction to 3 scientific thinking at the high school 4 level, and even to the extent that we have 5 at a Lawrence Hall of Science, which is a 6 science museum associated with the 7 University of California at Berkeley, a 8 program that's really geared, primarily, 9 towards primary school students in which 10 they get to play detective and how to 11 construct a logical thought process to 12 develop evidence so that you can prove a 13 case. 14 And it's all very simplistic sort of 15 stuff, but, this doesn't get at the 16 integrity question, but it does get at the 17 kind of exposure that forensic sciences can 18 have at a much earlier level in the 19 educational process. Bill. 20 SPEAKER: George, you mentioned that 21 your fundamental principle to solve a lot of 22 the things would be education core values 23 for forensic science. 24 I'd just be interested to hear what 25 your views of these core values are. 365 1 2 DR. WEEDN: Some of us did talk last 3 night about core curriculum. That's not the 4 same as a core set of values, and what we 5 really talked to ourselves is, we need to 6 discuss more among the academic community on 7 what those are. So to come to a consensus 8 that could be enunciated. I don't think 9 there's going to be much hardship in that. 10 I think that's pretty clear. 11 Integrity. If you look at the ASCLD 12 set up of words, I think those speak to 13 them. Clearly, integrity is going to be 14 there. Clearly, accuracy in our results 15 will be there. Clearly, the ability to 16 communicate and articulate these things that 17 we do to. All are very important as values 18 and core curricula, both. 19 DR. SENSABAUGH: I'm going to add, but 20 at somewhat a deeper level. I think what we 21 have is a fundamental core value, the 22 application of science towards the 23 application of science in justice, and this 24 creates, actually, some interesting ethical 25 conflicts, as you and I have talked about on 366 1 2 occasion, Bill. 3 If we think about our exercise as 4 providing the best scientific information 5 possible to a legal system at the earliest 6 stage of investigation all the way through 7 the legal system, I think that is a core 8 value. 9 Do no harm, this follows from the 10 medical model, but do no harm to any aspect 11 of the system, particularly, to the person 12 who is accused in the case. We are there to 13 try to provide the best science possible to 14 the system. 15 There are potential conflicts in core 16 values because, for some, the core value is 17 to provide service to the police, and this 18 creates the potential conflict when the 19 information reported by the laboratory does 20 not support police view in a particular 21 case. 22 But I think most of us would agree, I 23 hope all of us would agree, that if we find 24 something that is exculpating, that it is 25 our obligation as scientists, as forensic 367 1 2 scientists to make sure that that 3 information is brought to the legal system. 4 Tom. 5 SPEAKER: Just a comment on the 6 polygraph. I hadn't realized the situation, 7 and I just wanted to make a couple of 8 points. 9 I can certainly understand the need to 10 do background checks for employment for 11 those working in the forensic field, and I 12 can also understand the basis to do a 13 database check. 14 But there are a lot of other 15 professions in which truth is really 16 important to those professions, and I doubt 17 that there is a divinity school, a law 18 school, or a medical school that uses a 19 polygraph as a criteria for admission into 20 those professions. 21 Certainly, background checks, and I'm 22 sure in the future strikes against the 23 database will be part of it, but I think we 24 need to re-examine this polygraph test. It 25 sounds wrong to me. 368 1 2 SPEAKER: Not to defend the polygraph, 3 but I think the issue is, how do you focus 4 the direction of polygraph and what kind of 5 issues. 6 Do you focus on lifestyle issues, or 7 do you focus on past criminal-type issues? 8 It seems to me that it may serve a function 9 for screening, in some instances, of course, 10 that's taking criminal behavior as well as 11 lifestyle issues. From what I understand, 12 it seems that lifestyle issues are included. 13 DR. GAENSSLEN: Well, it has to do 14 with drug use, primarily, but it also has to 15 do with basic integrity. I kind of 16 understand the law enforcement agency's 17 position on this. 18 If you go to work in the Illinois 19 State Police Forensic Science Center in 20 Chicago, you have access to tons of 21 controlled substances if you get in the drug 22 unit, which you could, theoretically, if you 23 knew the system, steal and put back on the 24 street. That's the bottom line. 25 You also have access to tons of 369 1 2 weapons that come in off the street. That's 3 the lab director's nightmare. The lab 4 directors lay awake at night and think, is 5 anyone stealing my drugs? Is anyone 6 stealing my guns? And that's just how it 7 is. 8 You've got to worry about that kind of 9 stuff, and that's not true of lawyers and 10 it's not true of doctors to the same extent. 11 Although I realize doctors have narcotics 12 privileges and all that kind of stuff. 13 I think that's where this comes from. 14 Every case fry case in the United States is 15 a polygraph case. We know what the 16 limitations are, I think. 17 There has to be some kind of a fairly 18 serious background investigation for people 19 that are going to have access to that kind 20 of stuff. That's all. David. 21 SPEAKER: I'll just make a couple of 22 observations. The first thing is that the 23 polygraph does a remarkable job of 24 eliminating honest people who are nervous 25 and is essentially ineffective in 370 1 2 eliminating sociopaths. 3 Secondly, I'll point out that in the 4 Department of Defense, for persons cleared 5 to top secret and above who have access to 6 nuclear secrets, weapons, munitions, and the 7 rest, we do not use the polygraph because we 8 do not trust it. 9 DR. SENSABAUGH: John, I'll give you a 10 word on this. 11 SPEAKER: One of the panelists 12 mentioned the need for funding to support 13 educational programs, and, of course, 14 everyone turns to the federal government as 15 a source for that funding. 16 But I just wondered, within the 17 academic institutions themselves, are there 18 sources of funds that can be redirected to 19 worthy causes outside of their own programs, 20 some social deed like this? 21 I wondering if there is a role that 22 the forensic practitioners, lab directors 23 can play in trying to draw attention to that 24 and seek the benefits of the academic 25 institutions themselves. 371 1 2 DR. SENSABAUGH: Well, I think in one 3 regard, this is not so much related to funds 4 but as to basic survival. I can tell you 5 that when we went through, at Berkeley, our 6 first crisis, which was in 1975, we were 7 associated with School of Criminology at 8 that time. 9 And it was clear that the School of 10 Criminology was going to be closed. The 11 crime laboratory directors from around the 12 State of California came en masse to the 13 Chancellor of the University and said, this 14 program is too valuable to lose. 15 And, as a consequence, John Thornton 16 and I, who were the two people on the 17 forensic science faculty were the only ones 18 that survived out of the School of 19 Criminology. 20 Some people went into the law school 21 and were able to shift, senior faculty were 22 able to shift into other departments, but we 23 were the only junior faculty to survive. 24 And so that kind of support from the 25 professional community is tremendously 372 1 2 important for making the case for the 3 continuation of programs of this sort. 4 With regard to funding, I think you 5 will find that the universities, and I'll 6 speak for my colleagues, I think correctly, 7 the University there will say, we'll allow 8 you to survive, but if you really want to 9 flourish, you'd better get some money on 10 your own. 11 SPEAKER: Listening to the discussion, 12 I know your university doctorate programs, 13 but if you look at the history of several 14 fields, when you're in a situation where you 15 need resources, you want to gain attention. 16 You want to attract funds, so on, university 17 resources for getting started. 18 Historically, what people do is to 19 start doctoral programs. For example, 25 20 years at SUNY, Binghamton, a group of 21 chemists and physicists decided computer 22 science was not a science, and that never 23 got off the ground. 24 At Carnegie Mellon, where Victor is 25 now, the decision was made that, well, maybe 373 1 2 computer science is a science. Maybe, they 3 still didn't think it is, but at least they 4 made a decision that it was. 5 And that gave them a focus for getting 6 some start-up capital, for getting 7 university presidents involved and going to 8 DOD at the time, and within a 20 years, they 9 built up a hundred million a year department 10 out of what was not considered then to be a 11 field. 12 So if you want to look at how you're 13 going to perpetuate a field, get new 14 faculty, keep training the trained faculty, 15 you may have to consider, what about 16 forensic science could be considered to be 17 worthy of a granted doctoral degree because, 18 historically, those are the fields that 19 survive. 20 DR. GAENSSLEN: I think in order for a 21 doctoral program to survive, there has to be 22 a discipline base to it, and I think there 23 is in things like forensic chemistry, 24 forensic molecular biology. I'm still a 25 little hesitant to think about the generic 374 1 2 forensic science kind of degree, and, in 3 fact, in some universities, there are Ph.D. 4 programs in forensic science and in forensic 5 biology but not in the generic field of 6 forensic science. 7 I don't think they're quite ready yet. 8 I think we'd have a hard sell going through 9 our administration to sell a program like 10 that, and, particularly, with the small 11 funding base that's available at this time. 12 DR. SENSABAUGH: This is sort of a 13 chicken or egg problem. I can speak as 14 someone who had a Ph.D. program at Berkeley. 15 If you have money or if you can find 16 that there is a funding for students, then 17 it's much easier to make a an argument for a 18 Ph.D. program than otherwise. 19 The basis of our program was that it 20 was basically a disciplinary program, in my 21 case, biochemistry based, but in which 22 everyone who went through it had a very 23 solid foundation forensic science as well. 24 So it's sort of the combination of the 25 academic research and professional degree 375 1 2 program, and it worked quite successfully, I 3 think. 4 SPEAKER: The success that I think 5 almost everyone on the panel said that one 6 of the prerequisites for even a Master's 7 degree is some kind of background Bachelor's 8 degree and chemistry or biology. 9 If we're assuming that these people 10 are taking DNA track or the biological 11 sciences track are going to have that 12 foundation, you've got to start somewhere. 13 Maybe it's not time to have a Ph.D. 14 and a doctrine, but for some of the 15 biological sciences, someone went to GW or 16 Berkeley as a pilot program, wouldn't it be 17 useful to try some sort of interdisciplinary 18 program where you could take classes at the 19 law school or specific genetic classes at 20 medical school designed, some kind of 21 program and be funded from more than one 22 department rather than just the forensic 23 science department, and, again, as a pilot 24 program to start somewhere, it seems that 25 maybe it is time. 376 1 2 DR. GAENSSLEN: I just think that I'm 3 persuaded for the moment, that maybe there's 4 a couple of people already doing this, and 5 probably going to start doing this in 6 Illinois where we take students into a 7 Master's, M.S., program in forensic science. 8 But, maybe, simultaneously or while 9 they're in their first year or something, go 10 ahead and try to get them admitted into 11 traditional Ph.D. programs on the same 12 campus. 13 I know Jay Siegal has a student who's 14 going to be an M.S. Forensic Science, Ph.D. 15 Chemistry. That, to me, is a nice 16 combination. 17 I think UAB has a program, Alabama, 18 Birmingham, along these lines where you can 19 track the biological sciences and you can 20 track to chemistry. I like that kind of 21 model. 22 We can do that right now if we have 23 the right student and the right set of 24 circumstances. I probably would think 25 toxicology is sort of interdisciplinary, and 377 1 2 we're probably going to do Ph.D.s in 3 Toxicology before long. 4 SPEAKER: Will students be recognized 5 as forensic scientists when they come out of 6 the programs? 7 DR. GAENSSLEN: I think they could 8 certainly go to a lab director and say, you 9 know what, I have a Ph.D. in Chemistry, but 10 I got my M.S. in Forensic Science. I know 11 about forensic science. I like it. I want 12 to work in it. 13 And if the lab director were at all 14 inclined to hire a Ph.D., which they may or 15 may not be, they would probably talk to that 16 person. 17 I think Ph.D.s, frankly, who are 18 trained in research, are going to be harder 19 to retain than our better Master's students 20 in case work laboratories, for all the 21 reasons that other people talked about. 22 SPEAKER: We at the University of 23 Central Florida are taking one approach to 24 this, to the Ph.D.s. 25 I'm a faculty member and the Chief of 378 1 2 Forensic Science, but I want to point out 3 that biology and chemistry is 4 interdisciplinary Ph.D. program. Also 5 there's a Ph.D. in Biological Science. 6 That program, of course, would be the 7 core curriculum for that program, which is 8 biological science, in general. 9 Of course, if you specialize and you 10 want to work, do research in forensic 11 science. 12 Fully fledged Ph.D. program says 13 forensic science is the future, but we have 14 been approaching it as, I think, that's the 15 way of the future, we have a good 16 foundation, we have broader-based subject, 17 but research is really important. 18 For those students interested in 19 forensics, that's one model. 20 SPEAKER: I'd just like to get back to 21 the issue of integrity for a moment, this 22 has to do with what Dr. Gaensslen said about 23 people's pasts and the polygraph and finding 24 out what they'd done. 25 I would mention for the sake of a 379 1 2 direct form the perspective of a laboratory 3 director in a private lab what's important 4 to me and what keeps me awake at night, and 5 I think this is probably the same in the 6 public sector and Mark Dale asked this 7 question. 8 I'm concerned about people who are 9 dealing drugs, producing drugs, or involved 10 in illegal drug use now. I'm concerned 11 about drug addicts and habitual users now. 12 I'm concerned about employees or people who 13 are involved in illegal activity now. 14 But what I'm very, very concerned 15 about and what I want in integrity, or what 16 I believe is really important in terms of 17 integrity is science. 18 I'm concerned about evidence shaping. 19 I'm concerned about tampering; manipulating 20 of evidence; mistake covering; and reporting 21 lies, misrepresenting scientific facts in 22 favor of one side or another. I'm concerned 23 about plagiarism, fabrication, and 24 falsification. All these are things, I see, 25 are things that students can engage in as 380 1 2 students. 3 How do you see that as fitting into 4 teaching students about this? 5 DR. GAENSSLEN: This is extremely 6 important. This is the heart of the 7 enterprise. George articulated this better 8 than I'll be able to, but if you take as our 9 core value that we are scientists who serve 10 the legal system and try to produce truth, 11 whatever that quite means in any context, 12 then all these ethical things start coming 13 up. 14 Some of these things are just outright 15 fraud. Obviously, we rail against that sort 16 of thing, but that's a value we share with 17 every science. 18 Then you get into these kind of very 19 subtle things of where, well, you were hired 20 by the prosecutor, so you can say something 21 in a certain way. Whereas, if you were 22 hired by the defense attorney, you might say 23 the same thing a slightly different way, but 24 to throw the slant or to change the focus. 25 Experts do this all the time, so 381 1 2 there's constant discussion on these ethics, 3 but I think what we can do or what we try to 4 do, is to get students tuned into these 5 questions, to get them thinking about this 6 stuff, to make them realize there are ethics 7 in this profession. 8 And John Thornton put it best once 9 when I heard him say, you know, what he says 10 to lawyers is, "If my ethics and your ethics 11 collide, mine are going to prevail." And 12 he's right, and you've got to get that 13 across to them because they don't have any 14 ethics by our standards. 15 They can't or they couldn't do their 16 jobs. They're advocates. So things that we 17 just won't do, they're permitted to do. 18 DR. SENSABAUGH: Let's put it more 19 delicately. There's a culture context 20 between science and the law. But that, in 21 its own right, and, actually, Victor can 22 speak to this, because for all his jokes, he 23 has legal training as well as medical 24 training. 25 I think one of the key elements of a 382 1 2 forensic science core education is learning 3 about the culture of the law, the culture of 4 science, how the two conflict and how they 5 interact and then to make the best of it. 6 Many people who come into forensic 7 science from outside come in and are unaware 8 of how the works, are unaware that when a 9 lawyer does something in a particular way, 10 it's not necessarily because the lawyer is 11 being dishonest, which it would seem that 12 way to us, but rather that the lawyer is 13 following the legal imperative of the legal 14 profession. 15 We have to understand that, work with 16 it, but also try to have our ethics prevail. 17 DR. WEEDN: Specifically, people are 18 surprised to learn that law schools actually 19 require a course on professional 20 responsibility and legal ethics, and it's 21 part of my exam. 22 But I wanted to comment that this is 23 an issue of people, not instruments, and not 24 laboratory analysis and process. I think 25 it's a fundamental issue that we have to 383 1 2 have faith in the integrity of the forensic 3 science analysts, the examiners out there. 4 This is a different issue than quality 5 control and quality assurance, and I think, 6 in fact, more fundamental than that analytic 7 process. It goes to credibility by the 8 public, and so I want to thank you for 9 allowing me to draw real attention to that. 10 I think sometimes people substitute 11 quality control and quality assurance for 12 the more fundamental issue of the integrity 13 of a profession. 14 DR. SENSABAUGH: I think on that note 15 is a good point to close our session. I 16 want to thank our panelists, Bob Gaensslen, 17 Victor Weedn, and Dave Rowley. 18 (Applause.) 19 (Break.) 20 21 22 PANEL VI: TRAINING-TODAY AND TOMORROW 23 SPEAKER: I want you to know that 24 there's a card on the table that has the DNA 25 conference that you're attending listed 384 1 2 here, and our conference on science and the 3 law listed over here, and I'd appreciate it 4 if whoever gets a card. 5 You may be interested in the Science 6 and the Law Conference which will take place 7 in October in San Diego. There's some 8 detail on here, but it's also on our web 9 page. If you get on our web page, you can 10 get more information on that. In fact, 11 there is an outline of the conference. 12 MR. CONNOLLY: Thank you. Good 13 morning. I'm Ken Connolly. I'm Deputy 14 Commissioner of Counsel for the New York 15 State Division of Criminal Justice Services. 16 The panel we have here today is a diverse 17 group. It's training today and tomorrow. 18 Before getting into that. 19 Before we get into that, I thought, 20 just briefly, I'd give you an overview of 21 who DCJS is and what it does. The State 22 Division of Criminal Justice Services is an 23 agency which is responsible for coordinating 24 a number of criminal justice programs in the 25 State of New York. 385 1 2 Katherine Lapp, who spoke yesterday, 3 is the Commissioner. She wears two hats. 4 In addition to being the Commissioner of the 5 agency, she is also the State Director of 6 Criminal Justice. She advises the Governor 7 on criminal justice policies and issues and 8 legislation. We are the support staff for 9 that. 10 And, in addition, the agency started 11 out as the New York State Identification and 12 Intelligence Service. We are the repository 13 for all the criminal history records in the 14 State of New York. We have all the prints 15 and the criminal history records, and as far 16 as the DNA program goes, our agency sort 17 coordinates the blood collections which are 18 coming in hot and heavy since the law 19 changed the beginning or the 1st of 20 December. 21 And the way we've got our system set 22 up, the blood gets collected, we then, that 23 is, DCJS verifies the fingerprints to make 24 sure that person who gave the blood is the 25 person who was supposed to have given the 386 1 2 blood, and at the same time, we verify the 3 criminal history record to make sure that 4 that person has been convicted of an 5 offense, which entitles us to have the blood 6 in the system; and once that's done, we 7 notify the State Police, and the State 8 Police do the analysis. 9 So that, basically, is an overview of 10 what we do here in the State of New York. 11 Now, as I said, we have a diverse panel. 12 The first speaker is Kim Herd. Kim is 13 Senior Attorney and the Program Manager for 14 the DNA Legal Assistance Unit of the 15 American Prosecutors Research Institute. 16 In her capacity as APRI, she provides 17 and coordinates training for prosecutors in 18 the area of DNA evidence. She also provides 19 technical assistance to prosecutors and 20 other criminal justice professionals seeking 21 information on DNA evidence. 22 She also assists in the publication of 23 a quarterly publication put out by the DNA 24 Legal Assistance Unit that addresses 25 forensic DNA issues. Kim also has had some 387 1 2 background as a prosecutor in Hennepin 3 County, Minnesota. She's a member of the 4 State Bar of Minnesota and the Bar of the 5 District of Columbia. 6 She received her law degree from the 7 University of Minnesota and a B.A. from 8 William and Mary College in Williamsburg, 9 Virginia. 10 MS. HERD: I'd like to begin by 11 thanking NIJ for giving me the opportunity 12 to come and speak with you all today about 13 the very important issue of training for 14 prosecutors. 15 I work for an organization called the 16 American Prosecutors Research Institute. 17 We're known commonly as APRI. We are part 18 of the National District Attorneys 19 Association. We're like their sister 20 organization, except we're entirely grant 21 funded, and one of the funding programs that 22 we have is called the DNA Legal Assistance 23 Unit. 24 We are funded by the Bureau of Justice 25 Assistance, and it's grant that runs on a 388 1 2 yearly basis, so we have to apply for and 3 receive grant money each year to do the 4 programs that we do for prosecutors. 5 The DNA Legal Assistance Unit at APRI 6 is comprised essentially of four people, 7 halves of each person, if you will. I, as 8 the Senior Attorney, am in charge of the 9 program activities. I devote 50 percent of 10 my time there to activities related to DNA 11 and the other 50 percent to activities that 12 are completely not related to DNA. 13 We have a staff attorney that assists 14 us. She also devotes 50 percent of her time 15 to us. We have the legal intern that's part 16 time but that does a lot of substantive 17 work. And we also have an administrative 18 assistant that also has evolved into doing a 19 lot of the substantive work for us. 20 We received $150,000 this past year to 21 do training and technical assistance for 22 local prosecutors around the country. That 23 money goes to supporting two trainings, 24 which I'll talk about later. It also goes 25 to supporting our salaries, portions of our 389 1 2 salaries, and then to providing materials 3 that we can then send out to prosecutors. 4 We're trying to get that amount 5 increased. It was increased from the year 6 before, which we received $125,000, which 7 really isn't a whole lot of money when you 8 think about some of the other programs that 9 are receiving money for training. 10 So given the fact that so many 11 prosecutors use DNA evidence in their cases, 12 we're going to be making a real push to try 13 to get additional training to help them in 14 what they do. 15 And what we do in the unit is, number 16 one, we do training for prosecutors, and 17 I'll talk a little bit more about that. We 18 also provide technical assistance, and what 19 that means is that we have the capacity on 20 staff to assist prosecutors that will call 21 us for help. 22 We receive a wide range of calls from 23 different prosecutors. We also have 24 materials that we send out to them. We have 25 materials that are copied on different 390 1 2 issues that we have ready to go because we 3 get a lot of requests for the same sort of 4 the information. 5 Somebody will call up and say, "What 6 are STRs? I don't understand that." And we 7 have a packet that's ready for them that we 8 send out to them that includes information 9 on the science of STRs, information on the 10 legal opinions that are out there, briefs 11 that have been written, articles that have 12 been written, and we send that to them on a 13 quick basis. 14 We also have extensive library of 15 trial transcripts and briefs in DNA related 16 cases, and we have different publications 17 available. We subscribe to Nature, 18 subscribe to The Journal of Forensic 19 Sciences, and some other publications that a 20 lot of times prosecutors will call us and 21 say, "I can't find this. Can you please 22 help me?" And we'll send it out to them. 23 In addition, we have a lot of contacts 24 with different laboratory personnel and 25 experts in the scientific community that we 391 1 2 regularly call to help us answer these calls 3 for technical assistance. 4 Some of the our calls for technical 5 assistance have increased dramatically in 6 the last year. In 1999, we had about a 7 total of 84 requests. Already this year, we 8 had 43 in the first four months of the year. 9 And some of the examples of types of 10 requests that we receive are incredibly wide 11 ranging. We'll have people call and say, 12 "I've got a case involving mitochondrial 13 DNA. I don't understand. What is it? Can 14 you explain it to me?" 15 And, again, we will take the time to 16 explain some of the basic issues, and then 17 we'll send them out a follow-up packet of 18 information. We also get very specific 19 requests. 20 Recently, we had someone call and say, 21 "I've got a case where we have some 22 unexplained DNA under someone's fingernail. 23 Do you have any information on cases where 24 there has been transfer in this manner?" We 25 have a lot of contacts in the scientific 392 1 2 community. We'll call them up and say, "Do 3 you know of anything like this?" And we'll 4 get recommendations where to search. 5 We'll also do our own internet search 6 and searches through scientific journals, 7 and try to come up with information to arm 8 these prosecutors to be able to go back into 9 court and fight the issues that they're 10 faced with. 11 Additionally, we'll receive requests 12 sometimes to review cases. Prosecutors will 13 call and say, "I've got this DNA case. I've 14 never had one before. I don't know where 15 to begin." And what we'll do sometimes is 16 have them send it to us. We'll look it 17 over, kind of spot some of the issues for 18 them, and then we'll point them in the right 19 direction and tell them where they need to 20 follow up and how they need to get 21 additional information; and we'll send that 22 to them as well. 23 We receive requests from local 24 prosecutors, primarily. Sometimes we 25 receive requests from federal prosecutors. 393 1 2 A lot of times laboratory personnel will 3 call us. Again, if they have a good 4 relationship with their prosecutor, or if 5 they're concerned about the prosecutor's 6 knowledge, and they're about to go into a 7 case together, sometimes they'll call us and 8 say,"Is there a way you can assist us in 9 providing information to that prosecutor to 10 get them up to speed? Do you have any 11 predicate questions," et cetera, et cetera, 12 and we do have a lot of that information 13 that we ultimately send out to people. 14 Now, with respect to training, the way 15 we're funded, each year, we're able to do 16 two regional trainings, and we open them up 17 to a national audience of prosecutors. And 18 we do that, probably about a four-day 19 program. We pick locations around the 20 country depending on the different 21 geographic areas that have been targeted in 22 the past, and we advertise the training and 23 we open it up to, primarily, local 24 prosecutors, although, sometimes we do get 25 investigators that come. 394 1 2 And we put on a fairly intensive 3 program for a three and a half- to four-day 4 period, which I'll also talk a little about 5 in a second. We assist with shorter 6 training programs. Sometimes we'll receive 7 calls from prosecuting attorneys 8 associations of different states. They'll 9 say, "I want to put on a one-day training. 10 Can you help us?" So we'll give them ideas, 11 pull speakers for them, help them develop a 12 curriculum, provide them with training 13 materials, and help them run the program. 14 In addition, NDAA and APRI sponsor 15 national conferences on a yearly basis, 16 primarily. Sometimes we will have tracks of 17 those national conferences that are devoted 18 to DNA evidence for prosecutors. 19 And, finally, a great thing that has 20 come along for us is The National Advocacy 21 Center, which is a facility that's located 22 in Columbia, South Carolina. It's a 23 facility that's pictured there. It's kind 24 of a stately building that has a lot of 25 southern charm associated with it. Even 395 1 2 though it's kind of out of the way, it 3 certainly has been a place a lot of 4 prosecutors have gone to receive excellent 5 training. 6 We share that with the Department of 7 Justice. It opened in 1998, was the first 8 training that was done there, and all sorts 9 of different training programs occur. 10 There's violence-against-women training, 11 child abuse training, cybercrime related 12 training. We do joint training with Justice 13 sometimes. 14 But we also have allocated two weeks 15 of training, two times a year for DNA 16 evidence for prosecutors. And the great 17 thing about The National Advocacy Center is 18 that the tuition, the travel expenses, the 19 lodging and the training itself is all 20 covered for prosecutors. So it's a 21 completely free experience. 22 And when you get there, they have 23 meals that are provided on campus, in the 24 facility. You stay right in the facility, 25 so you're able to network with other 396 1 2 students, and also they give you an 3 allowance for dinner. So it really is a 4 completely free experience. 5 As you would imagine, there's a lot of 6 people that are interested in going to those 7 training programs because they're free. So 8 the competition is pretty stiff. There's a 9 lot of applicants, and applicants are chosen 10 by geographic area. There's never more than 11 one person chosen from a particular DA's 12 office. They like to try to vary it. 13 But those programs have been very well 14 received. We've done, I think, four so far 15 at The National Advocacy Center since it 16 opened, and we're going to do another one in 17 June of this year. 18 Our target audience with respect to 19 who we have to train out there in DNA 20 evidence is very heterogenous, if you will. 21 We have 2,700 prosecutors offices across the 22 country, and they're very, very varied. 23 Some offices have maybe one part-time 24 prosecutor that comes in and does cases, and 25 others have in excess of 500 prosecutors. 397 1 2 I sort of put a little graph there to 3 show that the majority of prosecutors 4 jurisdictions are rural. There's 44 percent 5 that represent less than 20,000 in their 6 jurisdiction, and, of course, they have 7 different and varying degrees of experience 8 in handling DNA cases. So that makes it a 9 challenge for us to be able to target 10 training on a national level to prosecutors. 11 The way we go about convening or 12 developing our training programs is, we have 13 an advisory group of individuals that we 14 convene that assist us in, number one, 15 delivering the training, but more 16 importantly, coming up with a curriculum and 17 the materials that we actually distribute to 18 our students. 19 And on that faculty, we have -- first 20 of all, I should say that these people 21 donate their time on a volunteer basis. 22 They take time out of their very busy 23 schedules and work up lots of materials for 24 us. They come and do the trainings for us, 25 sometimes it's a week out of their lives, 398 1 2 and sometimes we ask them to do it four 3 times a year. So they're very, very busy, 4 but they're very, very dedicated to helping 5 us. And we're very lucky to have them. 6 Some of the individuals we have 7 include many different scientists from the 8 FBI. We also work with Dr. Cecilia Krause 9 from Palm Beach in Florida. We also have 10 many prosecutors that assist us, experts in 11 the field. 12 Norm Gahn is an individual that works 13 with us. I know he's here. We also have 14 Woody Clark, Dennis Bower, Matt Riedel. 15 These are individuals that have been there 16 in the trenches fighting the DNA wars from 17 the beginning, and they have a tremendous 18 amount of expertise in this area, and they 19 come and try to impart that to students. 20 In addition, we've worked with 21 Dr. Carmody, also Dr. Bever. We've also 22 worked with some other individuals that have 23 helped and tried to come and explain the 24 very confusing issue of statistics that 25 prosecutors are very frightened of 399 1 2 sometimes. 3 Sometimes, we also employ 4 investigators to come and talk about 5 innovative programs they're working on, and 6 occasionally, we will have victims come in 7 and talk about how DNA has made a difference 8 in their lives. So we try to have a very 9 well-rounded faculty that has a very strong 10 expertise level. 11 Again, we meet on a yearly basis as an 12 advisory group to try to assess the 13 developments of past year and refine the 14 curriculum to reflect those. Then we gather 15 materials for students. We, ultimately, put 16 these in a huge binder, and we give them out 17 to students at different training programs. 18 We include the Powerpoints that we 19 have, but we also include sample briefs; 20 sample cases; decisions as many as we can 21 find on a particular topic; predicate 22 questions; defense attacks and how to 23 respond to them; different legal issues that 24 are novel; and we try to give them as much 25 information as possible and as many 400 1 2 different resources they can contact for 3 future assistance. 4 In addition, we evaluate the programs 5 by passing out evaluations for each of the 6 speakers and we ask for comments. We look 7 at those really closely and try to refine 8 our program based on the comments. In 9 addition, we send out needs assessments 10 before the trainings to try and get an idea 11 of who our audience is. 12 Some of the topics that we cover for 13 our basic training course, and, again, the 14 format that we've used is a week-long 15 training where we have a four- to a 16 four-and-a-half-day program. We, initially, 17 start with the basics of the science of DNA 18 because, as many of you know, lawyers went 19 to law school, they're not scientists. A lot 20 of them are very intimidated by the science, 21 and they don't have any knowledge about it. 22 Whereas a lot of people in the field 23 throw out terms that they think prosecutors 24 should know about, most prosecutors have 25 very little information about DNA. I had a 401 1 2 guy call me yesterday hat has an STR case, 3 and he was asking me some information. And 4 he's a very, very experienced prosecutor, 5 and I mentioned mitochondrial DNA and he 6 said, "What's that?" He had no idea about 7 it. 8 So what we try to do is do a basic 9 course on the science of DNA, some of the 10 basic scientific terms: genes, locus, 11 alleles. Very basic. We also, in our basic 12 course, do teach RFLP still because we feel 13 that that also provides a baseline of 14 information to get people into it, to 15 introduce them to some concepts that they 16 will later learn in other typing 17 technologies. 18 Then we go into PCR, and we have a 19 scientist that teaches the different 20 scientific principles underlying STR and 21 PCR, and we cover the different types of PCR 22 testing as well. 23 Of course, as we evolve, primarily, 24 into STR testing across this country, we're 25 concentrating our efforts more on that, and 402 1 2 we're trying to be able to explain that to 3 people. 4 Again, a lot of prosecutors when they 5 get there, they're very intimidated by the 6 science. It takes them a while to warm up 7 to it. So that is a real challenge to us to 8 try to figure out how to explain the 9 complicated process of STR typing. 10 In addition, we have a science lecture 11 on mitochondrial DNA, and we try to have a 12 lawyer that comes in and talks about their 13 experience in trying mitochondrial DNA 14 cases. That is also a challenge. Not many 15 lawyers across the country have yet been 16 faced with that challenge. 17 We're very lucky when we have 18 prosecutors that are able to come in and 19 talk about their story, but we need more. 20 So at the end of the presentation, I'm going 21 to make a pitch to anybody who is interested 22 in teaching or knows of somebody who is a 23 good teacher who has had experience in these 24 areas, especially prosecutors, to let me 25 know about that. 403 1 2 in addition, we cover the daunting 3 area of statistics. A lot of prosecutors 4 say, "Why do we even need to learn this?" 5 They're very frustrated by it because it is 6 so complicated and involves math, which a 7 lot of people haven't touched since they 8 were in tenth grade. 9 When the statisticians get up and 10 start talking, the eyes start to glaze over, 11 and so that is a real challenge for us to 12 try to get it to a level that prosecutors 13 can understand and be familiar with. 14 We also cover evidence collection and 15 preservation issues. We talk about a lot of 16 legal issues that are common in every 17 criminal case but that take on a different 18 meaning in DNA cases; discover; 19 admissibility issues. 20 We try to teach about CODIS. When we 21 start our programs, I'll ask people, "How 22 many of you have heard of CODIS?" And you'd 23 be surprised how many prosecutors do not 24 raise their hands, and that was as recently 25 as a February training. There are some 404 1 2 prosecutors who have no knowledge of the 3 benefits of CODIS and what it can do for 4 them. 5 In addition, we cover the more 6 traditional trial strategies, trial 7 techniques in working DNA cases, and we also 8 talk about post-conviction relief issues, 9 both in terms of nationally, what's 10 occurring and the nuts and bolts of how to 11 respond to them. 12 Also a lot of our lab personnel have 13 wanted us to talk about the issue of 14 prioritization of sample submission to the 15 different labs. We've tried to include a 16 lecture on that in our most recent trainings 17 as well. 18 And then finally, we try to do a tour 19 of laboratory if we're near location that 20 will accommodate us, and so far we've been 21 lucky with that in most respects. We were 22 recently out in San Francisco, and CAL DOJ 23 was gracious enough for us to let us go to 24 their facility. As you can imagine, as you 25 all know, there are major issues with 405 1 2 respect to that. 3 But we are lucky also in South 4 Carolina in that the laboratory there, which 5 is pretty much in its beginning stages, has 6 enabled us to come through and tour and to 7 see a lot of the important work that they 8 do. 9 You'd be surprised how many 10 prosecutors, again, have not actually been 11 to a lab and taken the time to do that. So 12 a lot of them are very happy to have the 13 opportunity. 14 We have been doing a basic course over 15 the last two years, and one of our biggest 16 challenges is that we're finding that our 17 audiences are so varied in their experience 18 level, that we've had to diverge and go into 19 a more advanced training session. 20 So we're going to try to do that for 21 the first time in August. We're doing a 22 session in Philadelphia, and we're going to 23 try to meet the needs of the prosecutor that 24 actually has been doing these cases for many 25 years, has an interest, want to hone their 406 1 2 skills and want to learn about the different 3 typing technologies that are out there. 4 Again, we're going to cover in more 5 depth the sciences. We're going to talk 6 about how to use CODIS in some of the legal 7 issues that are coming up with cases where 8 people are getting hits off of database 9 searches. 10 And, in addition, we're going to talk 11 about some emerging technologies. We have 12 Dr. Prinze from New York coming down. She's 13 going to talk to us about chromosome 14 testing. We're going to have another 15 scientist talk to us about emerging 16 technologies. 17 In addition, we're going to cover some 18 of the more novel legal issues, again, Norm 19 Gahn's brainchild, the "John Doe" warrants 20 and other post-conviction issues that are 21 coming up on a regular basis for prosecutors 22 that they absolutely need to know how to 23 handle. 24 Again, I think I went over this. We 25 did about five trainings at the advocacy 407 1 2 center, and we've done five regionally in 3 the last two years, and I want to talk 4 briefly about some of the challenges that we 5 consistently see with respect to training 6 prosecutors. 7 One of the most important things is to 8 be aware of the different culture that 9 exists in prosecutors offices with respect 10 to training. For a lot of local 11 prosecutors, it's very, very difficult to 12 get out of the office to come to a week-long 13 training program because they have 14 incredible trial schedules and they have 15 incredible case loads. 16 In addition, prosecutors offices 17 generally don't have the funding to send 18 people to training or to send them for a 19 week out of the office. So that's the 20 beauty of The National Advocacy Center, and 21 in our additional petitions for funding, I'm 22 going to ask for more scholarships for 23 prosecutors to be able to get them into this 24 training. 25 It's very challenging to be able to 408 1 2 impart to prosecutors that don't have any 3 knowledge about this a comprehensive 4 workable level of understanding to actually 5 get out there and handle these cases when 6 they get back to their offices. That's very 7 challenging, as you can imagine, to expose 8 them to the science, to teach them the 9 different concepts that they need to know. 10 So we try to do that as best we can, but 11 that's always a challenge. 12 Again, diffusing the fear of science. 13 A lot of evaluations will say, "Too much 14 science." And, again, we try to cover just 15 the very basics, but for prosecutors, they 16 want to get beyond the science and learn how 17 to try the cases without actually learning 18 the science that they need to learn. 19 Again, statistics is always a 20 challenge, and as I indicated earlier, 21 accommodating the different levels of 22 knowledge and experience is becoming more 23 and more of a challenge for us. 24 Something else that I'd like to try to 25 branch into is the concept of awareness 409 1 2 training. Prosecutors have training 3 conferences on an annual basis; summer 4 conferences, fall conferences. There's 5 usually a two-hour time frame that they 6 allot for speakers, and we'd like to try to 7 go out and give prosecutors an awareness 8 training on some of the issues that are out 9 ther with respect to DNA, such as CODIS and 10 post-conviction relief issues to try to 11 target, at least, the ones that can't come 12 for our longer trainings but to give them 13 more of a broader knowledge of what's out 14 there. 15 It's also harder for us to secure 16 faculty members that are experienced and 17 qualified. Again, we have an excellent core 18 group of faculty members, but they're very 19 busy. We can't keep tapping into them, and 20 it is hard to find prosecutors, in 21 particular, that have the knowledge and 22 expertise for handling these cases. 23 Again, it's always a challenge to 24 reach the rural prosecutors, to be able to 25 bring them in and meet their needs as well, 410 1 2 since they have different trial schedules 3 and different needs than a lot of the urban 4 prosecutors do. 5 And, finally, there's just the sheer 6 number of prosecutors out there that we have 7 to train that are using DNA but don't really 8 know anything about it. I hear it time and 9 time again from the laboratory personnel 10 that they're very frustrated when they go 11 into court. The prosecutor hasn't even 12 called them and reviewed the case with them. 13 That's amazing to me, but it does happen a 14 lot. 15 But, again, there are many other 16 prosecutors that are very dedicated and work 17 hard at this as well, and we want to help 18 them and that's the mission of our unit. 19 If I could have a wish list for 20 training for the future, again, it would be 21 to have additional funding for our 22 particular unit to have a full-time staff to 23 able to meet the needs and to be able to 24 advertise what we do. 25 A lot of prosecutors will call us and 411 1 2 say, "I didn't know you were out there. I 3 didn't know you existed." We try to 4 advertise ourselves, but, sometimes, we 5 don't hit the mark. 6 Again, I mention the issue of 7 scholarships, the ability to assist other 8 prosecutors in their training endeavors. We 9 get a lot of requests for that, and we can't 10 do it because we're too small of a staff. 11 We also publish a newsletter on a 12 quarterly basis where we highlight a certain 13 DNA issue that's a hot topic. We recently 14 did one on Y-chromosome testing. We did one 15 on the post-conviction relief 16 recommendations of the National Commission, 17 and we try to get that out to a wide range 18 of prosecutors and that generates responses 19 and questions from individuals. 20 In addition, we'd like to explore 21 other training mediums and technical 22 assistance mediums such as web-based or 23 video conferencing, and that's in the 24 future; and we'd like to try to continue our 25 unit's ability to get out and network in the 412 1 2 community and to become educated ourselves 3 and to keep up on all the different issues; 4 and, finally, to continue the coordination 5 and cooperation that we have with different 6 members of the forensic community and to 7 make sure that we're all on the same page 8 with respect to the training what we're 9 doing. 10 I think that for a long time we've all 11 been sort of in different factions and not 12 really knowing what each other's doing or 13 not coordinating as much as we should. 14 And, I guess, my final pitch would be 15 to say that prosecutors, of course, are the 16 end users of this evidence, and they really 17 desperately need the training and the 18 assistance, the interaction with the 19 different lab personnel, and so we always 20 welcome the opportunity for assistance; and 21 we appreciate the hard work that lab 22 personnel perform every day, but we want to 23 continue to work together because we have to 24 work together and we have to work with law 25 enforcement as well, and everybody 413 1 2 desperately needs training on how to handle 3 this evidence and these issues that come up. 4 I think that's about it. Thank you. 5 (Applause.) 6 MR. CONNOLLY: Thank you. Keith 7 Coonrod, our next speaker is Director of 8 Toxicology and Drug Chemistry Services for 9 the New York State Police Laboratory System. 10 He's been in the forensic business for 23 11 years. 12 He served on the board of ASCLD and 13 served as a Team Captain for numerous ASCLD 14 inspections, and he currently is President- 15 Elect of ASCLD. 16 Keith received his Bachelor's degree 17 in Criminology and Forensic Chemistry for 18 Indiana State University, and he has 19 Master's degree in public administration 20 from Marist College. Keith Coonrod. 21 22 MR. COONROD: Thank you, Ken. First 23 of all, this morning, I find it very 24 refreshing to come here and listen to past 25 panel speakers talk about the same needs 414 1 2 that I'm going to addressing here in my 3 presentation, and that is the need to be 4 able to do something regarding our education 5 of forensic scientists in the United States. 6 Universities agree that something 7 needs to be done on their end. Crime 8 laboratories agree that something has to be 9 done on our end also. And so what we're 10 saying is, obviously, we have to work 11 together in order to face this challenge in 12 the future. 13 The problem that faces forensic 14 laboratories is, how do we educate and train 15 our new forensic scientists in the future? 16 Initially, what we've done is we've dealt 17 with the mentoring whereby somebody comes 18 into our laboratory, let's say if it's 19 question documents or if it ends up being 20 firearms, and we can end up spending 21 sometimes one to three years in doing that. 22 And that's not really very practical 23 to do that. It takes a lot of time for a 24 laboratory. Laboratories do not have the 25 resources to be able to do that. We're 415 1 2 faced with significant case loads, not 3 enough people to be able to do this 4 particular training or the education of 5 forensic scientist, and here, again, it's a 6 one- to three-year commitment. We heard Bob 7 Gaensslen say before, the minimum training 8 period is one to three years in a 9 laboratory. 10 What ends up happening is, doing the 11 old mentoring, which I'm not saying has to 12 go out, there still is a need to do 13 mentoring, but what happens is, by following 14 the past practices of mentoring for one to 15 three years, we end up having both the 16 trainee and the qualified trainer being 17 non-productive. 18 So now, if we're doing a one-to-one 19 scenario, you've got two people being paid 20 by the laboratory which you're getting 21 really no production out of. This has to 22 change. What happens is you're going 23 through this period of time. What it 24 results in is the increase of backlogs. 25 Cases are not being done during the training 416 1 2 phase. 3 Customers still remain dissatisfied 4 during the training phase, which, as I said, 5 can go one to three years. Also what 6 happens is, at the end of one to three 7 years, laboratories will experience a 8 certain loss of newly trained staff that end 9 up going to other agencies. 10 I talked with one lab director last 11 week that spent two years training a new 12 firearms examiner, and what happened within 13 a couple of weeks after finishing the 14 person's training, out the door they went to 15 another laboratory. Two years worth of 16 resources gone. 17 The bottom line is, what this does is 18 this leads to inefficiency of the system, 19 and what it comes down to is there's no bang 20 for the buck. What we have to do is, like 21 we've heard before in our previous panel 22 discussion, is we have to work with 23 universities. We have to work with other 24 agencies, NCFS, NFTC, to be able to solve 25 this problem. 417 1 2 What I want to do is present to you, 3 what it ASCLD doing. As President-Elect of 4 ASCLD, we have, first of all, we have a 5 strategic plan. The strategic plan deals 6 with, ASCLD wants to be a participant, they 7 want to be an organizer, they want to be 8 coordinator of forensic science related to 9 training programs. 10 What we have is we want to work with 11 organizations like NCFS, NFSTC, which Bill 12 will talk about, and also with different 13 universities and colleges and programs 14 different programs that are out there. 15 We also have a task force which is 16 made up of Sue Narvison and Jay Siegal that 17 are put together to assist in the 18 development of basic criteria for forensic 19 education programs. So ASCLD is taking a 20 proactive response to this need by making it 21 part of our strategic plan. 22 Also, as President-Elect of ASCLD, one 23 of my responsibilities is I have to put 24 together the 28th Annual Symposium on Crime 25 Laboratory Development. In the past, the 418 1 2 lab or the symposium always has a certain 3 percentage of management courses that deal 4 for crime laboratory directors, assistant 5 directors, those people that are involved in 6 management of crime laboratories. 7 This year, in addition to that, what 8 I'm doing is I'm having workshops on the 9 front end, actually, on Saturday and Sunday 10 that are going to address those basic needs 11 of laboratory directors, but at our 12 symposium, which is in Buffalo, New York, 13 the week of September 11th and the 14th, I 14 have a segment that's going to be dedicated 15 to the education of our forensic scientists. 16 What I am doing is putting together a 17 program that's actually going to explore new 18 and unique programs that are going to be 19 designed to educate the forensic scientists 20 in specific disciplines. We're going to 21 take a look certain things like the FBI's, 22 the New Distance Learning Initiative that's 23 going to be due to be implemented this fall. 24 We'll be looking at programs from 25 NCFS, also NFSTC. Dr. Paul Ferrara will be 419 1 2 involved, and he'll be discussing the 3 Forensic Institute that was, in part, funded 4 by funds from Patricia Cornwell, in which 5 people that want to be scientists, in other 6 words, scientists that want to work in the 7 forensic laboratory, are trained in the 8 institute, and then that becomes a direct 9 pool for the Virginia system to be able to 10 hire and bring into the laboratory. 11 Also, we're going to explore 12 innovative university programs like, for 13 instance, as I said, some of the programs 14 that we've already heard, of how we're going 15 to train our forensic scientists in the 16 future, not just the classical getting a 17 Bachelor's degree in Chemistry, or like what 18 I did, in Forensic Chemistry, but how can we 19 better take and mold the person to be a pool 20 or a source in which they can move into 21 laboratories and not to spend this one to 22 three years in mentoring; and instead of 23 doing that, maybe only spending three or six 24 months of mentoring and fine tuning the 25 person learning some of the SOPs and 420 1 2 uniquenesses of the agency and, therefore, 3 not drawing down those limited resources of 4 the agency to get a person on-line. So 5 these are some of the things that, actually, 6 we're going to be taking and looking at our 7 28th Annual Symposium. 8 The other thing that I want to make 9 everybody aware of is that there's a 10 consortium. The Consortium is a group of 11 laboratory, or not laboratory, but actually 12 directors of various different or presidents 13 of different forensic organizations 14 throughout the United States. 15 It includes ASCLD. It includes 16 ASCLD/LAB. It includes the American Academy 17 of Forensic Sciences. I know that NCFS, 18 NFST are involved, and what it does is, it 19 identifies the need that we have to do 20 something regarding forensics. 21 And in order to do that, we have to 22 have a common unified voice. We cannot be 23 fragmented in our approach. So the 24 Consortium was put together of the various 25 different leaders of the forensic community 421 1 2 to come together to voice the opinion of the 3 forensic science community and say, Hey, 4 look. Listen to us. We need funding. We 5 need certain resources that we're very, very 6 short on in the forensic community. 7 Two of those areas: One deals with 8 personnel staffing and the other one is 9 training, amongst other areas. So the 10 Consortium is working to actually gain funds 11 to promote the need for the forensic 12 community that's out there, to actually be 13 recognized as a unified, common voice. 14 The Consortium also is supporting a 15 National Forensic Commission which can 16 actually take over that responsibility and 17 be that unified voice so we get the funding 18 that we need for education, training, 19 amongst other needs in the forensic 20 community. 21 The Consortium also supports certain 22 initiatives like the NFSIA, Eclipse, and 23 those types of programs in order to get that 24 funding. 25 The bottom line is, we must try to 422 1 2 seek alternative methods for learning, and 3 we must do that in a cooperative manner, 4 work with the universities. Universities 5 cannot do it on their own. They need the 6 laboratories. The laboratories cannot 7 afford to do it on their own anymore. 8 We need the universities. We need the 9 NCFSs, The National Forensic Science 10 training Center, those organizations to be 11 able to work together to achieve our goal. 12 The outcome is going to be better 13 utilization of limited resource for the 14 laboratory to achieve our goals, and that 15 will also provide an improved educational 16 quality of our forensic applicants, the pool 17 from which we can draw from. It will also 18 greatly increase the efficiency and 19 effectiveness of the laboratory. 20 The bottom line is, it will improve 21 customer satisfaction, which is really what 22 the laboratories are there for, to provide a 23 better service if we take and we work 24 smarter in educating and training our 25 forensic scientists. And, pretty much, 423 1 2 that's it. 3 (Applause.) 4 MR. CONNOLLY: Thank you, Keith. 5 Terry Fenger serves as Director of the 6 Forensic Science Program and Chair of the 7 Microbiology, Immunology, and Molecular 8 Genetics at Marshall University School of 9 Medicine in Huntington, West Virginia. 10 Dr. Fenger also serves as the Director 11 of Marshall University component of the West 12 Virginia CODIS under the authority of the 13 West Virginia State Police. He received his 14 Ph.D. in Microbiology from Southern Illinois 15 University in Carbondale, and then he 16 conducted post-doctoral research at LSU 17 Medical Center in New Orleans. Terry 18 Fenger. 19 DR. FENGER: I'd like to thank the 20 NIJ and the various New York agencies for 21 allowing me to present this material on the 22 Marshall University Forensic Science 23 program. We have one of the newer programs 24 in the area of higher education in forensic 25 science, and I'd just like to highlight a 424 1 2 little bit about how we got started and 3 where we think we're going with the program. 4 Actually, we got our footing back in 5 1990. There was a trial in Huntington, West 6 Virginia where they exonerated an individual 7 who was in the prison system using DNA 8 technologies. 9 Dr. Bing and Dr. Blight came to West 10 Virginia, and they participated in a habeas 11 corpus appeal. This was really our first 12 introduction as a microbiologist and a 13 forensic biologist to the forensic side of 14 things. 15 During 1992 through 1994, we offered, 16 supposedly, it was going to be one course, 17 but it turned out to be seven graduate-level 18 courses to the criminalists at the West 19 Virginia State Police as part of their 20 continuing education program. 21 At that time they realized it was very 22 costly to go to various places throughout 23 the United States for continuing education. 24 There was a backlog in the subscription to 25 courses at the FBI and Quantico. Some of 425 1 2 the courses, they had to wait on the order 3 of a couple of years. So this was the 4 setting in which our program began. 5 The forensic science program was 6 approved by the Board of Trustees in '94, 7 and just about that same time, we were 8 becoming interested, we meaning the West 9 Virginia State Police and Marshall, in 10 CODIS; and Senate Bill 252 allowed West 11 Virginia CODIS to start. 12 And in that law or in that bill, it 13 stated that Marshall University would do the 14 DNA testing for CODIS under the supervision 15 of the West Virginia State Police. 16 This one aspect has, I think, had a 17 major impact on the development of the 18 program because not only do we participate 19 in the educational process, but we also have 20 the CODIS lab right there next to the 21 forensic science program, its facilities, 22 and this allows our students to see what an 23 active DNA lab for forensic purposes is all 24 about; and it shows them a little bit about 25 database management and so forth. So 426 1 2 there's a number of practical aspects that 3 stem from that decision to allow Marshall to 4 do this. 5 So classes began in '95, and our first 6 graduating class in '97. Just last week, we 7 graduated our fourth class of 23 students. 8 Four of those graduates, over the years, 9 have come from the west Virginia State 10 Police. 11 A number of them that started taking 12 courses between '92 and '94 continued their 13 education during the period of the 90s, and 14 they had enough credits to qualify for a 15 Master's degree. 16 Now, I tried to assess how we 17 developed this program, and, really, there 18 was no formal structure by which we could 19 utilize for the development of the courses 20 and the curriculum, in general. So a lot of 21 the courses developed out of our 22 interactions with the West Virginia State 23 Police and federal agencies. 24 We would ask experts in the field, 25 "What do you need, or what do you view as 427 1 2 the potential for a particular course?" 3 And they gave us a lot of feedback which 4 helped us develop our curriculum. 5 The guest speakers, when they came 6 into Marshall, and many of which came from 7 the FBI and other federal agencies, these 8 individuals would give us their opinion 9 about what courses were needed. 10 We attended national meetings, and we 11 looked at established programs and looked at 12 their curricula to help us format ours. At 13 about that time TWGDAM was developing its 14 core curriculum, and they suggested 15 biochemistry, cellular-molecular biology, 16 genetics and statistics, so we included 17 those courses in our curriculum; and we 18 looked to the ABC just to determine what 19 type of questions were being asked on the 20 general knowledge exam, and that helped us. 21 Other things that were transpiring 22 about that same time were occurring in the 23 legal system so far as the O.J. Simpson 24 Trial and other trials which pointed to the 25 direction of evidence collection as being 428 1 2 extremely important and other investigative 3 processes. And, of course, new technologies 4 were developing, and we had to incorporate 5 that, especially, into our DNA courses. 6 I'd just like to briefly go through 7 our curriculum. This is a Master's level 8 course or curriculum, so most of our 9 students come in with a Bachelor's degree in 10 either Chemistry, Biology, Geology. One had 11 Chemical Engineering from John Hopkins. So 12 it was a variety of different individuals. 13 These individuals must have the 14 following courses: a year of physics, 15 chemistry, biology, and a year of organic, 16 all with labs; they have to have a 1500 on 17 their graduate record exam; a B average; and 18 three letters of recommendation pointing to 19 their integrity. We do not do any 20 background checks of these individuals. 21 The first year, first semester, they 22 take biochemistry, which satisfies one of 23 the criteria for what was TWGDAM, now 24 SWGDAM; fingerprints; crime scene and death 25 investigation; and a multiple topics course. 429 1 2 The crime scene and death 3 investigation, we think, is rather unusual 4 because the students who participate in this 5 on an alternative basis actually wear a 6 pager and are called out on crime scenes. 7 So they actually get to see what a crime 8 scene looks like. 9 We have one of the faculty members in 10 our program, is also the Coroner of Cabble 11 and Wayne County, and he calls these 12 students out on death investigations. 13 We have a close association with the 14 West Virginia Fire Marshal. Those 15 individuals that are interested in arson and 16 explosives, they wear pagers and they go out 17 to these crime scenes. 18 So these are firsthand training, and 19 we're the believers that many of the things 20 that we talk about in class need to be 21 amplified and supplemented with hands-on 22 training in the field by experts who have 23 done this their whole lives. So we have a 24 very close association with these other 25 agencies. 430 1 2 The multiple topics course. This is a 3 hodgepodge of different topics, but we 4 emphasize one area in particular. We talk 5 about IR spectroscopy, and we utilize that 6 for analysis of paint and other polymers. 7 But we also include explosives, arson, 8 firearms, glass fractures, and a number of 9 other topics, and seminar, which the 10 students are require today give. 11 Second semester, first year, the 12 genetics DNA technology course. This is one 13 of the core courses, again, for TWGDAM. We 14 have a microscopy course where they learn 15 scanning electron microscopy as well as 16 polarizing light microscopy. These two 17 areas, of course, can be used for gunshot 18 residue as well as fiber analysis. 19 Statistics is another core course for 20 TWGDAM. 21 A critical part of the our program is 22 a summer internship, and this is mandatory. 23 It's critical, but at the same time it's a 24 bottleneck for the program because the 25 students are required to go into a forensic 431 1 2 lab between June 10th and August and work 3 eight-hour days, five days a week. 4 So it's our responsibility to find 5 laboratories willing to accept these 6 students, and sometimes, especially for 7 those students who come to us from out of 8 state, it's difficult to make appropriate 9 matches. 10 In-state students often go to our 11 CODIS lab at Marshall, the West Virginia 12 State Police in various capacities. Some 13 have gone to question documents, 14 fingerprints, the DNA lab, trace, and so 15 forth. The medical examiners have taken 16 some of our students. 17 And then, of course, the out-of-state 18 agencies. Who encourage students that come 19 to our program from out of state to go back 20 to their home state and try to establish a 21 network with the state that they'll probably 22 ends up working with, so this is strongly 23 encouraged. But as our program has 24 increased in number, we have faced the 25 obstacle of finding the appropriate and 432 1 2 enough internships for our students. 3 The second year, first semester: 4 toxicology, cellular-molecular and other 5 TWGDAM. Bioterrorism. With our background 6 in microbiology, we offer this course as 7 what started out to be elective, but now 8 it's a mandated course in our series. 9 Seminar and electives. Electives, 10 especially, during the second year are 11 important in customizing the student's 12 experience. One students wants to work at 13 the ATF. It requires more chemistry than 14 what she had, so while she was at Marshall, 15 she also got a Bachelor's degree in 16 Chemistry to augment the Forensic Science 17 degree. 18 Final semester, we require digital 19 imaging; a legal issues course; electives, 20 again; and at the end of the last semester, 21 they're required to take a comprehensive 22 examination. This is an in-house 23 examination on all of the courses that 24 they've taken in forensic science. 25 It serves for us the monitor our 433 1 2 educational process, but it also gets the 3 students ready for their next task, and 4 that's going out and looking for a position. 5 They are keyed at that point. They have 6 reviewed all the information in the forensic 7 science courses, and we think this allows 8 them to present themselves well when they 9 look for jobs. 10 This indicates how the program has 11 developed over the years. We took our first 12 class in '95, which constituted about seven 13 students, 23 for the graduating class that 14 just graduated last week, and the one we 15 took last fall has about 17. The rise and 16 decline of the numbers does not reflect the 17 number of applications. 18 We found that because of the 19 bottleneck at the internship level, 23 was 20 just more than we could handle. We could 21 identify internships for those students, 22 and, therefore, we dropped back down to 17. 23 Also noted in the slide is the fact 24 that females apply to the program almost 2:1 25 compared to males, and this is a trend we've 434 1 2 seen, not only in forensic science, but in 3 higher education, in general. 4 It was reported at a meeting a couple 5 of weeks ago, that about ten years ago, the 6 college population at the undergraduate 7 level, 51 percent were male and 49 percent 8 were female. Now, the trend is that 41 9 percent are male, and the rest are female in 10 colleges throughout the country. So this is 11 a trend that we see in a number of different 12 areas. 13 This is a depiction of the location 14 from which the various students come from; 15 green being in-state students, red being 16 out-of-state, and blue being out of country. 17 And whereas, when we first started the 18 program, a good proportion of the students 19 came from instate, now it's shifted that a 20 good proportion of the students come from 21 out of state. 22 We have a number of individuals that 23 come down to the program from Canada, and 24 this last year, we just graduated one of the 25 medical examiners from Bucharest, Romania, 435 1 2 who came and participated in our program 3 over the last two years. 4 This takes the data from the last two 5 classes, and, again, it shows the overall 6 application numbers. We get about a hundred 7 or so applications for the slots that I 8 indicated before. We're going to probably 9 level off at about 17 positions. 10 Most of these, again, come from out of 11 state at this point in time. We accept, 12 again, about 17. A number of these 13 students, apparently, are applying to other 14 programs, though there's always a number 15 that drops off every year from those that we 16 accept. 17 On your far right, these, again, 18 indicate, these bars, again, indicate the 19 number of females versus males. It's 20 important for a new program such as ours to 21 monitor where our graduates go, how easy 22 they get jobs, and how well they're accepted 23 by the forensic science community. 24 In the first year, we graduated seven 25 students plus one state police criminalist. 436 1 2 So a number of them stayed in West Virginia. 3 One went to Utah, Ohio, Indiana in question 4 documents, and another one is actually an 5 instructor in the program. 6 And we're located in a medical school, 7 and we predict that this will continue to be 8 the case, there's at least one student in 9 every class that decides to go to medical 10 school, but we don't look at that as a 11 detriment. We look at it as, now, somebody 12 entering into the medical field who has an 13 understanding of forensic science, and if 14 they have some impact on the way evidence is 15 handled in emergency rooms or child abuse 16 cases, we feel that that's a positive 17 effect. 18 Again, the second year, this is for 19 West Virginia CODIS, Georgia Bureau of 20 Investigations, Cellmark. We have two at 21 the FBI, one in trace evidence, one in 22 fingerprints. 23 I think the fingerprint story points 24 out an aspect of the program. Even though 25 we do not stress fingerprints at all, it's a 437 1 2 one-hour course, first semester, four of our 3 graduates have been hired into fingerprints. 4 And how that appears to have developed 5 is that the students become interested in 6 fingerprints, they do their summer 7 internship at the West Virginia State Police 8 in fingerprints, and that internship is what 9 gives them the direction in working in a 10 fingerprint laboratory. And we have a 11 number that are off to law school. 12 And this is our third class. Again, 13 fingerprints, and as you can see, two have 14 gone into the Ph.D. program at Marshall 15 through the biomedical science program. So 16 it's a number of the courses that we require 17 at the forensic science level are also 18 requirements for the Ph.D. and M.D. 19 programs. So they do not have to retake 20 many of these core courses, and they can 21 move into the research slots at the Ph.D. 22 level. 23 Needs. This echoes many of the needs 24 that have already been discussed by the 25 previous presenters. We feel like there 438 1 2 should be some national guidelines to help 3 in the development of forensic science 4 programs; there should be an accreditation 5 process for forensic science courses; a 6 standardized comprehensive exam covering the 7 courses that a committee would develop. 8 We also feel that there needs to be 9 more of a distance learning or distance 10 education network that develops off of the 11 forensic science programs to fulfill the 12 needs of the local law enforcement, the 13 prosecutors, and so forth; and we need grant 14 support, and I think this has been echoed by 15 a number of presenters today. 16 So far as the Marshall program 17 expanding it scope into other areas, we view 18 several different directions, One of which 19 is to try to present the formal courses to 20 the West Virginia State Police as well as 21 other law enforcement agencies through a 22 distance learning modality. We have some 23 courses at the undergraduate level that 24 could also be transmitted through distance 25 learning. 439 1 2 And we have recently had a focus group 3 at our facility where we asked 4 representatives from the judiciary, the 5 legal profession, the law enforcement, fire 6 marshal; and we've asked them the question, 7 "What do you need from us? What can we 8 provide either through formal courses 9 in-house or courses that we can transmit 10 using the distance learning mode?" 11 And so we're in a process of surveying 12 their needs and developing courses through 13 distance learning. This, again, is 14 addressed to those people who are already 15 out there practicing, but they need 16 additional continuing education credits or 17 they may decide that they want to proceed 18 for the Master's degree. 19 One thing that we've been developing 20 in association with Bell Atlantic is the ATM 21 System. One of the judges in Huntington has 22 been instrumental in the developing of a 23 process called "Courtroom of the Future." 24 Eventually, all 55 County courthouses will 25 be linked, will be networked together, and 440 1 2 the original intent of this network was 3 deposition of arrestees. 4 However, we look at it as our ability 5 to transmit courses throughout the state and 6 to various audiences, including, like I 7 mentioned, the prosecutors, law enforcement, 8 fire marshal, and so forth. 9 And so we've had experience on certain 10 levels with distance learning. We have 11 webcast-based learning programs that we've 12 developed. We've developed some through 13 Marshall, some through the state government, 14 and some through the elementary system. 15 I should point out that three of the 16 four graduates who obtained Master's degrees 17 from the program, obtained much of the 18 course work through distance learning. We 19 had a room set up in Huntington. The State 20 Police are located in Charleston about 50 21 miles away, and we have another campus in 22 Charleston; and we were able to transmit the 23 course and cause minimal disruption of their 24 day. 25 So in summary, the forensic science 441 1 2 program at Marshall is relatively new. 3 We've developed a curriculum that we think 4 is still evolving. 5 Courses that we want to include in the 6 curriculum are those dealing with 7 cybercrime, which is an extension of our 8 digital imaging course. We want to expand 9 on our offerings in bioterrorism and really 10 keep track of what current areas are of 11 importance to the forensic science community 12 and develop courses along those lines. 13 Thank you very much. 14 (Applause.) 15 MR. CONNOLLY: Our last, but certainly 16 not least, presenter is William Tilstone. 17 He was appointed as Executive Director of 18 the National Forensic Science Center in 19 1986, and since that time has been 20 responsible for establishing the Center as a 21 key contributor to the enhancement of 22 quality forensic services nationally. 23 He is a member and Fellow of the Royal 24 College of Pathologists, received his B.S. 25 degree and Ph.D. both from the University of 442 1 2 Glasgow, Scotland. William Tilstone. 3 DR. TILSTONE: Before I begin, I 4 wanted to ask if there are any lawyers left, 5 apart from my two fellow panelists. There's 6 either two lawyers or two lawyers and three 7 cowards left. 8 I just wanted to try and redress the 9 balance a little bit. You folks have taken 10 it in the chin from many sources, and you 11 may wonder why you come to these meetings 12 and get assaulted and insulted and, 13 generally, beaten up. 14 And the answer is a serious one, and 15 it goes back to the question I asked of the 16 education people about the values of 17 forensic science and values, in the sense 18 that the previous panelists were talking 19 about, are the kind of things they would 20 like to see forensic scientists hold dear. 21 But, in fact, values that people 22 really have, the things inside them that 23 drive the way that they behave, the way that 24 they do things right here are a bit 25 different, and one of the fundamental values 443 1 2 in forensic science is seeing if you ever go 3 into a lab and have a coffee with someone, 4 there's a distinct distaste for lawyers; and 5 we tell lawyer jokes like, the lawyer who 6 stood on a cowpad and screamed, help, help. 7 I'm melting. 8 So what are you doing to do about it? 9 And one of the things that you can do about 10 it is, you can ask yourself, or not ask 11 yourself, ask the forensic scientists who 12 are saying nasty things to you, well, how 13 did you get to be a forensic scientist? 14 And they will tell you, I had to get a 15 degree and I had to get a job and I applied 16 and I got it. And you'll say, well, like 17 me, did you have to take any board exams to 18 qualify you for doing this job? And they'll 19 say, no. 20 Then you can say, like me, do you have 21 to continually demonstrate your competency 22 by continuing education? And they'll say, 23 no. So if you get that retaliation in the 24 first of these things, maybe it will stop 25 lawyer jokes. My fee's $500, and your bill 444 1 2 will be in your mail by monday. 3 So let's look at what I'm going to 4 talk about. I'm going to talk about 5 training and assessment in forensic science 6 that's going to deal with some of these 7 things. 8 But before I get to there, I have some 9 acknowledgments, like everyone. I'd like to 10 thank NIJ and their co-sponsors for the 11 invitation to speak. I'd like to thank my 12 friends and colleagues at the University 13 Strathclyde Forensic Science Unit, the 14 Forensic Science Center in South Australia 15 where I was Director for 12 years, NFSTC, 16 and the many others who discussed, argued, 17 and maybe even occasionally persuaded me of 18 views on the subject of training and 19 education. 20 I would also like to acknowledge the 21 support of NIJ to the NFSTC. As of April of 22 this year, there's an NIJ supported Forensic 23 Science Center, and I put that in, not just 24 to be polite and acknowledge it, but as 25 objective proof that things are changing. 445 1 2 There are more resources being into the 3 support of forensic science than there were 4 a few years ago. 5 So just to go back a little bit and 6 look at and define the difference between 7 education and training. Of course, we were 8 talking of the training side. But I see 9 education as primarily learning oriented. 10 So it's all about learning. 11 I find it difficult to see how you can 12 claim any credibility in education as a 13 learning institution if you do not conduct 14 research, which is contributing to the 15 advancement of knowledge. 16 It usually has a broad basis. It's 17 not terribly specific and narrowly defined. 18 It's delivered from educational 19 institutions, so you know where to go to get 20 education. 21 It usually takes a long time. We saw 22 some examples up to ten years. And very, 23 very, significantly, it's examined. So you 24 cannot leave your educational institution 25 with your degree without passing some sort 446 1 2 of examination. And once you've passed that 3 examination, you have some sort of 4 qualification which is, to some degree or 5 another, transportable. 6 Now, how does training differ? Well, 7 it's outcome orientated. So to begin with, 8 there's a purpose to it, which is of a 9 narrow focus and is not present in 10 educational programs because it's intended 11 to improve or create some degree of 12 competency in some defined area. 13 It's generally short. You won't go in 14 a training program for ten years. Ten hours 15 if you're lucky or unlucky, in some cases. 16 It's often delivered at the workplace, so 17 you don't have to travel for it. It comes 18 to you sometimes. 19 It's also an integral part of 20 technology transfer. The things you're 21 going to hear about this afternoon will be 22 of absolutely no use to you in your 23 workplace or beneficiaries of forensic 24 investigations without appropriate training 25 to transfer the understanding of the basis 447 1 2 of that technology and how to make it work, 3 and that's a very important part of 4 training. 5 Now, I snuck in the word "assessment" 6 in the title, and I just want to talk a 7 little bit now about why I did that. First 8 of all, assessment provides some objective 9 proof of the effectiveness of training or 10 education, coming back to a comment made 11 about education, about how there is an 12 examination in it. 13 It can be the basis of lifetime 14 learning, and by that, I mean that you can 15 build up an objective portfolio of how you 16 have learned new skills through your 17 lifetime because of assessment or a 18 continuing assessment as you've gone through 19 training programs. 20 It can be related to the maintenance 21 of some degree of professional 22 certification, and, as I said in the 23 introduction; hairdressers and attorneys, 24 yep, forensic scientists, nope. There is 25 not that maintenance of professional 448 1 2 certification and competence for us, but 3 there is for hairdressers and these people 4 that we make jokes about. 5 So let's go now to have a look at some 6 of the determining influences in training. 7 These are certification, we're going to look 8 at them one by one; accreditation; DNA; and, 9 of course, we have to have another category. 10 Certification. The key issue in 11 certification we're facing just now is the 12 growth of certification boards in forensic 13 science, we heard about it in medicine, but 14 we also had a little bit in the education 15 field about the American Board of 16 Criminalistics and the work that it does. 17 And the boards of certification are 18 seeking to demonstrate and retain proof of 19 some undercutting theoretical knowledge and 20 practical ability in the applied field. So 21 certification should bring with it a degree 22 of confidence to the user of the services 23 that the people doing things at least have 24 some ability. Unfortunately, for forensic 25 science, is voluntary. 449 1 2 Accreditation. Another voluntary 3 situation most of the times, but programs 4 such as the one delivered by ASCLD/LAB have 5 in them requirements for objective proof of 6 qualifications of the practitioners and 7 their continuing development. 8 But, probably, the major influence in 9 the last ten years to formalize, 10 institutionalize, and, I guess, just 11 generally beef up and make relevant and 12 significant training programs has been 13 what's happened in DNA, and, in particular, 14 the DAB standards which require proof of 15 education in key areas and of continuing 16 education. 17 The scientific working groups parented 18 by TWGDAM but now on to SWGMAT, Swig drugs, 19 swig beer, swig everything. (Laughter.) You 20 are awake. Good. Scientific working groups 21 also have built into their standards for 22 most of the sub-disciplines in forensic 23 science, education, continuing education, 24 and training requirements. 25 The other influences. Just one little 450 1 2 word. They're not insignificant, for 3 example, Dauber (phonetic.) The question, 4 is the subject matter covered by recognized 5 training and education programs? If it 6 ain't, then there's a question as to whether 7 it's admissable as scientific evidence. 8 Economics. I've often overheard the 9 plaintive cry yesterday and today, if only 10 we had more money. Gee, there ain't no 11 money. Gee, ain't it tough. But the fact 12 of the matter is forensic science is not a 13 rich field, never has been, and never will 14 because it's very, very small, and it's 15 going to take its place in the grand scheme 16 of things. So there's never ever going to 17 be a lot of money. 18 There are things that you can do to 19 try to compensate for the lack of funding, 20 and one of these is to take the training or 21 education to the student. The other thing 22 you can do is to make it needs orientated, 23 and I think it was Victor who showed the 24 report from the summit of a couple of years 25 ago that NIJ sponsored. 451 1 2 And part of that is to say, yes, 3 training is important, but that training has 4 to be needs orientated so there's value in 5 it, and the little resources available is 6 usefully used. 7 Another example, and this is one of 8 the workshops that NFSTC has produced for 9 the community based on needs, and that's 10 "Hair Examination for DNA Analysts." 11 Comments were made a few times about how old 12 skills are dying and being replaced by new 13 skills and new attitudes. 14 But, guess what, I've wondered around 15 in labs and asked them, "What do you do in 16 here?" And they tell me they do DNA. And I 17 say, "Do you do trace?" And they say, "No, 18 we don't." And the first thing you see is a 19 DNA examiner looking down a microscope at 20 hair. 21 I say, "What are you doing?" They 22 say, "Well, I'm looking at hair. Isn't it 23 obvious? Are you blind?" And I say, "Well, 24 what are you going to do with it? Are you 25 going to do a hair examination?" They say, 452 1 2 "No, no. I'm just looking to see what the 3 racial origin is or the body origin is." 4 Hey, folks. That's hair examination, and 5 these skills are being lost. 6 So we produced a very successful 7 workshop last year to reintroduce and 8 reinforce the basic skills in hair 9 examination for DNA analysts. 10 The other thing about training is that 11 it is a significant key in performance 12 development, career development, getting 13 better jobs, more well-paid jobs, or 14 whatever; but the really significant thing 15 there is 20 years of experience could be 20 16 years of doing the same thing wrongly, and 17 that's why training is significant and has 18 to take its place with education and 19 experience. Experience by itself is no 20 indication of competence or developing 21 competence and skills. 22 A slight digression here. I want to 23 just quickly run through some things about 24 web-based programs, and examples I'm going 25 to give here are educational rather than 453 1 2 training, but we have, in fact, applied the 3 same orientation to a couple of training 4 developments that we'll be releasing fairly 5 soon. 6 Web-based education, which Jack and I 7 have been involved in for three years now, 8 is, in fact, extremely successful. The 9 feedback from the student says, "This is 10 tougher than I thought it would be, I've 11 learned more than I thought I would learn, 12 and, hey, this is for real." 13 But it's based on different principles 14 to stand-up-and-talk academic programs. And, 15 in particular, it's based on the concept Of 16 creating asynchronous learning networks, and 17 those of you who can write quickly can go to 18 www.2Hawaii.edu.lalantext.htm. If you 19 really wanted it. I'll reiterate it later. 20 And the point about these are that 21 these aren't simply programs that take 22 text-based material and put it up on a 23 website, but they are tutorial and learning 24 outcome-based, and successful web-based 25 programs begin by saying, what are the 454 1 2 learning outcomes and then create a network 3 where people learn from each on a tutorial 4 basis like some of the best and most highly 5 regarded academic institutions do. 6 And the two examples are the Master's 7 in DNA, which Jack Ballantyne is here as a 8 program director for, and a new degree that 9 we've been involved in with the Junior 10 College in St. Petersburg for an Associate's 11 degree in Crime Scene Technology. 12 Coming to the last leg of my 13 presentation which is returning to this 14 theme of education, I want to put to you the 15 concept that training without some sort of 16 the assessment is useless, and I want to 17 produce some information to about a scheme 18 we have produced which provides that 19 assessment in the form continuing education 20 credits. 21 We designed this about two and a half 22 years ago, and it's been taking off across 23 the country. What we do is we use as a 24 yardstick what you have to go into achieving 25 one credit at the Junior college level. So 455 1 2 that's the base measuring point or the 3 reference point. 4 And we look at the programs and 5 workshops that are being offered; we review 6 the faculty, their experience, their CVs; we 7 look at the course curriculum; and we look 8 at the facilities. And we require that the 9 workshop has the compulsory test. We don't 10 say what it should be. We're not looking 11 for anything terribly stringent, but it's an 12 absolute necessity that a workshop does have 13 some sort of test. 14 And I'd like to share our experiences 15 over two years of this. Firstly, most of 16 the programs taking up the scheme have been 17 in the field of DNA. Examples would be 18 Promega, who chose it for the workshops in 19 the program last year and they're going to 20 do it again this year; the Cambridge Health 21 Technologies, their program last year and 22 again this year; the Florida STR Program, 23 two years ago and again this year. 24 Guess what we found from that 25 experience? Some students choose not to 456 1 2 take the test. I have to say I think that's 3 appalling. I just cannot fathom why anyone 4 with any sense of integrity would take their 5 employer's money to go to a workshop where 6 there's some test, some simple test and 7 choose not to take it. Maybe it's because 8 they were in the bar or Mickey Mouse lives 9 in Orlando. I don't know. I find it's an 10 astonishing thing. 11 What's even more astonishing and of a 12 greater concern is that some faculty have 13 declined to teach if their workshop is going 14 to be tested and subject to continuing 15 education credits, and I think we should all 16 walk out of here very perturbed by that. 17 What are my conclusions? First of 18 all, without question, training is one of 19 the key factors in operational competency 20 and successful technology transfer. When 21 we're talking today about education and 22 training, we're not talking about an 23 either/or. We're talking about two things 24 that go hand in hand to give users, the 25 justice system, the public, victims, 457 1 2 everyone, the confidence that forensic 3 science is, in fact, working. 4 Training, unfortunately, is not 5 mandated for anyone to practice as a 6 forensic scientist, but there are several 7 factors which we talked about like 8 accreditation and DAB, which are making 9 training become a requirement. 10 And, finally, for it to really work 11 and work well, program evaluation and some 12 degree of participant assessment with the 13 consequential continuing education units 14 have to be key factors in the success of 15 training. 16 The last thing I wanted to share with 17 you is just to reinforce that point about 18 what the difference between education and 19 training is. I would invite you to think 20 about two things. I would invite you to 21 think about sex, and I would like you to 22 think about children; and I'd like to think, 23 in particular, how you would feel if your 24 children came home from school and said, we 25 had sex education today as compared to if 458 1 2 they came home from school and said, we had 3 sex training today. (Laughter.) 4 (Applause.) 5 MR. CONNOLLY: Thank you. I think one 6 of the things I've gotten, at least, out of 7 the program for the last day and a half, and 8 certainly this morning's programs, are that 9 training and education, clearly, are not 10 mutually exclusive. I think they're 11 extremely complementary to each other. 12 Secondly, just as sort of outsider, 13 my observation is that the whole field of 14 forensic science is sort of a growth 15 industry, and because of that, it continues 16 to be a work in progress. 17 I want to thank the panel. Are there 18 any questions? Thank you all. Enjoy lunch. 19 DR. FORMAN: Lunch today is going to 20 be a boxed lunch, which will be served out 21 at the table next to the registration table. 22 It will be then brought back in here to 23 enjoy the lunch and to enjoy the awards that 24 we're going to present. 25 LUNCHEON / AWARDS PRESENTATION 459 1 2 MR. BOYD: I'd like to interrupt you 3 for just a minute. We're now going to take 4 the opportunity to present some awards to 5 some outstanding people and to give them a 6 chance to come up to the front of the 7 audience and talk to you while they still 8 have lettuce stuck in their teeth. 9 Yesterday at noon, we gave out the 10 first of these awards, and we did that 11 because Dawn couldn't be with us, but today 12 we want to go through the formal part of it 13 and begin to recognize those people that we 14 think have really made the big difference 15 and made the contribution. And I want to go 16 through a couple of things here to give you 17 an idea of exactly what we want to do and 18 also to make sure that we give the 19 photographers time to get set up. 20 Throughout its involvement in the 21 development of forensic DNA, the National 22 Institute of Justice has had the privilege 23 of working with and learning from many 24 extaordinarily talented and insightful 25 individuals within the criminal justice and 460 1 2 scientific communities. 3 Indeed, there are far too many to 4 mention them all during the brief 5 presentation that we're going to make here, 6 but we would like, however, to take a minute 7 to talk about just a few of these colleagues 8 that have made significant and 9 ground-breaking contributions to the use of 10 DNA in the criminal justice system over the 11 past 15 years. 12 Were it not for courageous efforts of 13 these individuals, the science of DNA would 14 not be where it is today nor would the 15 criminal justice system have reaped the 16 benefits of this science to the extent that 17 it has. In fact, as all of you are aware, 18 DNA has become the model for how the 19 forensic sciences should be handled. 20 Each of these awards reads, "Profiles 21 in DNA Courage, May 8-9, 2000" and then the 22 name of the individual is located underneath 23 it. 24 Then what I'd like to do is to ask 25 these people to come up. Let me give you a 461 1 2 couple of instructions. The award is in two 3 pieces. It is also very heavy. So I want 4 to caution you. Be careful. It is very 5 heavy, and it is in two pieces. 6 First, if I could ask Dr. Thomas 7 Caskey to come forward. 8 (Applause.) 9 (Presentation of award.) 10 I'd like to tell you a couple of 11 things about Dr. Caskey, if I could. He's 12 currently the Chief Operating Officer and 13 President of Cogen Biotech Ventures, Ltd. as 14 well as an Adjunct Professor at Baylor 15 College of Medicine in Houston, and that's 16 interesting because we've been talking a bit 17 about working both in industry and in the 18 university setting. 19 He's made a number of contributions to 20 the development of DNA for forensic uses. 21 Among those are that he chaired the 22 Congressional Office of Science and 23 Technology Policies Advisory Panel, which 24 assessed forensic DNA back in 1989-1990, and 25 he holds a membership on the National 462 1 2 Academy's National Research Counsel on DNA 3 and held that from 1989 to 1991. 4 And we're especially pleased to honor 5 him today, particularly, for his pioneering 6 research on STRs. The markers embraced by 7 the forensic community today were developed 8 under his direction, and they now lay a firm 9 foundation basis for STR validation in 10 providing this community with sets of 11 sensitive, powerful, and amplifiable 12 markers. So congratulations, Dr. Caskey. 13 (Applause.) 14 DR. CASKEY: First of all, thank you 15 very much for the honor, and I would like to 16 make a few comments about some of the people 17 who have contributed to this work. I'm 18 going to give you a two or three minute 19 blitz on the technology that finally emerged 20 as an identification system through STRs. 21 It had its roots with an M.D./Ph.D. 22 student, Al Edwards, who we shipped off to 23 Heidelberg to work with Wilhelm Ensorge 24 where we sequenced for the first time with a 25 automated sequencer, a human disease gene, 463 1 2 HBRT. 3 In the midst of that gene was a 4 tetrameric repeat, which when we looked at 5 it by PCR, was highly polymorphic. We 6 immediately flipped to a database, which was 7 pretty limited at that point, identified 8 every triplet and tetrameric repeat that was 9 available, tested the parameters of those 10 for their polymorphism, found them to be 11 highly polymorphic, and we were off and 12 running at that point adding multiplex 13 amplification, internal markers, and, 14 finally, were given funding for a 377, and 15 we moved on to fluorescence testing. 16 So it's been a pleasure to see this 17 interface of genome science and a practical 18 applications area in the forensic science. 19 I think without the instrumentation, without 20 the background of knowledge that came 21 through the genome project, this could not 22 have accelerated as rapidly as it has. 23 I'd like to close, though, with one 24 comment. It's win thing to develop a 25 technology that has new insights. It is 464 1 2 still another to take that new knowledge and 3 to turn it into something that is robust, 4 has high fidelity, high reproducibility, 5 and, in fact, public acceptance. 6 So the work that we did at the basic 7 science level never would have hit the 8 streets and never would have hit the courts 9 without the expertise of the people in this 10 audience, and I'm ever so grateful that it 11 has been done in a fine style; and I've had 12 a fine time working with it. Thank you. 13 (Applause.) 14 DR. BOYD: I'd like to get Dr. James 15 Crow to come up. I know most of you know 16 Dr. Crow who is a pre-eminent population 17 geneticist, and his work has influential in 18 the scientific community for more than five 19 decades. It's amazing for somebody who 20 looks so young. 21 Over the last six years, Dr. Crow has 22 bestowed upon the forensic community a clear 23 and thoughtful leadership in the arena of 24 population genetics. 25 First, wading into the mire of the 465 1 2 1992 NRC Ceiling Principle, which I'm sure 3 all of you remember, as Chairman of the 1996 4 NRC, he was able to provide forensic 5 scientists with reasonable, sound and 6 scientifically defensible methods, sometimes 7 defensive as well, for estimating the rarity 8 of a DNA match. 9 Dr. Crow currently serves as 10 Commissioner on the DNA Commission where he 11 chairs the Commission's Research and 12 Development Working Group, and he uses his 13 considerable skills there at bringing 14 together diverse opinions so that the 15 forensic community will have kind of 16 information they need to successfully 17 analyze case. 18 What I have to tell you, as a brand 19 new guy in this whole new forensic arena 20 inheriting the 1992 NRC report and trying to 21 figure out what we were going to do and 22 being pressed on all sides by a variety of 23 agencies, including some with three letters 24 that I won't mention, it was really 25 refreshing that Dr. Crow managed to pull 466 1 2 that together and produce something that 3 everybody now is genuinely comfortable with. 4 So congratulations. 5 (Applause.) 6 (Award presentation) 7 DR. CROW: I thank you for those kind 8 words about my appearance having lived 9 through most of the 20th century and 10 survived it, but you only see the facade; 11 and I won't go into the details of what's 12 inside. 13 I never cease to enjoy talking about 14 being -- I'm sure that I'm the oldest member 15 of this program, so I'm going to make the 16 most of it. A fellow octogenarian once said 17 that they tell you that as you get older, 18 you're going to lose your mind, but what 19 they don't tell you is that you're not going 20 to miss it very much. (Laughter.) 21 Of course, I thank you very much for 22 this honor. I accept any honor that has no 23 attendant responsibilities to it no matter 24 how small. However, this is a big honor, a 25 high honor, and I am very pleased to receive 467 1 2 it. 3 I am also pleased to be in the midst 4 of a group of company starting with Tom 5 Caskey, people that I know and known for a 6 long time and whom I admire very much. 7 I want to talk just a little bit, 8 after all, at my age, I have to talk about 9 history, genetics and forensics all started 10 in the year 1900. That was the year 11 Mendel's laws were rediscovered. That was 12 the year that Landsteiner discovered the ABO 13 blood groups, and within a year or two, he 14 pointed out that these ought to be useful 15 for human identification or parentage 16 studies. 17 Actually, the first 85 years of this 18 century, that was the predominant technique, 19 and then for ten years, the NTRs became the 20 leading ones, and then for the last five 21 years, it's been STRs. 22 The trend here is one of tremendous 23 acceleration, and it would be very 24 surprising if that acceleration didn't go on 25 into the next ten years or the next century. 468 1 2 And so there, clearly, are exciting times 3 ahead. There are going to be surprises. 4 The only surprise will be if there aren't 5 any surprises. But we can certainly expect 6 fancy and beautiful new techniques. 7 On the other hand, although you can't 8 predict surprises, I think there are some 9 things that we can predict with some 10 confidence. One of them is that the 13 core 11 STR loci are going to be around for a while, 12 not necessarily because they're the best 13 that can be done, but because they're 14 institutionalized and it would be very 15 difficult to change them, and there's no 16 good reason to. 17 On the other hand, we can expect 18 modifications to the technique, we'll hear 19 much about it this afternoon; speed; 20 automation; miniaturization; and especially 21 for database work. 22 But for case work, I think you can 23 expect markers to come quickly into the 24 system, and I would predict that it's not 25 going to be very long until we can identify 469 1 2 differences among even the very close 3 relatives. 4 And brothers and sisters, or brothers, 5 usually, have a very nice property that 6 population geneticists love, and that is 7 that the probability of identify of have 8 brothers has a factor of one fourth in it 9 that dwarfs most of the other components; 10 and that one fourth depends only on 11 Mendelism, no assumptions of absence of 12 population structure, no assumptions of 13 Hardy-Weinberg and latent equilibrium. 14 So I suspect, within my lifetime even, 15 that we will be able to make individual 16 human identifications without having to 17 worry about whether there was a brother 18 involved somewhere. Thank you very much. 19 (Applause.) 20 MR. BOYD: My staff tells me I have to 21 step up to the podium. Dr. Henry Erlich. 22 Dr. Erlich is currently the Director of the 23 Human Genetics Department at Roche Molecular 24 Systems. And his early interest in 25 molecular evolution and population variation 470 1 2 led him to search for methods that would 3 allow scientists ways of tracing genes 4 through time. 5 And this ultimately led to the 6 development of easy-to-use tests using HLA 7 and other markers that catapulted the 8 forensic into the PCR age. 9 Between 1996 and 1998, NIJ witnessed 10 an explosion of public laboratories seeking 11 funds, that's not unusual at NIJ, to fulfill 12 the mandate of the DNA Laboratory 13 Improvement Program, the Crime Act 1994. 14 And from his thoughtful development of 15 a robust controlled amplification-based 16 system, the reverse-dye block, massive 17 technology transfer of PCR and DNA testing 18 could a occur in the forensic community. 19 And so we appreciate this enormous and 20 creative contribution as well as the many 21 hours on the witness stand in those early 22 RFLP DNA cases. 23 (Applause.) 24 (Award presentation.) 25 DR. ERLICH: Thanks very much, David. 471 1 2 On behalf of my colleagues at SDIS and Roche 3 Molecular Systems who are involved in 4 develope PCR and apply it to genetic typing, 5 I would like to thank the National Institute 6 of Justice for this great honor. 7 I'd also like to acknowledge, in 8 particular, Randy Saiki, who was involved in 9 amplifying the first specific gene from 10 human genomic DNA and also who developed the 11 first immobilized probe array format, which 12 became the basis for the first PCR test 13 which was the HLA DQ output forensics typing 14 system. 15 And also I'd like to acknowledge the 16 contributions of Becky Reynolds who extended 17 his initial test to a large panel of a PCR- 18 based test for forensics typing, and, in 19 fact, you'll be here later this afternoon 20 from Becky about the recent work that she 21 and her colleagues have been doing on 22 mitochondrial DNA typing. 23 But on a personal note, I'd just like 24 to say that the application of PCR to 25 forensics testing that started in 1986 with 472 1 2 the Pennsylvania versus Pestanikas case, has 3 been very satisfying to me because it 4 combined my research interests in molecular 5 and population genetics with a long-standing 6 commitment to social justice. 7 When Ed Blake, who rented a lab and 8 office space in our building, first asked me 9 for help in this case, I had to tell him 10 that the DNA that we extracted from the 11 formaldehyde-preserved specimens in this 12 case was far too degraded for RFLP analysis. 13 So I suggested to him that, given this 14 level of degradation, perhaps, we could try 15 a new technique that we were just working on 16 in the lab, PCR; and this was PCR with a 17 newly isolated intact polymerase. 18 So, fortunately, we were actually able 19 to amplify and type the DQ alpha locus on 20 these very degraded DNA samples. And in 21 this initial case where the genetic test was 22 requested by the prosecution and the result 23 favored the defense, we were all spared the 24 adversarial confrontation of an 25 admissibility hearing. 473 1 2 In that more innocent time, we thought 3 that validation had to do with self-esteem 4 and that Tellig Fry was a cooking technique. 5 In subsequent cases, however, 6 including the first post-conviction review, 7 the Gary Dodson case in 1988, we were 8 confronted with the adversarial nature of 9 our legal proceedings, and with a 10 realization familiar to most viewers of TV 11 legal dramas, that in the courtroom, winning 12 often seemed more important than 13 establishing truth or arriving at justice. 14 Obviously, disagreements and disputes 15 occur within the scientific community, these 16 are usually resolved over time by looking 17 over more data or in O.J. parlance, by 18 playing the evidence card. 19 In the courtroom, however, the 20 arguments about the reliability of DNA 21 typing, presumably based on scientific 22 issues, often seem to be structurally 23 required by an adversarial system with 24 lawyers playing out their assigned roles in 25 the legal drama. 474 1 2 Granted, several important and 3 interesting scientific issues, primarily 4 involving population and statistical 5 genetics, have been clarified over the past 6 years, notably by Jim Crow and others, but 7 this valuable work has been carried out 8 within the scientific community, not in the 9 courtroom. 10 Looking back over the history of DNA 11 testing in the U.S., it seems to me that new 12 technology could be evaluated better by a 13 panel of knowledgeable scientists working 14 for the court rather than as adversarial 15 scientific experts working for the 16 prosecution or the defense. 17 In the fourteen years since 18 Pennsylvania versus Pestanikas, DNA forensic 19 testing has clearly made an enormous 20 contribution to justice within the U.S. 21 legal system helping to convict the guilty 22 and free the wrongly accused or convicted. 23 The use of criminal databases for 24 investigative work, the potential for 25 post-conviction review, and the possibility 475 1 2 of revising the statute of limitations for 3 certain crimes all reflect the degree to 4 which DNA testing is transforming our 5 criminal justice system. 6 The marriage of science and the law 7 remains a somewhat uneasy alliance of 8 partners with different cultural values, but 9 for the sake of justice, it is critical that 10 this partnership, like DNA itself evolve and 11 endure. Thank you very much. 12 (Applause.) 13 MR. BOYD: I'll even avoid the jokes 14 this time and ask Norm Gahn if he'll come 15 up. Mr. Gahn is currently an Assistant 16 District Attorney for the Sexual Assault 17 Unit in Milwaukee in the Milwaukee District 18 Attorney's office. 19 He was nominated by the National 20 District Attorneys Association to serve on 21 the National Commission on the Future of DNA 22 Evidence where he now serves with 23 distinction. Since 1989, he has tirelessly 24 pursued the best forensic analysis for each 25 of his cases. So thorough is his approach 476 1 2 to his cases, that Mr. Gahn now holds a 3 Master's degree in the Forensic Sciences. 4 I used to tell a joke, I'll have to 5 revise it now, that people become attorneys, 6 specifically, so they can avoid the science. 7 Obviously, Norm is not one of those, and we 8 honor him today for the excellent, thorough, 9 and thoughtful example that he's established 10 and which I think is highlighted by his very 11 creative application of a "John Doe" warrant 12 based on a DNA profile. 13 If imitation is the sincerest form of 14 flattery, Mr. Gahn should be blushing. His 15 John Doe DNA profile warrant has been copied 16 across the country and has stopped the 17 statute clocks for countless victims. So 18 his application is an important 19 contribution, and we thank him. 20 (Applause.) 21 (Presentation of award.) 22 MR. GAHN: I simply would like to 23 state that I have had some successes in the 24 courtroom with this technology, but I think 25 the successes that I've had are reflective 477 1 2 of the sexual assault detectives that I work 3 with in Milwaukee County and the crime lab 4 personnel at the Wisconsin State Crime 5 Laboratory. 6 I've been doing sexual assault cases 7 for many years, and I go back to the days 8 when we did the ABO PGM sub-type one and 9 those things that sort of send a chill down 10 my spine when I think about those trials. 11 But, you know, this DNA has done an 12 awful lot. I think it's not only energized, 13 I think, a lot of prosecutors, but the crime 14 lab analysts that I used to work with in the 15 PGM sub-types and all the ABO enzymes, 16 they're different today. They're different 17 when you walk into the crime lab. There's a 18 greater enthusiasm. 19 And I see it also with police 20 detectives, the detectives on the street. 21 This DNA, their knowledge of what it can do 22 when they properly, collect, look for, and 23 preserve this evidence. 24 So the terrific job that all police 25 detectives and all crime lab people do makes 478 1 2 my job very easy, and I just enjoy jumping 3 into the battle of the courtroom a couple of 4 times a month with this technology, but, 5 probably, if I reflect back over the years 6 of all the times I've used this technology, 7 or before it, I look back at the sexual 8 assault cases that I tried when the only 9 evidence we had was a victim who said, "I 10 picked him out of a line up," and what she 11 went through under the cross-examination. 12 DNA and what all of you do out there 13 today has taken so much fire power away from 14 the defense attorney today because that 15 woman now is followed by a forensic 16 scientist who says that when she did pick 17 him out of a line up, she was correct 18 because the chances are one in so many 19 trillion or quintillion, whatever those 20 numbers are today. 21 So, terrific work. I want to thank 22 all of you. If no one's thanked you today 23 for all the wonderful work that all of you 24 do, I do, and I thank you for this honor. 25 (Applause.) 479 1 2 MR. BOYD: Dr. Kenneth Kidd. Dr. Kidd 3 is currently a Professor of Genetics and 4 Psychiatry at Yale University, and he's been 5 a renowned researcher in human population 6 genetics for several decades. 7 He's a Fellow of the American 8 Association for the Advancement of Science 9 and many other professional societies. 10 Early on in the numerous admissibility 11 hearings often referred to as the RFLP wars, 12 Dr. Kidd brought his considerable expertise, 13 knowledge, and data into courtrooms to 14 provide a foundational basis that permitted 15 DNA to be permitted into the courtroom. 16 Most importantly, Dr. Kidd allowed yet 17 to be published, extremely difficult to 18 obtain genetic data on inbred populations, 19 the equivalent of academic gold, to be used. 20 Showing the strength of DNA as a 21 powerful discriminator, even in the most 22 closed populations, is his most important 23 contribution to this field, and we thank 24 him. 25 (Applause.) 480 1 2 (Presentation of award.) 3 DR. KIDD: I want to thank you very 4 much for this award. It's a great honor and 5 somewhat unexpected. Going from the 6 research laboratory and academia into the 7 court systems as an expert witness is an 8 extremely stressful occurrence. 9 I, in fact, however, ended up enjoying 10 it because I think, as a citizen, I learned 11 a great deal about our legal system, though 12 I always testified for the prosecution, I 13 occasionally consulted for the defense, but 14 they always decided they didn't want to put 15 me on the stand because I think the science 16 should serve the courts, not the 17 prosecution, not the defense, and I agree 18 very much with Henry Erlich. 19 But I also want to apologize for 20 inflicting upon the courts, the Queretiana 21 Indians. Thank you, again, very much. 22 (Applause.) 23 MR. BOYD: Dr. Joshua Lederberg. 24 Dr. Lederberg is Professor-Emeritus and 25 Sackler Foundation Scholar at the 481 1 2 Rockefeller University here in New York. 3 As a pioneer in the field 4 recombination in bacteria, Dr. Lederberg won 5 the Nobel Prize in 1958 for his work on 6 microbial genetics and evolution. He has 7 also won the National Medal of Science for, 8 in part, his scientific advice to public 9 interests and to governments and 10 international organizations. 11 It is Dr. Lederberg's willingness to 12 advise the forensic community on ways to 13 improve, enhance, and protect future DNA, 14 forensic DNA for which we honor him today. 15 Dr. Lederberg served as the first 16 chair of the DNA Advisory Board where he led 17 a diverse group of scientists, criminal 18 justice professionals, and practitioners to 19 develop quality assurance, guidelines, 20 practices, and foundations that have become 21 standards in the community and which are now 22 required by the courts. 23 He also served to monitor the 24 Congressionally mandated queries into the 25 utility of blind proficiency testing, and he 482 1 2 serves as a member of the DNA Commission's 3 Research and Development Working Group which 4 is providing a vision of the future of 5 forensic DNA. We thank him for helping to 6 shape this vision. 7 (Applause.) 8 (Presentation of award.) 9 DR. LEDERBERG: I'm very happy to have 10 the occasion to talk to you about the 11 emerging social contract. It's been a real 12 privilege for me to attend this conference 13 and to be a bystander, more generally of 14 observing the development of the art. 15 As you know, I don't do forensics, but 16 I have been following DNA very closely since 17 the publications from Oswald Avery at the 18 Rockwell Institute on February 1, 1944. 19 Every new technology offers special 20 opportunities and challenges to the social 21 fabric and DNA is hardly an exception, but I 22 am pleased to note how carefully DNA 23 forensics is being tended, acknowledging the 24 adversarial frictions that Henry eluded to 25 as a premier example of technology 483 1 2 assessment and I wish that could go on so 3 well, so effectively, and with such 4 important scientific as well as public 5 input, as has been the case here. 6 Perhaps, it's precisely the centrality 7 of DNA forensics and legal systems that has 8 led to this kind of oversight, but I think 9 the net is a very positive role. The 10 battles have been fought. It's quite clear 11 what the outcomes are, and I think we have a 12 lot to thank for the labors of people like 13 Henry and other people on the panel here for 14 having accomplished it. 15 But one has to say in thinking about 16 the social contract, that's our 17 relationships with our community and state, 18 there are trade-offs between the very, very 19 important values of law enforcement and 20 other personal values. 21 DNA technology has the virtue of 22 tending to support the truth, which as a 23 scientist, I wholeheartedly support. Social 24 acceptance of the new contracts emerging, 25 what degree of privacy will we submit to; 484 1 2 how much will we pay for these new systems; 3 and all the rest; will be very sensitive to 4 how the technology is used in the current 5 interval. 6 Reliability is, of course, the main 7 touchstone, and this has been greatly 8 advanced by proficiency testing and 9 laboratory accreditation. One flawed apple 10 could upset the cart, and we must not allow 11 enthusiasm, demonization of alleged 12 culprits, or sheer sloppiness to compromise 13 this marvelous tool. 14 As for the work of the DNA Advisory 15 Board, I have to single out Bruce Spidoli 16 (phonetic.) well known to most of you as the 17 person who really did most of the work. 18 In a more general sphere about that 19 contract, most of what I wanted to be said 20 has been covered by others, but I'll just 21 recapitulate a few cautions mentioned by 22 many; the importance of the quality of the 23 physical evidence and its preservation for 24 reassessment, especially, in a case of cold 25 hits; not to relax the quest for supporting 485 1 2 evidence, and there's a real danger of 3 complacency on account of the sheer 4 technical power of the DNA tool. 5 If you have a hit against the 6 database, you may really want to have an 7 opportunity to re-check what went into the 8 database in the first place, and if the 9 original evidence is gone, truth will be 10 denied that possibility, and the defendants 11 may be unfairly treated or there may not be 12 the possibility of an appropriate 13 confrontation. 14 And I have to say that we may be at 15 the peak of the capability and effectiveness 16 of DNA because the counters to it are just 17 gradually emerging. 18 Watch out for spoofs. We've already 19 heard of some that outdo fictional 20 imagination. The story of the person what 21 while he was incarcerated in prison managed 22 to concoct another rape with his own semen 23 outside. Folks who do that are going to be 24 thinking of all kinds of other ways of 25 beating the system. 486 1 2 There may be a black market someday in 3 diversionary DNA that perps might leave at a 4 crime scene and point to high officials, 5 perhaps, even the highest, and defense 6 attorneys will learn how to befog the 7 identification. 8 And as a couple of people said, we 9 must strive to keep the system honest and 10 fair, enhance poor defendants' access to 11 objective analysis and interpretation, and 12 with sometimes incompetent defense counsel, 13 the court may have recourse to third parties 14 and then to be sensitive to the fallout in 15 criminal procedure. 16 We heard eloquent remarks about the 17 utilities, and they're undeniable, about 18 collecting profiles from every arrestee, but 19 arrestee profiling, with all the advantages 20 that that may offer for effective law 21 enforcement, greatly enhances the incentive 22 for police to make ill-founded arrests. 23 Will this backfire? How will courts 24 deal with matches that are the fruit of an 25 arrest deemed tainted? And some courts have 487 1 2 gone very far in their zeal to curb the 3 police power, and defense counsel are likely 4 to rise to that occasion as well. 5 So the introduction of such a profound 6 change of procedure as routine arrestee 7 profiling really has to be accompanied with 8 a broader view of what ripples that will 9 generate and the precautions that need to be 10 taken to ensure that this is done in an 11 appropriately just and socially acceptable 12 manner. Thank you very much. 13 (Applause.) 14 MR. BOYD: We also have a message from 15 Dawn Herkenham, who we awarded yesterday, 16 and she wants to thank us for the lovely 17 award and for the words that were spoken on 18 the occasion, but she also wants everybody 19 here to know that the only DNA in her life 20 right now is a diaper that needs adjusting. 21 Too often those who do the critical 22 work, not just in the forensic community, 23 but in the law enforcement world, in 24 general, are overlooked and their 25 contributions sort of go by, in part, 488 1 2 because we're all so busy trying to work 3 real problems in real courts against real 4 crimes out there in the real world, and 5 because we're so busy we don't pause long 6 enough to do that. 7 We hope that these small tokens 8 reflect, at least, some part of our 9 appreciation in NIJ for the contributions 10 they've made to victims and to justice in 11 the United States, and we hope they also 12 further reflect on all of the rest of you 13 who have been toiling out there to make 14 their gifts so important to justice in the 15 United States today. So I'd like to ask you 16 to give them a round of applause. 17 (Applause.) Thank you, and we have a 18 remarkable deal on a $35 book. I want to 19 thank all of you. 20 (Applause.) 21 22 23 24 PANEL VII: TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS 25 PART I - MARKERS 489 1 2 DR. LEDERBERG: I just have a couple 3 of slides as a small sequel to my remarks a 4 few minutes ago. This is just to remind 5 you, which you all know very well, of the 6 social fallout and the ripples that the 7 further extension of precise, truthful DNA 8 identification can generate. 9 One of them is in the realm of family 10 secrets uncovered. Not every truth is 11 crying out to heard, and what's our role, 12 making sure that they are is just something 13 to keep in mind. 14 Victor Weedn, I have something that 15 you would remember. I think you will all 16 recall the headlines that attended this 17 example that the Vietnam representation in 18 The Tomb of the Unknowns. 19 I call that a holy place, but there 20 are different idealogies and different 21 concerns, and here are the interests of a 22 family in recovering an identified set of 23 bones. It really has unalterably changed a 24 piece of our mythology in how we have dealt 25 with those kinds of circumstances. 490 1 2 Again, there's a truthful outcome. We 3 can be grateful for that, but there are a 4 lot of ambiguities associated with insisting 5 on the truth. 6 Finally, this is probably a 7 repercussion of what I've seen in the press 8 about the identification of who was 9 purportedly the man in the iron mask, but 10 there could be political revolutionary 11 dynastic upheaval. So here the caption is 12 "After months of DNA testing, our scientists 13 have concluded that you are the rightful 14 King of France. Congratulations, your 15 Majesty." Well, all of this is just to say 16 that you drop the acorn into the pond and 17 big oaks can come out of the river. 18 We'll go on now to our proceedings. 19 You've all had the biographies. You've had 20 a chance to look at them, and I won't repeat 21 them again. So we'll just go right on with 22 our program, this is on technology 23 solutions, markers, and the first of our 24 panelists is Mark Batzer from Louisiana 25 State University in New Orleans. 491 1 2 DR. BATZER: Well, it gives me a great 3 deal of pleasure to be here today, and I 4 think you can sum up the next few talks as 5 newer types of genetic systems that may be 6 quite useful to the forensic community. 7 And, in fact, I'd say that my system 8 probably the least known of the bunch but 9 hopefully over time will prove to be a 10 useful tool for investigative forensics. 11 So I have to confess, this is my first 12 Powerpoint presentation ever, and, clearly, 13 there are reasons not to do these things. 14 So today, I'm going to tell you a little 15 about a mobile element insertion 16 polymorphism. 17 And, in particular, I'm going to tell 18 you about a family of mobile elements that 19 are termed SINES, or short interspersed 20 elements. So these elements, by definition, 21 are interspersed. So rather than the NTRs 22 are many satellite types of repeats that are 23 tandemly arrayed, these elements are 24 haphazardly dispersed throughout the human 25 genome. 492 1 2 They're small. They're typically less 3 than 70 to 300 bases in length, and they 4 exist in very high copy numbers in excess of 5 100,000 copies within our genomes. 6 Now, these are mobile elements, so the 7 fossils that I'll tell you about today are 8 actually what we call selfish DNA fossils. 9 These are pieces of DNA that have moved 10 around the genome and have duplicated 11 themselves. 12 Now, in particular, my favorite type 13 of SINE Alu element. Alu elements are 300 14 nucleotides long. They're dimeric in 15 structure with a left and a right half. 16 They have an internal RNA polymerase-3 17 promoter that's involved in their 18 mobilization. 19 They're typically flanked by short, 20 direct repeat sequences that I haven't shown 21 you here in this cartoon. They have a 22 middle A-rich region, a 3-prime oligo 23 DA-rich tail, and these elements are rather 24 recent inhabitants of our genome. 25 So if, in fact, you have an Alu 493 1 2 element, you're a primate. These elements 3 are a mobile element family, and they've 4 only been in genomes for about 65 million 5 years. 6 Now, because of their high copy 7 numbers, these elements, there about half a 8 million in our genome, they comprise about 9 ten percent of the mass of human genome by 10 weight. 11 Now, these elements move around in a 12 process that's termed "retroposition." And 13 the way that this works is, initially, an 14 RNA polymerase 3-derived transcript is made, 15 and then that transcript can self-prime on 16 itself for reverse transcription by an 17 exogenous reverse transcriptase, or it can 18 prime right in the chromosome at the 19 staggered chromosomal breaks that form where 20 these elements integrate in the genome. 21 Now, of course, you need to ask me, 22 where do the elements get this enzyme, 23 reverse transcriptase from? And the answer 24 is, they borrow it either from retroviruses 25 like HIV or from long interspersed repeats, 494 1 2 elements that do encode a functional reverse 3 transcriptase. 4 Now, even though there are half a 5 million of the elements in the genome, we 6 can actually come up with two dramatically 7 different models for how they've expanded as 8 a repeated sequence family. 9 In the first of these models, what we 10 call a transposable element model, each and 11 every element is capable of duplicating 12 itself, so across time there's an 13 exponential increase in the number of the 14 elements within the genome. 15 By contrast, Prescott Dyninger and I 16 put forward what we call the "Master gene 17 Model," and in this scenario of limited 18 amplification, only a single copy from over 19 half a million can duplicate itself. 20 Gradually, throughout time, as that 21 copy accumulates new mutations, they then 22 give off more copies that are marked by 23 those mutations, and they comprise what we 24 call a sub-family or a clade or a group of 25 related sequences. 495 1 2 So as it turns out, this became a 3 testable hypothesis as more and more of the 4 human genome was sequenced, and what we were 5 able to do was actually to detect sub-family 6 structure, a hierarchal relationship between 7 these sequences in the genome. And that 8 then led us to the idea that this master 9 gene model would, in fact, be relatively 10 appropriate for the amplification of these 11 elements. 12 This is a Louisiana eye test chart for 13 everybody. In fact, what this is is a 14 multiple alignment of different sub-families 15 of Alu elements. The sub-families are 16 aligned from the oldest up at the top down 17 to the more recent inhabitants in the 18 genome. 19 The dots down below the bases 20 represent the same base that's in the 21 consensus sequence. The mutations are 22 denoted by the appropriate base and color 23 coded with the sub-families, and insertions 24 and deletions are denoted by dashes. 25 And what I want you to see is, as we 496 1 2 go to older types of Alu repeats to younger 3 ones, we see a hierarchical sequential 4 accumulation of more and more diagnostic 5 mutations. 6 So for instance, the YA8 sub-family 7 has all the mutations of YA5 along with 8 three new green color-coded mutations that 9 denote it as a sub-family of elements, and 10 I'll show you in a moment exactly how large 11 that sub-family is and what the approximate 12 time scale for when these elements have 13 moved within our genomes is. 14 Now, here I'm showing you a schematic 15 diagram of when these elements have moved 16 within primate genomes, and what I want you 17 to notice is that actually 85 percent of all 18 these mobile elements moved within primate 19 genomes greater than 25 million years ago, 20 so forensics they will have no utility. 21 But what I want you to focus on for 22 the rest of my talk, are these elements at 23 the top of this tree, which have actually 24 largely moved within the human genome after 25 humans and African apes had diverged from 497 1 2 each other. 3 And so what I'll show you then are 4 some studies about this last percent or 5 tenth of a percent of Alu repeats that are 6 unique to humans and absent from non-human 7 primates and how they can be employed then 8 to study forensics and population genetics. 9 Now, my own laboratory has made a 10 dramatic shift in how we find these elements 11 in the genome. Suffice it to say that given 12 the sequence structure of the sub-families, 13 we can quite rapidly mine the human genome 14 sequence database in order to identify these 15 elements. 16 And so using this informatics-based 17 approach, we searched Genbank to find these 18 elements; annotate the sequences with 19 programs that annotate repeat content; with 20 repeat master of sensor, we can predict PCR 21 primers adjacent to each locus; search the 22 PCR primers to make sure that they reside 23 within unique sequences in the genome; and 24 then, eventually, identify new elements that 25 have different levels of polymorphic 498 1 2 information content. 3 So to give you an idea, I mentioned 4 earlier, the YA8 family. This group of Alu 5 repeats is actually comprised of only 50 6 members from half a million. So that's 7 actually a tremendous amount of selection 8 that we can make to sort through half a 9 million elements to find 50 that are very 10 recent in terms of their origin in the 11 genome. 12 To date, we've found 14 of these loci 13 in the genome; 7 of which were polymorphic; 14 1 of which was a high frequency 15 polymorphism; 6 were intermediate in 16 frequency, and I'll show you a bit what that 17 means in just a minute; and none were low 18 frequency polymorphisms. 19 None of these elements were found in 20 non-human primate genomes; 3 had inserted 21 into previously unidentified repetitive 22 elements; and 4 were monomorphic for the 23 presence of the Alu element in the different 24 human genomes that we surveyed. 25 We've also employed these tools to 499 1 2 look at bigger sub-families of Alu repeats. 3 So here is what we call YB8 sub-family. 4 This sub-family has about 2,000 members in 5 the human genome, and at the time I made 6 this slide, we had analyzed a little more 7 than a hundred of these elements, and out of 8 those 123 that we analyzed, 31 were 9 polymorphic; 15 had inserted into other 10 repetitive elements; 1 was found in a 11 non-human primate genome; and 76 were fixed 12 for the presence of the element. 13 So how do we use these for forensics? 14 Well, the whole idea is to study different 15 types of variation that are in our genome 16 and to use those pieces of variation to tell 17 the difference between individual genomes or 18 different populations. 19 So here what we've devised is an Alu 20 insertion PCR assay. Up at the top of this 21 schematic, it doesn't project so well, but 22 there's actually an Alu insertion here. 23 Down below it is a chromosome, and what we 24 do in our assay is predict unique sequence 25 primers in the 5-prime and 3-prime flanking 500 1 2 regions. 3 So in this assay, individuals who are 4 homozygous for the presence of an Alu 5 element amplify a 400 base pair fragment, 6 heterozygous individuals amplify a 400 base 7 pair fragment and a 100 base pair fragment, 8 and individuals who do not have the Alu 9 insertion amplify a 100 base pair DNA 10 fragment. 11 So this is a rapid assay to look for 12 the presence or absence of each of these 13 mobile element insertions in the genome, and 14 in the last part of my talk, I just want to 15 show a preliminary survey of the human 16 variation associated with a number of these 17 elements. 18 So what we've done is surveyed 27 19 different, diverse human populations for the 20 absence or presence of 21 Alu insertion 21 polymorphisms across 1,300 unrelated 22 individuals. 23 Now, the populations that we surveyed 24 span the globe. You'll see there are a 25 number of new-world populations shown here; 501 1 2 a quite a high density of populations in 3 Europe, in particular, I'll point out 4 populations from the Caucasus that we've 5 analyzed; a number of African populations; 6 and then a few populations from Samoa as 7 well. 8 Now, three things to ask about any 9 type of genetic marker. The first one is, 10 what's the level of heterozygosity that's 11 associated with the marker? So here, what 12 you'll see is that across our 21 Alu 13 insertions, we have an average 14 heterozygosity of 29 percent. 15 That doesn't mean like a lot when we 16 compare that to the VNTRs and STR type of 17 loci. But keep in mind, these are biallelic 18 loci, just like SNPs, there are only two 19 potential states. So the maximum 20 heterozygosity is 50 percent, and, in fact, 21 I want to point out that we have several 22 loci that approach the theoretical maximum 23 in this survey. 24 Secondly, we can ask how much of the 25 variation within this data were between 502 1 2 populations as opposed to within 3 populations? And we can do that using an 4 FST statistic or GST statistic. 5 So, in this case, I'll show you the 6 FST statistic, and what you'll see is, is 7 that actually about 13 percent of the 8 variation is between populations as opposed 9 to within populations, and, again, that's 10 the variation that we're trying to utilize, 11 not just to study evolution, but also in 12 forensics. 13 This is a principle components 14 analysis of those data, and here I've chosen 15 to show this as opposed to a tree just to 16 give you a global picture of how this 17 variation sorted out amongst the human 18 populations we studied. And two important 19 points to make: The first one is that 20 across this principle components analysis, 21 we actually captured about 82 percent of the 22 variation in the first two principle 23 components, and you can think of this as a 24 tool that's akin to an analysis of variance; 25 secondly, you'll see that there's a 503 1 2 very good agreement between geography and 3 the clustering amongst different 4 populations. 5 So here you'll see African groups in 6 one part; groups from the Caucasus in 7 another part that are spread out; other 8 European groups here; groups from the 9 Americas; from Asia, etc. 10 So there's a good concordance between 11 the clustering of these populations and 12 their geographic origin. Secondly, we can 13 ask in our data set by entering in zero for 14 the absence of the Alu insertion what the 15 root of this particular plot is, and you'll 16 see the root is shown here, and the root is 17 actually in Africa. So using these Alu 18 insertion polymorphisms, we able to support 19 an African origin for these particular 20 markers. 21 Now, I wanted to go back to this issue 22 of the Caucasus populations because there 23 are two important points to make. The first 24 one is that, actually, there is a bit more 25 genetic diversity within the Caucasus than 504 1 2 in the other European groups, and you can 3 reemphasize that here where I'm showing you 4 the average heterozygosity across the 27 5 populations plotted out by the origin of the 6 populations. 7 And so let me get you to focus in then 8 on the Caucasus groups and then the other 9 European groups. Across the board, it 10 appears that the Caucasus groups have a 11 higher amount of diversity than the other 12 European groups. 13 So if we assume the same effective 14 population size for the Caucasus and for the 15 other European groups, then one can argue 16 that the Caucasus are actually the ancestral 17 Caucasian population. 18 Now, what makes Alu insertions unique? 19 They're typed by simple PCR assays. As my 20 colleague, Mark Stoneking puts it, "We're 21 the low-tech guys." We don't need ABIs to 22 genotype our loci, a PCR machine and a gel 23 box. 24 They're stable polymorphisms that are 25 rarely delighted from the genome, and 505 1 2 they're identical by descent. So say, for 3 instance, Henry Erlich and I share an Alu 4 insertion polymorphism, we inherited that 5 polymorphism from a common ancestor. 6 By contrast, all other types of 7 polymorphisms beyond simple lineal 8 relationships are merely identical by state. 9 That means they look the same, but we cannot 10 always infer that they are identical by 11 descent. 12 And lastly, the ancestral state of 13 these polymorphisms is known. So, for 14 forensics, how do these fit in? Well, I 15 don't actually think that we'll ever beat 16 the CODIS loci in terms of their utility in 17 forensic case work. 18 However, I think these types of 19 systems, along with the Y-chromosome and the 20 mitochondrial DNA have a unique niche, and 21 that is that they're a rich source of 22 population-specific alleles. They afford us 23 the ability for individual identification. 24 They also afford us the ability to 25 infer geographic affiliation and ethnic 506 1 2 affiliation upon an unknown DNA sample. So 3 I think that they have a niche in terms of 4 criminalistics and that, ultimately, they'll 5 be quite useful. 6 So, in conclusion, our analysis has 7 supported an African origin for modern 8 humans. I've given you the sales pitch for 9 what makes this a unique type of variation 10 for studying forensics and human population 11 genetics. 12 About 28 percent of these Alu 13 insertions are polymorphic for presence and 14 absence and that these elements are novel 15 identical-by-descent markers for the study 16 of human evolution. 17 And, lastly, I'd like to say that a 18 lot of people contributed to these studies. 19 In particular, I'll acknowledge my long-time 20 tag team partners, Mark Stoneking and 21 Prescott Dyninger who I've interacted with 22 for well over a decade, and then also the 23 people in the lab that have done this work, 24 my and post-doctorals, Abdel Salem and Steve 25 Sherry, along with a number of my students, 507 1 2 Jeremy Myers; Marion Carroll; Mimi Semarco; 3 Bethany Vincent; and Sun Wen. And also many 4 people have contributed DNA samples to these 5 analyses, and we really appreciate that. 6 Thank you. 7 (Applause.) 8 DR. LEDERBERG: Next on is Michael 9 Hammer from the University of Arizona. 10 DR. HAMMER: Well, first of all, I'd 11 like to thank the organizers for inviting 12 me. I've learned a lot. I've never seen so 13 many excellent presentation in one meeting, 14 and I was truly inspired by the Scovilles 15 and Debbie Smith. 16 I'd like to say that I also 17 acknowledge NIJ for funding my lab for two 18 years, and this project that I'm going to 19 talk about is sort of a progress report for 20 a project that we've been doing jointly with 21 Sue Narveson at the Phoenix Police 22 Department. 23 Like I said, it's work in progress and 24 I'll try to get through to some of the 25 results. In the first part of the talk, 508 1 2 I'll try to give you some of the basics 3 about the Y-chromosome. 4 All of the markers we've heard about 5 in the meeting to date, up to this moment, 6 have been on these 22 pairs of autosomes. I 7 don't believe there are any markers on the 8 X-chromosome that people have mentioned. I 9 may be missing something. 10 The markers that I'm going to talk 11 about now are strictly limited to the 12 Y-chromosome, which is inherited from father 13 to son. The objectives of our study were to 14 develop a DNA typing system that targets the 15 male-specific portion of the human genome, 16 which I'll refer to as the NRY, and I'll 17 explain why in a moment, it stands for 18 non-recombining portion of the Y. 19 We wanted it to identify a set of 20 informative NRY markers that are robust in 21 forensic analysis, both Y-STRs and Y-SNPs, 22 and to generate detailed protocols for 23 multiplex genotyping of these markers using 24 an ABI platform. So we may not be as 25 low-tech as Mark, but we don't want to go 509 1 2 too high-tech because we'd like for this 3 system to be utilized in forensic labs. 4 And, finally, we wanted to establish a 5 database of U.S. population groups. The 6 rationale for doing this is, first of all, 7 the vast majority of violent crimes are 8 committed by males; cases of sexual violence 9 currently comprise approximately 75 percent 10 of forensic case work in which there is 11 biological evidence for examination. 12 The extraction steps necessary to 13 isolate male genomic DNA from mixed samples 14 are time consuming, and there are often 15 problems associated with yield and degree of 16 separation male and female cells, therefore, 17 we have to deal with mixed profiles and 18 enhanced risk of contamination. 19 We may not want to avoid that step, 20 but there are few cases where there may be 21 few sperm heads and difficult to extract 22 male cells away from female cells, and often 23 times the female cells will swamp out a male 24 signal in a PCR reaction. 25 The cases where we envision this 510 1 2 system would be especially useful would be 3 in rape cases where the assailant semen is 4 mixed with cells from the victim and perhaps 5 at very low frequency. In fact, cases 6 involving no sperm at all because the male 7 is aspermic for one reason or another, this 8 would provide the opportunity to get 9 male-specific genotypes. 10 Other kinds of mixtures where 11 differential lysis cannot be performed, for 12 example, blood/blood, blood/saliva, and Jack 13 Ballantyne, mentioned some of those, and, in 14 fact, didn't mention the Y-chromosome, but 15 he mentioned, specifically, some of these 16 applications. 17 Now, let me get back to the NRY. 18 Essentially, it's the portion that doesn't 19 undergo recombination with the X, which is 20 about 95 percent of the entire chromosome. 21 The entire chromosome is about 60 megabases 22 or 60 million base pairs. 23 It, obviously, carries the gene called 24 SRY which triggers male differentiation in 25 development, and the NRY, again, corresponds 511 1 2 to the strictly paternally inherited portion 3 of the chromosome. 4 Now, the inheritance pattern is as 5 follows, and most of you are fully aware of 6 this, but if we have a male here, and I'm 7 showing a single autosomal pair, his 8 Y-chromosome and his mitochondrial DNA, his 9 Y-chromosome will trace back to a single 10 male in each generation, back to his father, 11 his father, his great-grand father without 12 undergoing any change, barring the 13 occasional mutation, of course. His 14 mitochondrial DNA, obviously, would go to 15 his mother and traces a maternal lineage all 16 the way back in time. 17 In contrast, the autosomes, because of 18 recombination, are going to trace to any of 19 these previous ancestors in each generation. 20 So an Alu element that you find polymorphic 21 on this autosome, for example, you can't be 22 sure if it traces to this great-grandmother 23 or this great-grandfather up here. It 24 traces to any of these above individuals 25 there, and without their DNA, you couldn't 512 1 2 tell which individual it was. 3 So it certainly has implications for 4 evolutionary studies. We can trace male 5 lineages back in time to single common 6 ancestors in the past, but I think because 7 of this largely non-recombining unit, we 8 have the ability with the Y-chromosome work 9 to combine the utility of many kinds of 10 markers. So I'm not going to sit here and 11 advocate one kind of marker, I'm going to 12 advocate the use of a combination of 13 markers. 14 And this is a little more background 15 for you. The euchromatin region, which is 16 the region we focus on, 30 megabases of DNA, 17 different kinds of DNA compositions; there 18 are single copy regions, there are regions 19 of homology with the X, and there are 20 Y-specific repeats. These light blue areas 21 are regions we thought had many repeats 22 within just the Y-chromosome. 23 And those are interesting because we 24 can design primers to those regions and 25 amplify many different portions of the Y in 513 1 2 one experiment, and I'll explain why that's 3 important in a second. 4 So, again, we're going to be using 5 many different kinds of markers along the 6 entire 30 million base pairs of the Y, 7 including point mutations or SNPs; 8 insertion/deletion polymorphisms, a great 9 example Mark just reviewed for you in Alu 10 elements; and, of course, microsatellites. 11 These two classes here and these two 12 columns have very different mutation rates. 13 Mutation rates are point mutations on the 14 order ten to the minus eighth per site per 15 generation, for Alu insertions on the order 16 of ten to the minus tenth, and about five to 17 seven orders of magnitude higher mutation 18 rate in the microsatellite. So we can 19 combine information from different kinds of 20 mutation systems in one Y-chromosome system. 21 Now, here's an example of an Alu 22 polymorphism that was discovered on the 23 Y-chromosome a number of years ago called 24 Y-Alu polymorphism or YAP. And, in this 25 case, I forgot to bring the slide, but I 514 1 2 just made this up yesterday very quickly, I 3 have a gel that looks almost as perfect as 4 this gel, which I drew, these are primers 5 around the Alu, as Mark has just described. 6 And so this kind of hits home because 7 you have one male who has allelic state 1, 8 and another male has allelic state 2, and 9 when you amplify female DNA, you get nothing 10 not matter how much DNA you put into the 11 reaction. 12 Now, the next point that I wanted to 13 make, again, hitting home on this idea that 14 we can use many markers on the single 15 system, here's the entire NRY, and this is 16 supposed to indicate different markers along 17 the non-recombining portion of the 18 chromosome, SNPs, indels, STRs, by looking 19 at a single individual, across his 20 chromosome, we can build what's called a 21 haplotype. 22 So that's the combination of allelic 23 states genotyped at polymorphic sites 24 anywhere on the NRY of each male, and this 25 is referred to as a haplotype. So this 515 1 2 individual is a G minus 12, this individual 3 is G plus 13, and so on and so forth. 4 That's the general idea. 5 Now, moving from theory to practice, 6 we undertook a study to identify several of 7 these different markers in different 8 population systems. The first system I want 9 to talk about is a diversity panel, what we 10 call the YCC diversity panel. 11 It's 74 cell lines for which we have 12 DNA isolated. It represents almost an 13 infinite source of DNA for us, so we can 14 continue to type markers and provide these 15 as a resource to the community. In this 16 panel there are 74 chromosomes from Africa, 17 Europe, Asia, the Americas, and Australia, 18 and I'll refer to some of the results that 19 we typing that panel of cell lines. 20 In addition, we've typed U.S. 21 population groups, about 529 individuals, 22 African-Americans, European-Americans, 23 Southwest Hispanics, Southwest Native 24 Americans, and we didn't have a sample of 25 East Asian Americans, so we used East Asians 516 1 2 from Asia and made a composite group for 3 that group. 4 And, finally, we also typed 5 Y-chromosome markers for this study and 612 6 chromosomes, additionally, of Americans, 7 Europeans from Europe, and North Asians; and 8 we were kind of interested in the idea of 9 how much population structure, to get back 10 to this Queratiana problem, we're going to 11 kind of revisit in a way and ask how much 12 variation and how much substructuring do we 13 find in Native American populations which 14 have a tribal, sort of, population structure 15 that often times is characterized by 16 isolated populations. 17 And we worry about how the genotypic 18 content of one sub-population may be 19 represented by another, and so if you have a 20 database for one, how well does that 21 represent another. 22 And we were interested in that 23 question, and so we used North Asians, 24 Siberian populations as sort of a control 25 comparison for Native Americans given that 517 1 2 they also have a similar lifestyle. 3 The markers genotyped so far, and this 4 is work in progress, so it's ongoing, the 5 YCC diversity panel has been typed for 20 6 Y-STRs and 101 Y-SNPs. 7 U.S. population groups and world 8 groups, N equals 1141, were typed for five 9 Y-STRs and 31 SNPs, and we're going to 10 compare that also with U.S. population 11 groups typed for another set of Y-STRs, 12 Pentaplex 1 and 2, which I'll describe now. 13 I guess in a second, I'll describe the two 14 pentaplexes. 15 This is result of typing 20 Y-STRs in 16 the YCC panel. These are the different 17 markers that we used. Notice that the top 18 three markers here have a very high number 19 of alleles in this panel, 19, 36, and 39; 20 whereas, these other markers, 9, 8, and so 21 on down the load, have a much smaller number 22 of alleles. 23 The reason we have so many allele 24 patterns for these markers is they are 25 primer pairs that fall into this region of 518 1 2 the Y that's repeated, so a single primer 3 pair will amplify many different markers 4 along the Y, and, in a sense, each single 5 primer pair in a PCR reaction gives you 6 almost a fingerprint for that individual. 7 So what we're interested then is to how we 8 can best combine these different markers to 9 get a very highly informative system of 10 polymorphic markers. 11 So we designed two, five-plex PCR 12 reactions, each, actually, looking at six 13 markers, because each contained one of these 14 markers that was duplicated on the Y. 15 So this is Pentaplex 1, Pentaplex 2. 16 These are the different loci in Pentaplex 1. 17 This one is duplicated. It's a high 18 resolution haplotype. This one is 19 duplicated here. You can see there's 49 20 different alleles at this marker, and 16, 21 when I say "alleles," I really mean 22 patterns. 23 This just shows you a gene scan image 24 of Pentaplex 1 run out, these five different 25 markers for a panel of different 519 1 2 individuals, and you can see each lane 3 represents the genotypes of those 4 individuals at those five different markers. 5 This is one of those hypervariable 6 markers, and you can see how much variation 7 there is. A single pair of markers is 8 amplifying more than one marker across the 9 chromosome. 10 Now, here's our U.S. and world 11 population data for just Pentaplex 1. I 12 don't have time to go through all of this, 13 but here you have your U.S. population 14 groups, and here you have some world 15 population groups. 16 Notice that here is the sample size, 17 the number of chromosomes. Here are the 18 number of different of haplotypes, 19 combination haplotypes that identified. 20 This is the discrimination capacity, so it's 21 just the number of haplotypes divided by the 22 total sample size. And you can see, in most 23 cases, it ranges between 75 and 80 percent 24 with just five markers, which is pretty good 25 discrimination, except in the case of Native 520 1 2 Americans where it was only 37 percent. 3 Interestingly, it was true for North Asians, 4 the Siberian groups with similar lifestyles 5 and population structure. 6 So how do we increase the resolution? 7 We need to look at additional 8 microsatellites. So here's results from 9 just the YCC panel where we looked at 10 Pentaplex 1 and 2, and you can see Pentaplex 11 1 gave us a discrimination capacity of 12 almost 80 percent. 13 Pentaplex 2 by itself was higher, 14 86.5. The two together brought us to 92 15 percent discrimination capacity. The 21 16 STRs was all the way up at 97.3 percent 17 discrimination capacity. So that gives us 18 some hope that by adding more and more 19 markers on Y, we can get up to more 20 discrimination. 21 Now, let me just spend a couple of 22 minutes talking about Y-SNPs, another 23 polymorphic marker system on the same set of 24 chromosomes. This sort of gives you an 25 overview of the features of these markers. 521 1 2 They provide higher resolution than STRs 3 alone; they provide a very high degree of 4 geographic specificity, already reviewed by 5 Mark for the Alu markers between different 6 populations; and they give good indications 7 add-mixture between different populations. 8 And this is the structure of a 9 haplotype tree. This is looking at 10 something like 65 SNPs across different 11 populations in the world. This entire 12 cluster here is found only in sub-Saharan 13 Africa. 14 This cluster here is found only in the 15 new world in Native American populations. 16 This marker here is at a very high frequency 17 in Northern European populations. The point 18 I'm trying to make is these markers can 19 provide us not so much with 20 individualization of the chromosome of each 21 male, but a good indication of geographic 22 specificity. So the nice thing about the Y 23 is that we can combine these two aspects. 24 Now, this shows you some U.S. 25 population groups, profiles for 522 1 2 Y-chromosomes haplotypes in different groups 3 based on these Y-SNPs. You can see Native 4 Americans have a very high frequency of this 5 magenta haplotype. This is truly a Native 6 American-specific haplotype. 7 African-Americans have a very high 8 frequency of these green haplotypes, and we 9 know from our surveys of the world that 10 these are African haplotypes, and the fact 11 that we find them in African-Americans is no 12 surprise, but you can see that these blue 13 haplotypes which are found in Europeans and 14 also in Caucasians from the southwest are 15 also prevalent or present in 16 African-American populations giving us some 17 indication of add-mixture European Y 18 chromosomes flowing into the 19 African-American gene pool. 20 Here we see Asian Y-chromosomes, and 21 they form a completely different set of 22 haplotypes there. Notice that Europeans 23 have a set of haplotype, and the profile is 24 very similar to southwest Caucasian 25 Americans and very similar to Southwest 523 1 2 Hispanics. So with respect to the 3 Y-chromosome, Southwestern Hispanics have a 4 profile that's very similar to Europeans and 5 Caucasian Americans. 6 We don't know what means with respect 7 to other markers in the genome, for example, 8 mitochondrial DNA may give us a very 9 different picture. But also notice that 10 this magenta haplotype found in Native 11 Americans only is found also at some low 12 levels in Caucasian Americans from the 13 Southwest as well as Southwest Hispanics 14 indicating there are Native American 15 chromosomes, again, flowing across 16 populations systems. 17 I think these are important 18 considerations for forensic work, and we 19 need to consider them further to understand 20 the impact they may have on statistical 21 analyses. 22 Now, just to get at this question of 23 how much structure is there, Mark already 24 nicely introduced the idea of FST, which is 25 the measure of the between group amount of 524 1 2 variation relative to the total amount of 3 genetic variance in the system. 4 I just quickly want to point out that 5 when we look at STR haplotypes, the FST 6 numbers are pretty low, lower than the 13 7 percent that Mark alluded to in most 8 populations. 9 Our worldwide sample, it was .069 or 10 6.9 percent, however, it was highly 11 statistically significant. For U.S. groups 12 it was lower, and for Native Americans, it's 13 quite high, about 5.3 percent, almost as 14 high as the world populations together. 15 But notice for SNP haplotypes, these 16 numbers are much, much higher, so 35, 36 17 percent of the total variance is explained 18 by a variation between groups, and this 19 reflects, again, their geographic 20 specificity. 21 The STR haplotype numbers being lower 22 reflects the fact that we're starting to get 23 a lot of individualization of Y lineages in 24 each group. Therefore, that lowers the 25 amount of between group variance. For 525 1 2 Native Americans we have a lower amount of 3 individualization, and we also have a lower 4 amount of between group variation. 5 Notice, very interestingly, that North 6 Central Asians, the Siberians also have high 7 levels of FST like Native American groups 8 do. 9 And this is just a different measure, 10 I won't go into it, to measure FST. I'm 11 going to cut to the chase here because I 12 don't want to take too much more time. 13 So, essentially, the number of known 14 Y-STRs is greater than 40 right now, and so 15 there's great hope that we can develop the 16 Y-chromosome as a system with high 17 individualization by looking at many STRs. 18 The number of SNPs is greater than a 19 hundred, and they exhibit geographic 20 specificity, so the different properties of 21 Y-STR's individualization and Y-SNPs 22 geographic specificity in combination are 23 especially useful for DNA forensics. 24 Some U.S. population groups may be 25 subdivided with respect to NRY haplotype 526 1 2 variation, and that needs to be further 3 investigated. 4 Varying degrees of paternal 5 add-mixture between U.S. population groups, 6 again, we need to reassess or assess the 7 influence that may have on forensic 8 analysis. And, therefore, I think we need 9 to say at this point that we'll need larger 10 databases of Y-STR and Y-SNPs for individual 11 U.S. population groups and their parental 12 groups in other parts of the world to really 13 understand how to best analyze these data. 14 And future directions are to identify 15 additional hypervariable STRs, we're already 16 doing so and have found some; for the fewest 17 number of PCR reactions to give the largest 18 number of haplotypes; genotype U.S. 19 populations with several informative SNPs 20 using fluorescent space technology, 21 everything that you can do in your forensic 22 lab, it's no more high-tech than that; and 23 increase our sample size in the number of 24 U.S. population groups in the database. 25 I'll leave it there. Thank you very much. 527 1 2 (Applause.) 3 DR. LEDERBERG: Next is Terry Melton 4 from the State College of Pennsylvania and 5 Microtyping Technologies. 6 DR. MELTON: I'd like to first thank 7 Dr. Lisa Forman and the NIJ for asking me to 8 come here and talk to you today about 9 mitochondrial DNA. 10 We've heard briefly only in passing a 11 couple of references to mitochondrial DNA, 12 and I got the impression that some people 13 think of it as a little bit of a mystery 14 molecule still. So I'm here to tell you 15 that there's quite a lot going on in the 16 mystery molecule world of mitochondrial DNA, 17 and it shouldn't be a mystery anymore to 18 you. 19 All of the laboratories that I'm aware 20 of are sequencing hypervariable regions 1 21 and 2 in the noncoding control region. 22 Mitochondrial DNA is a circular molecule. 23 It's about 15 Kb long and it does have some 24 genes in it that code for various things 25 having to do with cellular respiration. The 528 1 2 region we're interested in tends to be 3 highly variable among individuals, and it's 4 quite useful for forensic identification. 5 In our laboratory, as in most 6 laboratories, we're sequencing these two 7 hypervariable regions, as I mentioned, HV1 8 and HV2. We build in quite a bit of 9 redundancy in our analysis by actually 10 amplifying several different PCR products 11 which overlap each other. 12 And I should mention that there is a 13 move afoot to doing some of the region in 14 between HV1 and HV2, and downstream of HV2 15 these are called the VR regions, and they're 16 extremely useful for resolving some of the 17 differences between people who have some of 18 the more common types that are more 19 difficult to discriminate with respect to 20 these two regions. 21 And I should also tell you that in our 22 laboratory we're doing quite a bit of work 23 with very degraded samples where we amplify 24 even smaller fragments, that is 100 to 140 25 base pairs, and we're having quite a bit of 529 1 2 success applying this approach which has 3 heretofore only been used by the Armed 4 Forces Laboratory in their work with the 5 degraded remains from Korea and Vietnam. So 6 we're actually able to get some very 7 valuable data out of forensic samples in 8 these regions by using an ancient DNA 9 approach. 10 In our laboratory, we're mostly typing 11 shed hairs, usually hair fragments or hairs 12 with telogen roots. Of course, if there is 13 a root bulb, we would always want to 14 preserve that for nuclear testing. 15 Our second most common kind of sample 16 is aged skeletal material, usually teeth. 17 Occasionally, we get long bones. We like to 18 get teeth if we can get them. 19 And, occasionally, we'll do a degraded 20 stain, but what we're finding with stains is 21 that we have such a sensitive assay, 22 mitochondrial is about ten to a hundred 23 times more sensitive than nuclear DNA 24 typing, so with degraded stains, we will 25 recover not only the type of stain itself, 530 1 2 but the type of anyone who has handled the 3 fabric prior to the stain being there. 4 So Stains are very problematic. I 5 like to say, we can always clean a hair, 6 clean a bone before we test it, but we 7 cannot clean a stain. 8 I want to point out too, one of the 9 very useful attributes of mitochondrial DNA 10 is that it's maternally inherited. It's 11 inherited in a haploid mode. 12 This is particularly useful in cases 13 where the individual in question who may 14 have left the sample is not available, you 15 can go to any living maternal relative and 16 ask for a blood sample or a buccal sample to 17 get the type of the missing individual. 18 So a missing persons examination can 19 be done. It's very useful in a no-body 20 homicide kind of case where a sample has 21 been left behind, where you believe a murder 22 has occurred and you'd like to test a hair 23 or a stain left at a crime scene. 24 Occasionally, we have some exhumations that 25 are done in shallow grave cases and that 531 1 2 sort of thing. And, occasionally, too, we 3 do maternity and sibling analysis. These 4 are quite useful because of this maternal 5 mode of inheritance. 6 We will hear, of course, there are 7 disadvantages to using mitochondrial DNA. 8 Certainly, it's not nearly as discriminatory 9 as nuclear DNA testing, but, of course, it 10 is absolutely as satisfactory as a nuclear 11 marker for doing exclusions. 12 And as an inclusionary marker, we're 13 actually seeing some very good statistics 14 now with the current database which is in 15 use, such that the probability overall of 16 selecting any two individuals at random from 17 the population of Caucasians is only about 18 1:255. 19 And I often mention too, that 20 mitochondrial DNA is sort of the end of the 21 road for testing for most DNA cases. People 22 are not happy with these numbers compared to 23 nuclear testing, but, again, in addition to 24 other information that you derive about a 25 case, it can be extremely helpful and also 532 1 2 very compelling in addition to that other 3 information. So I always say it's sort of 4 part of the puzzle of a case. 5 The numbers are similar to other 6 groups, and I'll talk a little bit more 7 about statistics in a little while. Current 8 issues have remained virtually the same 9 since the beginning of this science. 10 Heteroplasmy was originally considered 11 sort of the scare idea in mitochondrial 12 testing. This is a situation in which an 13 individual has more than one type of 14 mitochondrial DNA in their body. 15 It's actually true that we're probably 16 all heteroplasmic at some level, and, in 17 fact, over the last few years, because of 18 some very excellent studies being done by 19 Dr. Reynolds at Roche Labs and by the Armed 20 Forces Laboratory in Rockville, Maryland, 21 we're actually beginning to understand 22 heteroplasmy quite well. 23 So the biology is better understood. 24 This is a picture, actually, on the right 25 here, of a heteroplasmic sample. What you 533 1 2 see is that this individual -- this is 3 looking at the light and the heavy strands 4 which, of course, are always both sequenced 5 in a case -- this person has a G and an A at 6 that position. That's a site heteroplasmy. 7 Down here, this is what we would call 8 a link heteroplasmy where this person 9 actually has a population of molecules with 10 seven Cs followed by a T and a population of 11 eight Cs followed by a T. This results in a 12 very characteristic sort of messy looking 13 sequence downstream. So it always entails 14 extra work when you have this situation in a 15 case. 16 We are also converging on some 17 estimates of frequencies of heteroplasmy in 18 various tissues. We know it's quite high in 19 the brain and in muscle tissues. It's very, 20 very low in blood samples, usually, and we 21 are seeing about 15 to 20 percent in hairs. 22 In our laboratory, we've seen in about 23 six percent of our case work samples a site 24 heteroplasmy, and we've seen a link 25 heteroplasmy in about 21 percent of our case 534 1 2 samples. Fortunately, the methods for 3 detection are increasingly more sensitive. 4 With most instrumentations in most 5 laboratories, people can detect mixtures of 6 about 80 to 20 and possibly as low as 85 to 7 15 mixtures so it is getting easier to 8 detect heteroplasmy. 9 Understanding heteroplasmy has 10 certainly led to conservative 11 interpretations in cases in which you find 12 it. Standards for all laboratories, and 13 these are sort of original to the FBI, is, 14 of course, with two or more sequence 15 differences, you would say you have an 16 exclusion. 17 Obviously, when you have a match at 18 every position, which is what we see most of 19 the time when we have two samples that have 20 come from the same individual, you cannot 21 exclude. In fact, in the last year and a 22 half we've actually only seen two samples in 23 the same case where the two samples differed 24 by one site. 25 So, on average, most samples, if 535 1 2 they've come from two individuals will 3 provide a difference of eight sites. So 4 it's rare that you'll have this problem down 5 here, with the one sequence difference. 6 That's termed inconclusive because of the 7 possibility that you have undetected 8 heteroplasmy or that you have two samples 9 coming from two different individuals. 10 When there's clear evidence of heteroplasmy 11 with a common base in both the question, the 12 known samples, we also say that we cannot 13 exclude. 14 And, finally, evidence of heteroplasmy 15 in both samples can actually strengthen the 16 match, and this something that was found in 17 the remains of the Tsar and his brother; and 18 this was a published paper a few years ago. 19 Contamination is the ongoing bug-a-boo 20 of mitochondrial DNA laboratories. Of 21 course, good laboratories that conform to 22 very high standards of contamination 23 prevention will see it only rarely, 24 fortunately, and this usually takes the form 25 of a sporadic contamination. 536 1 2 It really requires for minimizing 3 contamination to type your personnel, deep 4 internal databases, and my soap box is 5 always absolutely minimizing the number of 6 samples that are being handled concurrently. 7 However, we do rare contamination 8 events, as I said, especially, sporadic 9 events, and it's becoming clear among all 10 the laboratories that do this that each of 11 these cases must be evaluated in its own 12 context and the sporadic contamination 13 events, especially, should not necessarily 14 invalidate the results of the testing. 15 And I think Mitch Holland and Tom 16 Parsons really said it best in their 17 Forensic Science Review paper from 1999, and 18 I would certainly urge any of you who are 19 interested in mitochondrial DNA analysis and 20 the specifics of it to get a copy of this 21 paper because it's a very comprehensive and 22 excellent review of the science. 23 They, basically, say that despite all 24 the precautionary measures to minimize 25 contamination, it will be observed 537 1 2 occasionally in some PCRs, and there should 3 be approaches developed in every laboratory 4 to decide how to analyze this sort of result 5 without losing authentic results from the 6 testing. And I think it's a very, very good 7 approach to take and sort of a common sense 8 approach, which I think everybody should be 9 aware of. 10 Ongoing, of course, is the database 11 and population genetics issues, which are 12 really not so much issues as much as to me 13 that they are an indication that we are 14 beginning to get a very, very good 15 understanding of what the variation is like, 16 particularly, in North American populations. 17 The database, which is maintained by 18 the Armed Forces and FBI laboratories in 19 Quantico. Is growing steadily. The last 20 issue had over 4,300 human mitochondrial 21 sequences of North American forensic 22 significance, and the next issue of this 23 database will be out in July; and I expect 24 it to be quite a bit larger at that point. 25 There are plans, of course, for a 538 1 2 number of more samples, 5 to 10,000 more 3 samples, and the current issue contains over 4 a thousand sequences of African or 5 African-American origin, around 700 Hispanic 6 sequences, 240 Native American sequences 7 from the Navajo and Apache groups, 414 Asian 8 sequences, and around 2,000 sequences. 9 Presenting the courtroom statistics, 10 this is sort of an evolving thing, I think, 11 there have been several ways to present the 12 context for inclusion in the courtroom. The 13 earliest method was to describe the number 14 of times a sequence that had been seen in a 15 case had been seen in the current database. 16 So you'd just say, oh, we've seen it three 17 times out of these 4,360 individuals, and 18 it's broken down by ethnic group under that. 19 The method I prefer is actually 20 something that gives you a little bit more 21 information. Actually, since we cannot go 22 out and type everyone in the population, we 23 can estimate the frequency of a type in the 24 database, but we're forced to put a 25 confidence interval around that frequency. 539 1 2 We can actually calculate a 95 or 99 3 percent confidence interval around the 4 frequency estimate, which is based on the 5 current data base. So, for example, you can 6 say a 95 percent confidence interval is that 7 the true frequency lies somewhere between 0 8 percent and 0.15 percent. 9 And this is the kind of number you get 10 when you have one instance in the database 11 as it exists now, and, in fact, the 12 corollary to that is that, by extension, you 13 can exclude well over 99 percent of the 14 population as being potential contributors 15 of that sample. 16 So the numbers are quite useful and 17 quite good for at this point for actually 18 going to court, and it has been proposed 19 that likelihood ratios could be used in case 20 work, although, to my knowledge, it has not 21 been used in court. 22 Just a little bit about where we're 23 doing our case work. About half or maybe 55 24 percent of our work is in the area for law 25 enforcement and prosecutors. This always 540 1 2 includes, of course, criminal cases, missing 3 persons cases, and there is a lot of 4 interest in doing cold cases where people 5 are going back and looking at hairs that 6 have been stored away for a number of years, 7 and these are actually very good samples and 8 work quite well. 9 Along the same lines, of course, we do 10 testing and confirmatory testing for the 11 defense. We're also quite involved in doing 12 post-conviction testing. Very often on 13 hairs that were deemed microscopically 14 consistent with someone resulted in their 15 being convicted, and now someone's actually 16 going back and doing DNA testing on those 17 hairs. 18 On a rare occasion prosecutors and 19 defense attorneys will get together and pay 20 for a test together, which is really nice, 21 and that's a very small fraction of what we 22 do. And about a quarter of the time, we're 23 actually working on some less criminal type 24 cases, of course, relationship studies; the 25 occasional historical case where someone has 541 1 2 dug up a body that they believe belonged to 3 some famous person and they want 4 confirmatory testing of that. 5 We actually believe we have done the 6 very first NAGPUR case where we helped in 7 repatriating some Native American remains 8 found in a dig site in California, and we 9 did confirm that the skeleton from that site 10 was probably an individual of Native 11 American origin. 12 And because of the geographic history 13 of mitochondrial DNA and its evolutionary 14 history, we can also be useful in doing some 15 asylum cases, looking for geographic origins 16 of someone who is looking for political 17 asylum. 18 And, finally, a very small fraction of 19 our cases is what I call "vanity" cases. 20 This is the occasional person who calls you 21 and says, "I'm the convinced I'm the 22 Lindbergh baby," or "I'm another Romanov 23 descendant." So we get a few cases like 24 that from time to time. We have Anastasias 25 about once a month. 542 1 2 These statistics come from my friends 3 Kevin Miller, who's an analyst at the FBI 4 Mitochondrial Unit. I think they're fairly 5 up to date. Right now we know testimony has 6 been given in 33 cases in at least 22 states 7 and American Samoa. 8 And there have been five states with 9 recorded admissability hearings; five 10 appeals to date, all have been upheld. In 11 Florida in 1997, there was an admissability 12 hearing which failed to pass. This was 13 based on some statistical issues. It has 14 since passed in Florida. 15 And there is an upcoming admissibility 16 in New York State in June. There's also, 17 apparently, an ongoing admissability hearing 18 here in Manhattan this week, which I was not 19 aware of until yesterday. 20 Federal testimonies. There have been 21 testimonies in six federal jurisdictions; 22 two recorded admissability hearings, three 23 appeals to date, two have been upheld, and 24 there's one pending. 25 Finally, I'd like to share with you 543 1 2 something that I found in a local book store 3 about six weeds ago. I think it's an 4 excellent commentary and I'm now the proud 5 owner of a first edition which has this as 6 the cover. Thank you. 7 (Applause.) 8 DR. LEDERBERG: We'll go on now to 9 Rebecca Reynolds from Roche Molecular 10 Systems. 11 DR. REYNOLDS: I wanted to first, of 12 course, thank Dr. Lisa Forman for her 13 invitation to speak here and also to thank 14 Dr. Terry Melton for introducing the 15 mitochondrial genome to you and also 16 explaining why it's such a valuable source 17 of information for both forensic and human 18 identification. 19 And Lisa asked asked me to focus the 20 development of our rapid simple method for 21 analyzing sequence variation in the control 22 region and comparing it to sequencing as 23 opposed to discussing our heteroplasmy 24 studies, and I have honored her request, at 25 least, as best as I can. So I will be 544 1 2 focusing on this technology that we've 3 developed. 4 As Terry told you, most laboratories 5 doing mitochondrial DNA analysis are using 6 DNA sequencing, and in Terry's lab and our 7 lab, we use the Genetic Analyzer 310 for 8 analysis; and as you can see with sequencing 9 as she described, we're basically getting 10 information about every position within the 11 control region. 12 However, it's important to consider, 13 though, how long does it take to get that 14 information, and it's also important to ask, 15 do you really need that much information for 16 ever sample that you're looking at? 17 The goal really is to determine as 18 quickly as possible and by extending as few 19 resources and time as possible which of 20 those samples really have probative value 21 and which of them really should get the most 22 amount of time and analysis. 23 So what we've been doing is developing 24 an alternative assay, but let me first 25 describe to you how long it does take to 545 1 2 obtain information when you're doing 3 sequence analysis, and I'm basing these 4 estimates, again, this is on the 310 5 Analysis because that's what most forensic 6 laboratories own, the instrument they own. 7 Plus, we've analyzed well over a 8 thousand sequences ourselves, and I've 9 talked with people who also use the 10 technology and so these estimates are fairly 11 reasonable. 12 You spend your first day, basically, 13 following extraction. You spend your first 14 day setting up PCR and amplifying it. You 15 then have to prep your products before you 16 can do the sequencing reaction, so you need 17 to do that and then set up your sequencing 18 reactions to go over night. 19 The next day, you can't just load 20 those reactions onto your sequencer 21 instrument, you have to prep them as well. 22 So you spend the morning doing that. You 23 get your samples up and running on the 24 machine and begin collecting data. 25 With the 310, these are analyzed one 546 1 2 at a time, and it takes about 55 minutes 3 per sample to collect data. So what that 4 means is at the end of day three, really, 5 that's when you have some information in 6 hand that you can use to make some 7 decisions, i.e., decide if they're actually 8 exclusions and samples that you no longer 9 have to deal with, at least, in the context 10 of the case you were given. 11 So the information yielded after three 12 days is about 28 sequences. You get another 13 26 for every 24 hours after that. Now, 28 14 sequences doesn't mean 28 samples, but, as 15 Terry described to you, there are actually 16 two regions that you're analyzing, HV1 and 17 HV2. 18 Each of those is amplified into two 19 fragments, and then those four fragments 20 need to be sequenced in both directions, so 21 you're talking about eight sequencing 22 reactions per sample that you want 23 information on. 24 So, really, at the end of three days, 25 you're talking about information on maybe 547 1 2 three to four samples. Given that most 3 cases involve a lot more than three samples, 4 you're really needing to spend about a week 5 before you can make a decision; yes, this 6 hair is excluded or not. 7 So there really is a need for 8 something that's more rapid and simpler that 9 laboratories can use for analyzing sequence 10 variation. So this is the test that I was 11 going to describe to you. 12 And the approach that we've been using 13 is probably one that's familiar to you. 14 It's using the Immobilized SSO Probe 15 Detection technology. These are actually 16 the first microarrays, granted they're low 17 density microarrays, but they are 18 microarrays, so you guys have been on the 19 cutting edge for about a decade. 20 So what are some of the advantages of 21 SSO probe strips -- I might just call them 22 probe strips at this point -- over 23 sequencing, and why do they become very 24 useful as a screening tool? 25 And I guess I do want to emphasize, 548 1 2 we're not saying, don't sequence. You have 3 to sequence, but you don't need to sequence 4 every single sample that comes across your 5 lab bench, and one reason that this is such 6 a valuable screening test is that it is 7 significantly faster than sequencing. 8 First, after PCR, there is no sample 9 preparation. You go straight from there to 10 the probe strip which is where you then are 11 looking at sequence variation. You can also 12 type up to 40 samples at a time, and it only 13 takes two and a half hours. And that's 14 enough information to tell immediately 15 whether or not a sample is included or 16 excluded or can be associated with the 17 particular individual or not. 18 As I said, it uses established 19 technology that's been accepted in courts 20 for years, and it's also easy to implement 21 meaning that you really need only about a 2 22 $2,500 water bath to do this assay as 23 opposed to a $60 to $70,000 instrument that 24 requires a $5,000 a year maintenance 25 contract on top of the $10,000 of additional 549 1 2 software that you need to analyze the 3 sequence. 4 So, again, you have to go that way 5 anyway, but the point is, you want to keep 6 your costs down and your time down as much 7 as you can, and this is one way to do that. 8 And, finally, again, it is easy to 9 interpret. I'll be showing you an example 10 of some strips, and you'll see for yourself, 11 you can do it by eye. You don't need any 12 software or anything additional to determine 13 whether or not you need to deal further with 14 a particular sample. 15 As Terry described to you, generally, 16 our laboratories are looking at HV1 and HV2. 17 For the first version of our assay, we 18 focused exclusively on the HV2 region, and 19 what we're doing, unlike sequencing, where 20 you're looking at every single position 21 within the hypervariable regions, what we're 22 doing is looking at clusters of the most 23 polymorphic positions within, as I said, our 24 first version, HV2. 25 And these are the five clusters, 550 1 2 labelled A through E. What we're doing for, 3 again, the original version of the assay is 4 amplifying a 415 base pair fragment that 5 encompasses the entire HV2 region. 6 Sequencing, generally, when it's 7 nonreference samples, involves two separate 8 PCR reactions with two primer pairs then 9 with overlapping fragments to get 10 information across that region. 11 The next slide is an example of 12 results that you would get with an SSO 13 strip, and these are the five regions that I 14 just indicated to you, A through E. And 15 then within each of these regions, there are 16 probes that are specific for certain 17 sequences. 18 So, as an example, in region A, you 19 see that the probe 2 is positive, it's 20 giving a positive signal. What these two 21 probes tell you is whether or not an 22 individual has a G or an A at that position. 23 This person happens to have an A at position 24 73. 25 Similarly, in region B, you have now 551 1 2 seven probes that look at sequence variation 3 at these three positions. This individual, 4 the B5 probe is positive. We know that that 5 means that person's sequence contains a T at 6 146, a T at 150, and a T at 152, similar for 7 region C and D. 8 In region E, we just have one probe 9 there, the E2. This is not looking at 10 sequence variation as it is in regions A 11 through D. Here what we're looking at is a 12 stretch of C residues, and most populations 13 can divided into two groups; those that 14 have seven Cs in a row and those that have 15 eight Cs in a row. 16 And we've chosen to design a probe for 17 eight Cs. This individual, therefore, has 18 eight Cs in a row in this region. If that 19 probe is absent, that means that individual 20 has seven Cs or there's some other issue 21 such as length heteroplasmy occurring. 22 So with this combined information you 23 obtain, then, a miter type about that 24 individual, again, with sequence information 25 about the most polymorphic region within 552 1 2 HV2. 3 What I wanted to show you here is 4 that, which I should mention quickly that 5 the amount of information that you get from 6 the strip, this particular strip, as Terry 7 was saying, with sequencing, you can exclude 8 about over 99 percent of the population. 9 With this strip in this form it's about 95 10 percent of the population. So it's not as 11 informative, but it's not bad as an 12 exclusionary method, which is perfect for a 13 screening tool. 14 So then in comparing the amount of 15 time it does take then compared to 16 sequencing -- I just made this small 17 table -- now, we're just looking at what 18 happens post-PCR because for both methods, 19 you have to do the PCR reaction. 20 With the probe strips within three 21 hours, you can obtain information on up to 22 40 samples in the HV2 region. In contrast, 23 again, if we're just talking about the HV2 24 region, it takes two to three days following 25 the initial PCR to get information about 553 1 2 seven samples, both directions, in HV2. 3 It's quite a difference, and, again, 4 here you could have given somebody an 5 answer, yes or no, you've got the right guy. 6 Basically, if you've got the wrong guy, get 7 back out on the street look for somebody 8 else rather than waiting three days to a 9 week. So, again, it's a very valuable then 10 as a screening mechanism. 11 We've made some improvements to that 12 original version of the assay, and I wanted 13 to go through those quickly now. We wanted 14 to include the HV2 region to increase the 15 informativeness of the assay. So to 16 accomplish that, we've done a couple of 17 things. 18 First, we added in a primer pair that 19 we can use to co-amplify HV1 and HV2, and 20 what that means is that we only have to use 21 one portion of our DNA sample to get 22 information in both HV1 and HV2 as opposed 23 to four portions of our DNA sample if we're 24 going to do sequencing. 25 We also then added in nine probes for 554 1 2 the HV1 region, and we decided to remove the 3 HV2 C-stretch probe, that's seven Cs versus 4 eight Cs; and that's probably because the 5 general consensus in the community now is 6 that that region is ambiguous, you really 7 need to take a lot of time to figure out 8 what's going on there. So you're going to 9 be doing that at the sequencing level 10 probably more than at a screening level, and 11 so we eliminated that probe. 12 Now, because it was such an 13 informative probe, overall, we haven't 14 increased the informativeness of the assay 15 greatly, but what we have done is provided a 16 lot more information that can be interpreted 17 unambiguously. So that's actually a very 18 important improvement. 19 The other thing that we've done is to 20 design additional primer pairs that are 21 compatible with the strip assays so that you 22 can analyze highly degraded samples as well. 23 And, again, here we're trying to conserve 24 extracted material because it generally is 25 very precious. 555 1 2 So, now, we do have four primer pairs, 3 to for HV1 andHV2, however, instead of 4 having four reactions, we have two 5 reactions, and the way we accomplish that is 6 in one of those reactions to amplify a 7 portion of HV1 and a portion HV2. 8 In that second reaction, you take your 9 second Alu quad of DNA, and now you look at 10 the other portion of HV1 and the other 11 portion of HV2. We've also determined, 12 because it was very important that you don't 13 have to go back and do additional work, you 14 if it's amplified here and you can test it 15 on the strips, you need to be able to 16 sequence it without doing anything else, and 17 in fact, that's true, you can. 18 So we actually are really looking 19 forward to the collaboration with the 20 Georgia Bureau of Investigation where 21 they'll be testing this out on "real case 22 work." I should mention that we've done 23 this on old hairs, soft tissue, bloods, and 24 some bones, but we wanted this in a real 25 case work setting to make sure this really 556 1 2 works, and hopefully we've talked Terry into 3 testing this as well. But this would be a 4 great saver of sample which is very 5 important. 6 And, finally, the last thing, and 7 Lisa, I'm sorry, I have to mention the word 8 "heteroplasmy" here. We also wanted to 9 address heteroplasmy hot spots. We've 10 looked at over 1,700 samples, blood, hairs, 11 bones, and soft tissue; and we've identified 12 a number of heteroplasmy hot spots. 13 As Terry told you, heteroplasmy is the 14 presence of more than one sequence, 15 mitochondrial sequence, within an 16 individual, and sometimes, that can just 17 complicate the interpretation. So the goal 18 is to make the interpretation as simple and 19 unambiguous as possible. 20 Most of those hot spots, we already 21 had probes that covered them. We didn't 22 have probes for position 189, and this is a 23 site that we identified, in particular, in 24 muscle tissues and in hairs. Position 16093 25 has been reported by other laboratories, and 557 1 2 we've included it as well. 3 So what the new version of the strips 4 look like now, we've added in 11 probes and 5 removed 1, so we've gone from 17 probes to 6 27 probes. These are the new probes for 7 HV1, and we still have some optimization 8 work work to do. I don't know if you can 9 see it, but there's still a little bit of 10 cross-high at a couple of positions. 11 These are the original HV2 probes, and 12 then, finally, these are the new probes we 13 added in for the heteroplasmy hot spots at 14 189 and 16093. 15 So, again, you can tell immediately by 16 looking at these three individuals, they 17 have distinguishable types. You didn't need 18 any software, you didn't need a lot of time. 19 You needed, basically, to do your assay, and 20 at the end of two and a half hours, you 21 look in the tray, okay, these are all 22 different. Very easy. 23 From here I wanted to just mention 24 another reason why we decided to add 16093, 25 and, again, it's a comparison of the two 558 1 2 technologies, which, really, are 3 complementary. I really believe they need 4 to be done together, not one at the 5 exclusion of the other. 6 And that's because sequencing, just 7 because it's sensitive to which sequencing 8 chemistry you use, which instrument you use, 9 it's sensitive to the position within the 10 sequence and the base at each of those 11 positions as to whether or not you're able 12 to determine a mixture of sequences, either 13 due to contamination or heteroplasmy. 14 And 16093 ended up being particularly 15 bad so that you actually can miss it when 16 you're sequencing, and I just have one 17 example to show you of a mixture study that 18 we carried out. We mixed two sequences, one 19 that had a T at 16093 and one that had a C. 20 In this first panel 12 and a half 21 percent of that mixture is a C, 25 percent 22 C, and 37 and a half percent C. We then 23 sequenced with two different chemistries. 24 Both of these are being used in different 25 laboratories. The big dye is reported to be 559 1 2 more sensitive, and, therefore, might be 3 used more frequently in mitochondrial DNA 4 analysis. 5 But look at what happens. At 12 and a 6 half percent C with the derotamine dyes, you 7 see a slight C peak under the T; here at 25 8 and 37 and a half percent, clearly, 9 unambiguously, you do see that second 10 sequence and you would correctly interpret 11 acid mixture due to, most likely, to 12 heteroplasmy or possibly to contamination. 13 But look what happens with the big dye 14 chemistry. 12 and a half percent, 25 15 percent, not even a trace of a second 16 sequence. You would have missed it. Even 17 at 37 and a half percent, you're just barely 18 starting to pick up that second sequence. 19 With the strip typing technology, the 20 probes are not sensitive to any of these 21 variables. It doesn't matter what the 22 sequence is surrounding it. Everything is 23 designed to take all of that into account. 24 Therefore, it detects low levels of 25 mixtures reliably, and with the strips at 560 1 2 this position, we can get down to 10 percent 3 reliably, so, therefore, we think that it's 4 an important addition to the strip for that 5 reason as well. 6 I just wanted to finish up then with 7 conclusions then that we really think that 8 efficient analysis, if your average forensic 9 laboratory, if there is such a thing, if 10 your average laboratory is going to do 11 mitochondrial DNA analysis, it really is 12 going to be done most efficiently by using a 13 screening method prior to sequencing. 14 And if you don't like this screening 15 method, there might be others out there that 16 you should look at, but I really highly 17 recommend that just for efficient flow of 18 work within your laboratory that you look at 19 that. 20 I did forget to mention earlier, we've 21 been sending these strips to a forensic lab 22 in Sweden. They've cut down their case work 23 turnaround time in the mitochondrial unit of 24 their lab on the order of days. So it's 25 been very valuable in that way. 561 1 2 We believe that the immobilized SSO 3 approach to assay and DNA sequencing are 4 complementary technologies, not competitive 5 technologies. They really both have 6 advantages and disadvantages. They should 7 be used together. They are complementary. 8 In that, as I showed you, the 9 immobilized probes, they're more sensitive 10 and they give less ambiguous results than 11 the sequencing, however, the DNA sequence 12 analysis is clearly more informative. So by 13 using them together, I think that's the way 14 to go. 15 I wanted to end by acknowledging 16 current and past members of the laboratory 17 who have been working on the work that I 18 showed you, in particular, Sandy Callaway 19 and Matt Gabriel, these are the two 20 individuals in the laboratory funded by our 21 NIJ grant; Karen Walker, she's been working 22 on immobilized probe assays for a decade. 23 Past members include Dr. Ellen Clark, 24 she's now with California DOJ DNA 25 Laboratory, and Joe Vallaro is now with the 562 1 2 Boston Crime Laboratory there, actually, 3 their new Technical Leader. 4 Also, I'd like to acknowledge NIJ and, 5 especially, Lisa Forman because she has been 6 incredibly supportive and enthusiastic about 7 this technology from the very beginning, and 8 we really appreciate that and it keeps us 9 going. Thank you, again. 10 (Applause.) 11 DR. LEDERBERG: We're exactly on time, 12 but I'm going to borrow a three minutes from 13 our break to see if there are any really 14 important questions or comments on today's 15 proceedings. 16 SPEAKER: This is for Mike Hammer. 17 Mike talked about SNPs on the Y, insertions 18 and deletions on the Y, STRs. What about 19 the minisatellite, the A repeat, which is, 20 of course, the most reliable marker on the 21 Y. 22 Do you foresee that as having a use in 23 forensics? 24 DR. LEDERBERG: Would you recap the 25 question? 563 1 2 DR. HAMMER: Yes. Jack asked about 3 another type of marker called a 4 minisatellite. There's one known to exist 5 on the Y so far. It's highly polymorphic, 6 however, we have not attempted to type it in 7 our lab. 8 Mark-Job link and Lester is very, very 9 good at typing this marker, and I'm not sure 10 if the technology to type it is really 11 exportable or how broadly it would be 12 usable. But since I haven't tried it, I 13 can't say for sure. It's MVR PCR. 14 DR. LEDERBERG: Okay. I think it's 15 time for a 15-minute break, and then we'll 16 resume for the panel that Henry Erlich will 17 moderate, Technology Solutions and Methods. 18 (Break.) 19 PANEL VIII: TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS 20 PART II - METHODS 21 DR. ERLICH: Good afternoon. I'm 22 going to introduce our panel and we will 23 have a brief panel discussion at the end of 24 the individual talks. 25 As you know, in the beginning of 564 1 2 PCR-based forensic typing, sequence 3 polymorphisms were typed using 4 oligonucleotide probes, and length 5 polymorphisms were typed using gel 6 electrophoresis. 7 But our panelists today are going to 8 be discussing, not only new technologies for 9 genotyping, but also new methods for 10 analysis. So we really are looking forward 11 to these talks, and, as I said, I hope we'll 12 have time for some discussion afterwards. 13 The first speaker today is John 14 Butler. John is a research chemist at the 15 Biotechnology Division at National Institute 16 of Standards and Technology. John. 17 DR. BUTLER: I'd like to thank the 18 organizers for for giving me a chance to 19 speak today about some of the work I've done 20 in the past, some of the work we're doing 21 now at NIST, and now some of the things that 22 will be going forward in the future; and, 23 hopefully, we'll get some discussion and 24 collaboration with people in the field. 25 My presentation will cover, first, 565 1 2 some of the advantages of mass spectometry, 3 and then cover some of the past work that I 4 did when I was in California at gene Trace 5 Systems, the present work I'm doing now at 6 NIST, and, finally, how the technology can 7 be used in the future. 8 So within the steps of processing a 9 sample, if you first obtain a sample from a 10 crime scene or from a paternity testing 11 investigation, we have to go through 12 biology, technology, and genetics with that 13 sample. 14 We first have to extract, quantitate 15 and then PCR that sample. In the case of 16 STRs, we do a multiplex reaction. Then with 17 the technology side of things, we do a 18 separation and detection of those alleles. 19 We then determine the genotype, and then, 20 finally, under the genetic section, we 21 compare that genotype, we compare that 22 genotype to other samples, and if there's a 23 match, then go through the population 24 statistics and finally generate a case 25 report. 566 1 2 Well, the technology we'll be hearing 3 about today, and my talk, in particular, 4 will focus on the PCR amplification side of 5 things and then the technology for 6 separation, detection, and analysis. 7 So I'm going to talk about 8 time-of-flight mass spectometry and talk 9 about some of the advantages of this 10 technique, primarily, that it's fast and 11 that it's accurate. 12 The way it works is you take a set of 13 samples, and you array them onto a plate. 14 Each individual spot is mixed with absorbing 15 a matrix compound which absorbs laser light 16 which comes from a pulse laser beam, strikes 17 that sample, as I'll demonstrate here in a 18 moment, and then you get a very rapid 19 separation in the form of microsecond time 20 scale; and then it impacts a detector and 21 sends an electronic signal that you can then 22 analyze on a computer. 23 So the way it works is the laser beam 24 hits, ionize some of the sample, it shoots 25 down the flight tube, and we then get a DNA 567 1 2 separation that occurs in microseconds. 3 So instead of taking hours on a gel or 4 minutes on a capillary system or on a 5 microchip, we can now do things in fractions 6 of that on the mass spectrometer. 7 And we also take multiple readings on 8 each sample and average the signal across 9 that, which gives us more reproducibility 10 there. 11 So some of the advantages are the 12 rapid analysis times, as I've alluded to 13 here; in less than a second, you can obtain 14 results. It's very accurate without 15 internal sizing standards or allelic 16 ladders. 17 In other words, you can make a 18 measurement on a DNA sample, not have to 19 compare it to anything else, and very 20 accurately measure the mass over time and 21 over different instruments. You're making 22 direct DNA measurements. There's no labels 23 no radioactive labels, no fluorescent 24 labels. You're measuring the DNA itself. 25 It's capable of very high throughput 568 1 2 processing with automation. Thousands of 3 samples can be analyzed per day per 4 instrument on this type of a system and 5 we've demonstrated that. 6 It's very versatile for a number of 7 assays, including STRs and single nucleotide 8 polymorphisms, which I'll discuss briefly at 9 the end. And, primarily, it doesn't use 10 gels. Those who know me know that I have a 11 "No gels" T-shirt in a set of clothing I 12 have there to show that I'm really an 13 activist for new technology and the 14 advantages it can bring. 15 What are some of the disadvantages? 16 There's no technique that is ever perfect. 17 Number one, is the high instrument cost for 18 labs. It's over a hundred thousand dollars 19 for an instrument up front to get into this, 20 and this will fit in, I think, for large 21 centers doing analysis, but for the smaller 22 labs, certainly, they can't get into this 23 easily. 24 Number two, is we have problems with 25 salt, with the size of the DNA we can 569 1 2 analyze, and salt inhibits the ionization of 3 that DNA. We also have an upper limit, 4 currently, with the types of lasers that we 5 use, of around 120 base pairs. So we can't 6 do the large STRs that we'd like to be able 7 to analyze, but there's ways around that. 8 And there's no assay kits that are 9 available, and that's something that we tend 10 to forget in the forensic community. In 11 order for it to be widely used, it really 12 needs to be in a kit form that anybody can 13 buy and use and that can be routinely 14 operated with. 15 Potential solutions are the fact, and 16 this is really happening now, that we're 17 going to, in some cases, regional centers or 18 contract laboratories where a single lab 19 analyzes lots and lots of samples, and with 20 that type of facility, then you can handle 21 the high instrument cost and you have the 22 need for high throughput. 23 In terms of the size and salt issues, 24 we have designed new primers for all of the 25 13 core STRs that are used in the U.S., and 570 1 2 we've, basically, moved them in closer into 3 the repeats, which allows us to get smaller 4 PCR products and still measure the repeat 5 content for each sample. 6 And we're also looking at new DNA 7 markers in the form of single nucleotide 8 polymorphisms and the advantages that that 9 can bring. 10 Now, some of the past work I did at 11 gene Trace Systems. I redesigned all the 12 primers for the 13 core STRs to make smaller 13 PCR products. We did a comparison study 14 with CAL DOJ where we took 88 samples and 15 compared them, they were amplified with the 16 Co-filer STR multiplex set, and then we 17 compared those with singleplex 18 amplifications that we ran on the mass spec. 19 We got excellent agreement with all of 20 the samples except for D7 where in 17 21 samples out of those 88, we discovered null 22 alleles. The exciting thing was, in fact, 23 we discovered some new alleles that had 24 never been recorded before. And we 25 generated a report for NIJ from all this 571 1 2 work that's 150 pages long, and I 3 understand, it will be made available in the 4 future for the community at large. 5 But Gene Trace has dropped this 6 project about a year ago, and I subsequently 7 left Gene Trace and moved to NIST where I 8 could continue some of this work. 9 So we did a comparison, as I 10 mentioned, with CAL DOJ, and this is just to 11 illustrate the ABI 310 separation of the THO 12 allelic ladder from alleles 5 to 9.3 and 10, 13 which, of course, differ by one base, and if 14 you run that on the 310, it takes just over 15 a thousand seconds for those alleles to pass 16 the detector. 17 The same result, same sample, on the 18 mass spectrometer, as you can see, runs from 19 14,000 daltons up to about 20,000 daltons, 20 and those alleles impacted the detector at 21 200 microseconds. So, actually, the 22 separation between 9.3 and 10 in this case 23 is only 1.5 microseconds. 24 And we, basically, made the size 25 smaller, as illustrated here, on the top, 572 1 2 the co-filer amplification product for 3 allele 10 is 187 base pairs. We shortened 4 that by over a hundred bases by using these 5 new primers. 6 So if we compare these techniques in 7 terms of throughput, what we can do, we did 8 a multiplex PCR 88 samples. It took about 9 54 hours to run all of those through on the 10 ABI 310, which comes out to about 2,000 11 seconds per sample; and because you're 12 getting multiple genotypes per sample, it's 13 about five minutes per genotype. 14 On the mass spectrometer, we're doing 15 singleplex reactions with these new primers, 16 as I mentioned. That means that you have to 17 do more samples, so 616 samples, those were 18 completed through the mass spec in 54 19 minutes, which means five seconds per sample 20 and five seconds per genotype. 21 So that we have, basically, two orders 22 of magnitude increase in terms of overall 23 throughput, what it can do. Now, this work 24 was all done before the ABI 3700 was 25 available. Now that exists and that allows 573 1 2 you the capability of doing multiplexes, and 3 as Dave Coffman mentioned yesterday, you can 4 get very high throughputs with that. 5 The other advantage with mass spec is 6 accuracy. This is a set of data collected 7 from TPOX alleles, one collected in March of 8 1999, the other October of '98, so six 9 months apart; and we compared the masses. 10 You can see the red line is a 11 theoretical, if you have the exact mass, and 12 you can see that these all fall on top of 13 one another, very tightly grouping for each 14 allele, and you wouldn't be able to do this 15 on a gel because of electrophoretic mobility 16 differences with temperature and the time 17 and voltages that you run. 18 But on the mass spec that's very 19 steady, and you can get very accurate 20 results over time. So we have excellent 21 precision and accuracy in the mass 22 spectrometer for STR allele sizing, and 23 this allows us to get by without any 24 internal standards or allelic ladders in 25 order to do accurate genotyping. 574 1 2 So the summary of our results with CAL 3 DOJ that we hope to write up in the future 4 is that we able to get excellent agreement 5 with these particular STRs, which are the 6 ones used in the co-filer kit, and we had 7 some null alleles which showed up on D7 8 because of one of the primers. 9 Now, this is the mass spectrometer at 10 gene Trace Systems that we used. We had a 11 very high throughput system, and we could 12 routinely analyze in 45 minutes about 384 13 samples. Our very best was 96 samples in 14 two minutes by using some really fast 15 algorithms for data processing. 16 We were able to do, in one day, 4,000 17 samples on a single instrument. It took 18 three robots to keep up with the mass 19 spectrometer. We averaged around 2,000 20 samples a day the last eight months I was 21 there at Gene Trace, just showing that this 22 was continuous. It's not just one day, and 23 then you're recovering for two weeks on your 24 analysis. Most samples were run in 25 singleplex reactions, but we were table to 575 1 2 demonstrate some multiplexes there. 3 So some of the things we got out of 4 this is we found that we could use new 5 primer sets that are smaller. One of the 6 issues in forensics, of course, is dealing 7 with degraded DNA samples, and so, you can 8 see, as you get larger and larger with PCR 9 product size, your success rate falls of in 10 terms of amplification, but if you have a 11 primer set that amplifies as larger, you 12 won't get nearly as good a success rate as 13 if you have a smaller primer set. 14 So what we hope to do with this is 15 take some of these primers that we designed 16 for the mass spec, put fluorescent tags on 17 them, and we'll be able to demonstrate that 18 you can pull up degraded DNA samples very 19 nicely with these primer sets. 20 Just to illustrate the differences in 21 the regular sets that are used with the 22 Amplisar kits from ABI, these are the sizes 23 that you would get, and you can see how much 24 smaller, in some cases, like D7, almost 200 25 bases smaller by using these new primers 576 1 2 that are closer to the repeats. 3 So if we can develop some singleplexes 4 and some low level multiplexes, you can then 5 go back if you want to get information. If 6 something's in a database for D18, for 7 example, your case work, because it's such a 8 large allele that you have, normally, like 9 in here, 344 bases, you could then amplify 10 with a smaller primer set and then pull up 11 that information on the case work sample 12 allowing you to get more probative 13 information for your database match. 14 So, now, what we're doing at NIST, I 15 have a post-doc, Pete Vallone is working for 16 me and I work under Dennis Rieder, we're 17 working on the biology, the technology, and 18 the genetics of different systems here. 19 On the biology side, we're looking at 20 STRs and SNPs; we're using capillary 21 electrophoresis and mass spectrometry, so 22 we're trying to bridge the gap as people are 23 working with current technologies, with CE 24 and expanding what we hope will be some 25 future things that can be used; and we're 577 1 2 working as model systems with mitochondrial 3 DNA and with the Y-chromosomes, which you've 4 heard a lot about in the last few talks. 5 We're also trying to improve the 6 capability for multiplex PCR. We're working 7 on some new primer design software and some 8 automation and then making that all 9 available through Starbase, which is a 10 website that allows you to access 11 information. 12 So our present work at NIST is that 13 we're using the mass spectrometer to look 14 for quality control of primers, verifying 15 that primer sets that we get from commercial 16 manufacturers remain the same over time. 17 This will be important as more and more 18 samples are put into databases. 19 We're looking at multiplex primer 20 design assays and how we can develop those 21 rapidly; automating sample preparation with 22 robotics, not only with things that can be 23 used in the future, but with things that can 24 be used right now; the PCR amplification 25 with mass spec spotting of plates and even 578 1 2 loading 310 tubes with automation; and then 3 we're looking at some new chemistries for 4 SNP analysis using the mass spectrometry. 5 This is just to illustrate that with 6 the mass spectrometer and running a primer 7 set, this is the profiler kit, each primer 8 has a unique mass that can serve as a 9 signature to verify that that kit has not 10 been altered over time and can be used for 11 QC purpose. 12 In terms of multiplexed assays here, 13 we Y-chromosome sets of SNPs, as Mike Hammer 14 talked about, in fact, you need to have as 15 many markers as possible to get higher 16 levels of discrimination. This is a set of 17 12 that we received from Stanford 18 University. They provided 154 Y-chromosome 19 markers that we're using in developing our 20 multiplexed assays. 21 This is Pete Vallone, the post-doc 22 who's worked with me and is designing some 23 of this software with visual basic that can 24 automatically design these multiplexes. 25 This is the robotic system that we 579 1 2 have in our lab now that allows us to do -- 3 it's kind of hard to see on the slide -- but 4 it will pipette individual reactions into 5 each tube and keep the other wells covered. 6 It also has an arm that will drop the 7 plate automatically into the thermocycler, 8 close that lid, and amplify, all 9 automatically. So you can do all your PCRs 10 overnight and continuously without having 11 any operator intervention. 12 There's two types of mass 13 spectrometers that are commercially 14 available right now that can do this kind 15 thing. Perceptive Biosystems has a plate 16 that will hold up to a hundred samples, and 17 Brucker sells a system that can do 384 18 positions, and we're working with both of 19 those instruments. 20 Now, in terms of chemistries for SNP 21 analysis, we're working with a primer 22 extension assay, so, basically, this works 23 by having a primer that binds next to the 24 site we want to look at; we then extend by 25 adding to that mix the dideoxase and a 580 1 2 polymerase; we can then extend across that 3 site; and then measure the mass difference 4 between the primer and the extension 5 product. 6 And each mass base has a unique mass 7 that can be measured. So, again, no 8 fluorescent labels are needed to measure the 9 direct DNA, and we can make a measurement 10 very quickly. 11 Now, this is one of the assays we 12 worked on for mitochondrial DNA, so you can 13 do a rapid screening in just a few seconds 14 per sample, and, of course, this would allow 15 you to generate large databases. 16 This was published last year in 17 Electrophoresis, but here we're able to 18 probe both strands of DNA simultaneously, 19 the heavy and light strand, and you can pick 20 up all four different bases. In this case, 21 it was a sixplex that we analyzed. 22 So where is the future of this 23 technology going? I think it can be used 24 for mitochondrial screening assays for some 25 of the reasons that we've heard that Becky 581 1 2 Reynolds talked about and Terry Melton, and 3 we've developed an assay that can do ten 4 sites along the D loop, five in HV1 and five 5 in HV2 that can be developed, basically, 6 into a minisequencing assay. 7 Along the Y-chromosome, we're 8 currently evaluating multiplex sets from the 9 150 or so markers we received from Stanford 10 and trying to look for the best sets that 11 can be used. 12 And then I think one of the great 13 advantages is you can very rapidly develop 14 population databases with this technology. 15 So as autosomal SNP markers are going to be 16 looked at to complement the core of 13 STRs, 17 this will allow us to very quickly develop a 18 population database for each of those SNPs. 19 Finally, I'd like to acknowledge Pete 20 Vallone, the post-doc that's worked with me; 21 Dennis Rieder and Lisa Forman, who have been 22 very supportive and encouraging of this 23 work; the collaborators at Transgenomics and 24 at Stanford and the people who have allowed 25 us to use their instruments while we were 582 1 2 waiting to get our own; and then the 3 co-workers I had at gene Trace Systems. 4 DR. ERLICH: Thank you, John. Are 5 there any questions? If not, I had one very 6 quick one. 7 What are the issues that represent the 8 barriers to using higher molecular weight 9 fragments, and are there ways that you'll be 10 able to overcome them? 11 DR. BUTLER: Right now, there's two 12 things you have to worry about: it's the 13 laser that you use and the matrix, the 14 compound that's used. 15 Currently, the available matrices that 16 have been discovered and the UV lasers are 17 used, that are simple to operate, limits 18 you. As you try to increase the laser 19 power, which is what's needed to ionize 20 larger and larger fragments of DNA, you, 21 basically, blast the DNA to pieces, and you 22 then you end up with smaller fragments. 23 So you have to, currently, the matrices that 24 allow soft ionization still need to be 25 discovered for extending that range. 583 1 2 Now, you can use an IR laser and get 3 things up to about 2,000 bases in terms of 4 DNA, so that that would allow us to do 5 larger fragments, but there's no 6 commercially available IR laser system right 7 now. So that will, hopefully, come in the 8 near future. 9 DR. ERLICH: Thanks, John. Our next 10 speaker is Dan Ehrlich who's a Director of 11 the BioMEMs Laboratory at the Whitehead 12 Institute for Biomedical Research. Dan. 13 DR. DAN EHRLICH: Thank you, Henry. 14 Henry and I are related, at least, Henry 15 denies it. I'm going to give you an update 16 on the this particular chip-based approach 17 that's based on your standard methods 18 capillary electrophoresis as updated on 19 chips. 20 And I think as you come to these 21 meetings and you see the process that's 22 happening here in which the NIJ has been 23 organizing all this national activity, you 24 begin to see that a lot of progress has been 25 made, a lot by a small group of people, and 584 1 2 what's going to happen is kind of the trend 3 that Jack Ballantyne pointed out in his talk 4 yesterday where there's this funnel of 5 collected samples and potential information 6 which is then funneling down because of the 7 inefficiencies of the assay process, so that 8 of the many samples that might be collected 9 on a crime scene, the number that actually 10 get analyzed is a paltry few. 11 And what that is a testament to is the 12 inefficiencies of the technology that's 13 being applied, and what you're hearing from 14 the group here is that that's probably very 15 unnecessary; and with relatively small 16 investments in converting the standard 17 technologies, which, by the way, were all 18 developed genomic sequencing, modifications 19 of those will greatly increase the 20 efficiency of DNA assays applied for 21 forensics. 22 So the key mantra in this probably is 23 assay speed, and also this relates to the 24 cost of the analysis. And it reminds me, I 25 don't have any lawyer jokes, but it reminds 585 1 2 me of the one Larson cartoon I can remember 3 about is a physicist joke in which you see 4 Einstein up at the blackboard and he has E 5 equals MC squared up there and then he has 6 time equals money and he's staring in 7 disbelief. 8 And I think that's very real in that 9 time and money are coupled when you're 10 dealing with people's, both law enforcement 11 and citizen's, time in order to get to the 12 bottom of an important story. 13 So I run a group which is involved, 14 primarily, in developing new tools for 15 genomic sequencing, but we stumbled on the 16 fact that a chip-based approach is very 17 powerful as it is applied to what is at 18 least the first standard approach to human 19 forensics, the STR analysis applied, I'm 20 sorry to say, on gels. 21 And what can happen on a chip is it's 22 possible to greatly improve the efficiency 23 of this very specific question you're 24 answering and to get that answer in ten to a 25 hundred times the speed of the current 586 1 2 standard machine, the 310 machine, and there 3 are a bunch of other potential consequences, 4 including most probably improved signal to 5 noise, which presumably cascades to 6 improvement in terms of discrimination of 7 some of the more complicated problems. 8 And then, of course, you read the 9 newspapers and you read about portability, 10 and this is probably the next twist, but in 11 the near term, it's just to do what you 12 already need to do with poorly designed 13 instrumentation more efficiently. 14 So some time ago, we quantified that 15 and we looked at how much improvement is 16 possible on a chip by comparing a slab-based 17 machine, capillary machine. So the slab's 18 running at two and a half hours; the 19 capillary system for this assay was 20 something like 40 minutes for the CCCT 21 ladder, loci; and then out on the chip with 22 an embedded marker system running on the 23 same single-color system running out in two 24 minutes. 25 I'm not going to talk a lot about how 587 1 2 that's implemented. I have one sample 3 system here. It's a cascade of plates. In 4 this case, this size, if you pull this thing 5 apart, take off some of the cover plates, 6 the working element is about a few inches 7 long, and this is actually the optimized 8 machine for this particular STR assay. This 9 is an eight-channel system, and it's the 10 system which was giving the data I showed 11 previously in a couple of minutes with 12 signal to noise superior to the commercial 13 capillary machine. 14 And the key to that, if you just want 15 it in a nutshell, is that it employs what's 16 called a cross injector in which the sample 17 is brought in on a transverse channel and 18 then switched down the selection channel. 19 So it comes up, is switched and 20 brought down the conventional capillary 21 channel to the conventional laser 22 fluorescent detector, and the fact that you 23 can switch that teeny amount of DNA allows 24 you to optimize this device for short 25 length. 588 1 2 So that's, basically, it in a 3 nutshell, and, incidentally, in the process, 4 it consumes a minuscule amount of your 5 precious sample, and depending on how it's 6 implemented, incidentally, could conserve, 7 basically, 100 percent of that sample. 8 So I showed you a glass device. If 9 you made this cheap enough, which you 10 probably can, then you probably could keep 11 it and keep 100 percent of your DNA. 12 I'm going to be very quick. Here's a 13 two-minute assay for the CCTV, again, don't 14 get too confused by this. In our early 15 studies, we were using a ladder buried right 16 in with the sample, but you can see the 17 signal to noise. This was part of a 18 collaboration which we did with Victor Weedn 19 when he was at AFIP. 20 And I'm just going to make two further 21 points about this, which are where it can be 22 extended in the very near term, and one of 23 these is in the direction of multiplexing 24 it. And this is part of the another project 25 which we had in the lab but which we're also 589 1 2 going to apply to the NIJ program. 3 So in the area of multiplexing, we're 4 building full 384-lane devices for 5 sequencing. This is for de novo sequencing, 6 so these are getting to rather large chips. 7 In fact, we can't call them chips anymore. 8 But almost certainly, I think, the 9 instrumentation community will agree will be 10 the format for what happens after the 3,700 11 capillary machine, either in the exact next 12 generation or the generation. I believe it 13 will be the exact next generation or the 14 generation after that. 15 So this is a high multiplex chip, and 16 we now have in your laboratory a full 17 robotic system which uses two of these chips 18 and recycles them back and forth and has 19 full automation for refresh, which I can't 20 say is fully operational. It's in the lab. 21 We're debugging it at the moment. 22 But it's designed to do seven 23 megabases of raw DNA sequence in 24 hours. 24 So that's basically 10 or 20 times the 25 capacity of a 3700 machine. So we're going 590 1 2 to highly multiplex operation for something 3 like doing very inexpensive databasing. 4 That well could be the format that you will 5 be seeing. 6 The sequence data is very nice. This 7 would be for short-read type of application. 8 If you're doing full sequencing for 9 forensics, you might be running 3 or 400 10 bases, and this type of data here I'm 11 showing would apply. This is a 15 to 18 12 minutes run time on the chip format. 13 The last question which I want to 14 comment on is, how fast could it get? And I 15 here we just have a projection. This is, 16 again, for the electrophoresis-based 17 technique, but as part of a study we did, I 18 asked the question, "Now, if we really 19 optimize that little device for speed, how 20 fast could we do a CCTV assay?" 21 And the bottom scale here is reading 22 in seconds, so it depends on how small we 23 can make the injection plug, and we didn't 24 know that when we were doing the study, but 25 now we do. We know we can move this down to 591 1 2 something like ten micron injection plugs 3 through a phenomenon called stacking. 4 So if you look at these curves, you 5 can run chips based on this principle in 6 about five seconds, and if you just wanted 7 the first three loci, it looks like four 8 seconds, three and a half seconds. So it's 9 extremely fast for this step in the assay 10 and would be dominated entirely dominated by 11 the PCR process. 12 And then you ask, "Well, what is the 13 ultimate speed of the PCR process?" And 14 Henry's better able to answer that than I 15 am. I think it depends on a lot of 16 complicated chemistry issues, which probably 17 are still being resolved. But our current 18 record, I think, with intact polymerase is 19 around ten minutes, something like that. 20 So, in the near term, what we're 21 trying to do is we're trying to provide a 22 laboratory system, this is not the portable 23 device in the near term, it's an improved 24 high-speed device to be used in a laboratory 25 setting. It should speed up the rate at 592 1 2 which you could turn a sample down below the 3 ten minutes in electrophoresis step. 4 We're going to be putting the first 5 systems in the Virginia and Florida state 6 labs and testing them on real samples and 7 more realistic conditions, and that will be 8 happening, to put a time scale on that, that 9 will be happening towards the end of this 10 year. 11 And we will be exploring various 12 applications including some of these thorny 13 issues of mixtures and nonideal samples and 14 so on in that setting, and then we'll be 15 going on to, presumably, some of the other 16 assays that have been discussed this 17 afternoon as well. Thank you. 18 (Applause.) 19 DR. ERLICH: Does anybody have a 20 question for Dan? If not, then we're going 21 to move on. The next speaker is Mark Perlin 22 who is the CEO of Cybergenetics. 23 DR. PERLIN: Hi. I'd like to welcome 24 the few of you who are still here. We 25 greatly appreciate your tenacity. Today, 593 1 2 hopefully, it will be worth it. This seems 3 like a very nice session. 4 I'd like to talk about a different 5 sort of the problem today, and I'll be 6 taking quite a bit of time to motivate why 7 this is an important problem. After hearing 8 David Coffman's talk about how they could do 9 4,000 samples in nanoseconds or so the other 10 day, the question is, how do you actually 11 analyze the data? 12 So what I'll be talking about is when 13 you have STR forensic databases, the concept 14 of the data scoring problem, and after I've 15 laid out the problem, I'll describe an 16 expert system solution that we've developed; 17 and if time remains, I'll give a quick talk 18 about mixtures and some work that we've been 19 doing there. 20 So, the whole concept of building a 21 database is that you have an individual, and 22 for that individual, you look at 10 or 15 23 loci; and for each loci, you want some 24 information on a database. What's the 25 information that you actually want? 594 1 2 Well, what you want is a pair of 3 numbers, sometimes the same number, which 4 are the actual lengths of the DNA molecule. 5 How do you get that? Except for the magic 6 of mass spec, usually, you can't get in 7 there with a microscope. So, currently, we 8 do a lot of processing to get that. 9 First, we do a PCR amplification, 10 that's a process that generates PCR 11 products. Then running gels or some other 12 type of technology, we do a size separation. 13 We get some electrophoretic bands. And 14 then, once we even have that, we haven't 15 even detected anything yet, we still have to 16 acquire the data and measure something. 17 There's a detection at the end. 18 So this is not some simple process 19 that happens perfectly. In fact, there are 20 many, many data artifacts that happen along 21 the way, and in anybody's quality assurance 22 system for QC, these are all artifacts that 23 people look for and know about and there are 24 a dozens of other ones as well. 25 So in context to these artifact that 595 1 2 is naturally occur in the process of trying 3 to find a length and having to do a lot of 4 experiments, in the analysis, one can 5 certainly ask the computer to say, well, 6 from the data pixels, please go back up, 7 recover the DNA signals, get some bands, 8 size, quantitate, get PCR products, and 9 designate the alleles. And in a perfect 10 world, we'd be done. 11 We don't live in a perfect world, and 12 so, in fact, what you end up with is a lot 13 of human data editing; and it's essential 14 for the quality assurance. There are dozens 15 of artifacts that have to be checked and 16 looked for, and if you don't, you'll end up 17 with a non-data base. This is assuming that 18 a database is comprised of the actual 19 lengths of the people you want to put onto 20 the database. 21 So this is essential for quality 22 assurance, and I'm not going to go into all 23 the steps, but people have to do this and in 24 the process, they have to know something 25 about how the data were derived. 596 1 2 How is this high quality assured? 3 Well, currently, what virtually every group 4 does is you have a first scorer, you have a 5 second scorer, and they sit and they look at 6 every piece of data that comes through 7 spending about a minute per locus of each 8 sample; and then when these two people are 9 done, they either have a third person or 10 they get together or they together with a 11 third person -- they have meetings about 12 this stuff -- and then they agree about 13 which 90 percent of the data is good enough 14 to put on, what artifacts have been 15 accounted for, and then some percentage goes 16 back to be written up in the laboratory. 17 And that's how you're assured very high 18 quality DNA database. 19 This is a great concept and it leads 20 to very high quality, but it's not free. 21 There's a spreadsheet you can download from 22 your website, and I'll tell you where to 23 find that later. You can work out the 24 numbers almost any way you want. 25 What I've done here is to say, suppose 597 1 2 you only paid people $25,000, I'm trying to 3 give you the lowest estimate I can, and you 4 worked out what the fully overheaded cost of 5 what managing, training and retaining those 6 people would actually be for some period of 7 time; and then you said we were doing 8 something like CODIS which has 13 loci, and, 9 currently, you have to do 16 experiments to 10 generate thirteen loci, so to do one million 11 samples, you have to do 16 million data 12 inspections. And if you were to do the 15 13 million people who comprised much of the 14 criminal population of America, if you 15 thought about doing that as a project over 16 five years, you'd want to do 3 million 17 samples a year, on average, and that would 18 be 48 million samples. 19 And to do that, you'd have to find 20 about 750 people, train them, retain them; 21 and when you looked at the cost of it each 22 year, it would be running about $50 million, 23 so that's about a quarter of a billion 24 dollar project, assuming underpay your 25 people and can even keep them. So it's a 598 1 2 serious problem. 3 So a solution to maintain the quality 4 assurance is, instead of having people doing 5 this, is to have computers and expert system 6 that understands every step of the process, 7 knows what the artifacts are, knows what 8 it's expecting, what is being observed, can 9 compare the differences along dozens of 10 axes, fire rules that are appropriate to 11 that, and maintain quality scores, do the 12 bulk of the work instead of a person. 13 And the result is a system that we 14 hope would be a lot faster, more accurate, 15 far less inexpensive; and forensics, since 16 it really doesn't fatigue and it can 17 maintain detailed autotrails of everything 18 it does, may be useful in court at some 19 point. 20 So I'll tell you about the True Allele 21 system that we've developed. It's a 22 flexible automated fragment analyzing 23 system. We use it for many things. We just 24 started with a National Cancer Institute 25 grant for gene expression, but most of what 599 1 2 we've been focussing on the last year or two 3 has been for forensic analysis. 4 The idea is that you can take input 5 from any gel or any capillary, and by the 6 end of the summer, we should have most of 7 the capillaries in the Hitachi system built 8 in as well as the 377s that are in there, 9 the data that gets put in as the raw data 10 automatically set up as a study, and the 11 computer goes through and happily does image 12 and signal analysis, assigns alleles, and, 13 most importantly, does a quality assessment. 14 The software runs on all three major 15 platforms. I consider the Macintosh to 16 still be a major platform, even though this 17 was the only presentation that used a 18 Macintosh today. Bad sign. 19 And then when it's all done, because 20 the computer knows what it has, it's fired 21 its rules, it has quality scores, it can 22 focus the user review on just five to ten 23 percent of the suspect data before it goes 24 out and gets entered onto CODIS, which is an 25 output module that we're putting in now, 600 1 2 actually, this week. That's True Allele. 3 And whether the input is from a gel, 4 the data come in, this is a typical ABI 377 5 gel, the system automatically tracks the 6 lanes, extracts the data, and determines the 7 quality of gels and puts everything into 8 size coordinates. We do a lot of 9 mathematical transforms. As we try to undo 10 each step of nature and we go back, we try 11 to transform it back into the right natural 12 setting. 13 Or the data can come back from 14 capillary. And here we acquired the data 15 through signal processing, some nice 16 algorithms where, if you don't want any 17 calibrating matrices all the time, we can 18 dynamically compute the matrix on the fly 19 from just what's in that capillary; and when 20 we're all done, end up with extracted 21 profiles, again, in size coordinates. 22 Once that's done, we then take a look 23 at the allelic ladder. One day, I hope we 24 won't need the allelic ladder, using John 25 Butler's technology, but we still do, and so 601 1 2 all the work is done relative to allelic 3 ladders. Our goal is to figure out what the 4 lengths of the DNA molecules are, which you 5 cannot do from sizes, so, again, we 6 mathematically transform it into ladder 7 coordinate system. 8 We do a lot of quantitation. The 9 system spends about half of its time 10 accurately modeling every peak that it finds 11 to get exact quantitations, not heights or 12 areas, but actual models, and when it's done 13 it calls the alleles. 14 For the five or ten percent of the 15 data where there might be a problem, a user 16 has an interface. This opens up into maybe 17 a dozen other windows. If you have 18 questions about it, I'm not going show that 19 all to you here today. 20 So you see, here's the signal against 21 a ladder for that marker. This is the 22 result of the quantitation. If you were to 23 click on this, a quantitative explanation, a 24 picture, would come up as to how that 25 occurred. And in the end, you get 602 1 2 designations, again, all shown relative to 3 ladders. 4 There's a quality score that can rank 5 the data, and we have about a dozen rules 6 and we're adding about another dozen this 7 month that can detect things like third 8 peaks, low signal, almost anything that 9 would be in QMS document is what we try to 10 write for to detect. 11 We have a website that supports most 12 of the stuff. The spreadsheet is 13 downloadable from it. You can go to 14 Cybgen.com if you want to take a look. We 15 list many things about the technology, 16 including the patents. 17 We innovated this work. Our patents 18 have filing dates going back to 1994, and 19 they cover almost anything you would want to 20 do with scoring STR data, such as quality 21 assessment, removing artifacts using 22 capillary machines, automatic lane tracking. 23 If it involves quality assurance, it's 24 probably patented, but you can take a look. 25 We also have software that you can 603 1 2 download on an evaluation basis. Take a 3 look at it, let us know what you think. How 4 do you do that? On our support site, you 5 can give us feedback that gets logged onto 6 our database so we can read about what you 7 like or you don't with features and things. 8 You can also check news. Interesting 9 news a few months ago was that in the UK, 10 the Forensic Science Service elected after a 11 competitive process, to use True Allele, 12 basically, to avoid hiring another 3 to 400 13 people. This was their goal. 14 And the system that we're is setting 15 up is that you generate STR data, and then 16 True Allele Expert System will automatically 17 score the data, assess the data quality, and 18 then when you're done, you'll have a human 19 reviewer, a much smaller team, looking at 20 five to ten percent of the data and then 21 that quality check goes out onto the UK 22 national database. 23 Now, looking at five to ten percent of 24 the data means that instead of having each 25 piece of data scrutinized by two to three 604 1 2 people, it's looked at by a tenth of a 3 person, and that's the primary basis for the 4 cost savings that you would get along with 5 the expected quality improvement. We expect 6 this to be on-line in the fall in 7 Birmingham, UK. 8 Since I have one minute left, I'll 9 make a quick note about some intelligent 10 case work software we're developing. Once 11 you have a database you want to use it. 12 It's fun spending half a billion dollars 13 hiring people to stare at computer screens, 14 or not, but once you've done that, you want 15 to use that database to reduce crime. 16 So we're working on decision support 17 systems for forensic experts. It's very 18 different than expert system because what 19 you want is an intelligent tool that can 20 present quantitative analyses to the expert. 21 We're automating the graphical display 22 so that forensic scientists don't have to 23 waste their time playing with interfaces. 24 If you want to see any one of 50 reasons or 25 explanations, they'll be automated, and the 605 1 2 goal is to take days of effort and reduce it 3 to an hour or two; and the new system is 4 called JACOB and this is one example of some 5 new methods we've been developing. 6 If you look at the first row, this is 7 SGM plus profile, ten loci on a mixture. We 8 synthesized this in our lab run out on a 9 310, and you're looking at the quantitations 10 of the heights using Gene Scan. For 11 publication purposes, it's pretty standard, 12 and what you see is a mixture. We've all 13 seen mixtures before. 14 Think of this maybe as a sample from a 15 rape or a some other crime where there are 16 two samples mixed before. Here is a 17 reference sample of an individual such as 18 the victim, and that can also be acquired by 19 running a panel; and here's a profile. 20 So the question is, given a reference, 21 how easily or accurately or quickly can you 22 quantitatively figure out the profile of the 23 person who did the crime? The answer is, 24 you can do it in about a tenth of a second 25 if you have the data using some new 606 1 2 subtraction algorithms we have, and it 3 recovers what the weights are, what the 4 profile is; and that profile, of course, 5 matches the profile of the synthesized 6 mixture of what the actual component is. 7 And the point is, in a day when you 8 have 15 million people on a criminal 9 database, and you have methods who will 10 automatically find out who that person is, 11 people might be able to walk out of a 12 hospital knowing that their attacker has 13 actually been identified. In fact, I would 14 hope that at some point, such crimes would 15 go away if people realized they're going to 16 be detected. 17 In summary then, we've been developing 18 technology for automated DNA profiling as 19 well as how to use it for forensic analysis. 20 Almost every part of the STR data pathway 21 has been automated from robotic sample 22 preparation, PCR, many ways of separating 23 sizes, and the new bit that we've added is 24 how to automatically designate alleles with 25 very high quality assurance. Thank you very 607 1 2 much. 3 (Applause.) 4 DR. ERLICH: Are there any questions 5 for Mark? 6 SPEAKER: Just a quick question and 7 this in reference to the comment you made. 8 Why do you believe that people would 9 stop violent sexual offenses? I know you've 10 got a medical background. 11 DR. PERLIN: I'm thinking of a world 12 five or ten years from now where you have a 13 high recidivist crime and you're reaching 14 the point were almost everyone is going to 15 jail, not only will the people be in jail, 16 but somebody will look at the paper and 17 realize, or their buddies will all be in 18 jail; and it's the recidivist factor coupled 19 with the deterrent. 20 Would you shoot somebody in front of a 21 police officer, or would you try to do it 22 more privately. DNA might lead to a 23 situation where it's more like you're being 24 observed more closely. 25 SPEAKER: Does the hardware limit your 608 1 2 system, your software's ability to do this 3 job quickly? 4 DR. PERLIN: The sequencer or the 5 computer? 6 SPEAKER: I'm talking about on the 7 computer side of this. 8 DR. PERLIN: No. 9 SPEAKER: So the program has plenty of 10 processing? 11 DR. PERLIN: We're speeding up some of 12 the quantitation elements considerably in 13 the next year, and that will have the speed 14 of processing. You can take 5,000 to 10,000 15 samples and run them overnight and off the 16 shelf microcomputer. 17 SPEAKER: The system that you 18 anticipate being operational in Birmingham 19 in the fall with five to ten percent human 20 checking, is that random? 21 DR. PERLIN: No, that's what they've 22 seen of what our system does on their data 23 before we've done more tuning. Now, they 24 can tune it to whatever. Their scientists 25 can choose thresholds for quality scores on 609 1 2 each rule. 3 If they choose to run it at 5 percent 4 or if they choose to run it 25 percent, it's 5 based on the customization of their own 6 comfort factor. We don't dictate that. We 7 don't tell them what computer to run, how 8 much work to do. That's completely up to 9 them, and we customize it for them. 10 DR. ERLICH: Thanks, Mark. Our next 11 and last speaker on this afternoon's session 12 is Ronald Sosnowski. Ron is the Director of 13 Molecular Biology and Assay Development at 14 Nanogen. 15 DR. SOSNOWSKI: I'd also like to thank 16 NIJ and the organizers, particularly, Dick 17 Rau, who has supported this work from very 18 early on, and Lisa Forman and her staff for 19 putting on a great conference along with the 20 people from the New York State Justice 21 Department. It's been very stimulating and 22 informative. 23 What I'm going to do is talk to you. 24 I'm going to give you a brief introduction 25 of what we do, what our organization does 610 1 2 and what we're about, and a little brief 3 introduction to the technology; and I'm 4 going to tell you where we are in developing 5 the technology and where we hope to go. 6 Let me just talk to you a bit about 7 kind of where we are oriented. I know it's 8 a business plan sort of the thing, but I 9 think it will be helpful as I mention some 10 of the things we're going towards. 11 We're basically a biochip company. 12 We're an active chip company, and I'll 13 explain what that means. What we're going 14 to first is research people, people who want 15 to develop different assays and 16 technologies. It's going to be a lab-based 17 instrument, hopefully, leading towards 18 diagnostics; and we've been involved in 19 forensics for some time. We think that 20 that's a growing area and that's a very 21 important area to be in. 22 We also have licenses to technology 23 and telecommunications and the internet, 24 real-time biological sensing, and this is 25 relevant, I bring this up to this audience 611 1 2 because we see a future possible product for 3 the forensics community. 4 Our chip is different than one than 5 that Dan Ehrlich was talking about. We are 6 a microarray chip. It is silicone based. 7 The array is in this area, as you can see. 8 The individual sites are about 80 microns in 9 diameter. There are about 200 microns 10 center to center, and each of these has a 11 trace or connector that goes out to the 12 exterior which connects to a power supply 13 and a regulatory unit. 14 This means that each of these 15 individual sites in here, which are a little 16 difficult to see, can be activated 17 energetically with an electric field, and 18 that allows us to manipulate DNA and other 19 charged molecules; and by doing that, we can 20 greatly increase the reactions rates. 21 The way that that can work is in this 22 very simple cartoon. If this row of pads, 23 individual pads is biased positively, DNA 24 being negatively charged will migrate over 25 to this area, concentrates over this area, 612 1 2 and by the simple laws of mass action, when 3 you have the reactants increase in 4 concentration, then you increase the rate of 5 products. In this case, single stranded DNA 6 molecules going double stranded DNA 7 molecules. In addition to attracting them 8 here, we can repel them from areas we don't 9 want to, and that can also be an important 10 factor. 11 By changing the solution, you can then 12 put a different molecule in and attract it 13 to a different set of pads until your array 14 is complete. Let me just show a brief 15 demonstration of some real-time 16 hybridization. Within this array, there's 17 already a single strand DNA attached, and 18 there is complementary strand in the 19 solution which is labeled. What you're 20 seeing is a hybridization event. This is 21 measured in seconds, and this is measured in 22 hours. 23 This was done under conditions of 24 about one mole of sodium chloride, about as 25 favorable as we could find for DNA 613 1 2 hybridization, so it's a fair comparison. 3 The system that we're going to be 4 releasing this year, the second half of this 5 year, is an integrated system. This is 6 probably more than would be released to the 7 forensics community. 8 This system consists of two different 9 instruments. One is a loader that the 10 investigator would be able make his own 11 arrays. In a forensics environment, we 12 would be providing chips with genetic 13 content already on them, so this probably 14 wouldn't be relevant to the forensics 15 community. 16 However, the reader would be, and the 17 reader is able to do electronic manipulation 18 of the DNA, environmental manipulation of 19 reaction area as well as well as light-, 20 fluorescent-sensitive detection of 21 molecules. 22 This is the disposable part of the 23 system. This is a research cartridge. This 24 is about the size of it. I don't know how 25 well you can see. I'm just trying to give 614 1 2 you an idea of what the sizes are. The chip 3 area that I showed you a blow-up of earlier 4 is in this section only. 5 The chip that I showed you before is a 6 100-pat chip. What we're going to be using 7 shortly will be a 400-pat chip, which will, 8 of course, accommodate many more assay 9 capabilities. 10 This is little bit closer view of an 11 instrument that could potentially be in a 12 forensics lab in three to five years, 13 something along those time lines, depending 14 on how these things go with these types of 15 testing. 16 Briefly, let me explain how the assay 17 works. Since we're doing this in a 18 microarray format and not sieving, it's a 19 hybridization-based assay. So what's done 20 is that at different sites in the array, 21 let's talk about capture-down format in this 22 particular instance, we would array pieces 23 of DNA, oligonucleotides, that contain a 24 unique sequence that would be specific for a 25 THO1 locus, for example, and at different 615 1 2 points in the array, the unique sequence 3 would be the same, however, the number of 4 repeat units would vary. So a series of 5 different pads would have a different number 6 of repeat units. 7 Then one would come in with a target, 8 and in this example, it's a homozygote 8 9 repeat unit target, and that would hybridize 10 pretty much equivalently to all these sites. 11 The third part of the process would be 12 then to bring in a second oligonucleotide 13 that has a unique sequence that's also 14 complementary to the other end of the 15 target, and this is also labelled. This 16 can, but does not have to have, a single 17 repeat unit. 18 After this hybridization is done. 19 This is pretty much, again, an equivalent 20 hybridization. All of these are lit up, so 21 there's no discrimination at this point. 22 Stringency is then applied, and there can be 23 chemical, electronic, or thermal stringency 24 applied; and the first molecules to go away 25 are the ones that had an overhang. Let me 616 1 2 just show you that briefly. 3 When there's an interference here when 4 the number of repeat units at a particular 5 site are equal to or greater than the number 6 of repeat units in the target, then there's 7 going to be an overlap between the reporter 8 and the capture. 9 And, those, we found, are the least 10 stable, and that's pretty obvious because of 11 the fewer number Hydrogen bonds that, at 12 least, statistically, at some point are 13 going to be present in the reporter complex. 14 So those denature first. What you're 15 left with at that point are two classes of 16 molecules, either the match or sites that 17 have a gap and are also mismatch, and the 18 energetic difference between these sites and 19 the match site is that while they have the 20 equivalent amount of Hydrogen bonding, this 21 site has base stacking; and that is a 22 sufficient amount of energy to distinguish 23 between the different types of targets that 24 could potentially be hybridizing. 25 This is a multiplex of three different 617 1 2 loci that were done on one chip, so you can 3 see that the assay is quite robust. These 4 are positive heterozygote, this is also a 5 positive heterozygote, and this is actually 6 THO1 9.3, which, because this is a 7 hybridization format, there's an added 8 factor of there being a difference in 9 Hydrogen bonding as well as the base 10 stacking. So it discriminates quite nicely. 11 We developed this assay along with 12 funds from NIJ with the Bode Technology 13 Group, and they were a beta test site for us 14 this past September. 15 We installed an instrument there, 16 talked to them, discussed with them how a 17 system might be run. Jim Shaum was in 18 charge of running the concordance study. He 19 set up a set of rules to run this system, 20 and then they took out of their database a 21 total of 107 samples, which would be 22 equivalent to 214 calls to alleles for each 23 individual at each locus. 24 What they found with TPOX was that the 25 results on our system were 100 percent 618 1 2 concordant with what they found on their 3 standard, which at the time was a Hitachi 4 101 gel sieving system. With CSF1PO they 5 had a single discordant. 6 That discordancy was an allelic 7 drop-out. The individual was a heterozygote 8 that was scored as a homozygote. We went 9 back and looked at the data, and there was 10 actually a machine error. It was a fluidics 11 error, really. It didn't have anything to 12 do with the assay. 13 And, in fact, with new software that 14 we've developed, that error would have been 15 caught, and it would have been a no-call 16 rather than a discordant call. That's where 17 we are. Where we're going is in two related 18 but, perhaps, different directions. 19 One is towards a device that can be 20 taken closer to the scene of a crime. We 21 discussed some of the pros and cons of doing 22 that, and I think that those issues need to 23 be resolved as quickly as possible so that 24 technology can be developed. 25 One way of doing that is going with a 619 1 2 portable system. This is something that was 3 actually developed with funds from DARPA and 4 NIST, ATP related to other applications. 5 However, the functionality and the 6 underlying mechanics of the system are 7 identical to what would be used to a 8 point-of-crime device. This is about the 9 size of a K-Pro computer, if anybody 10 remembers those suitcase-sized boxes, but it 11 is quite portable and it can be battery 12 operated and it includes the functionality 13 of amplification as well as analysis. 14 The key element in having something 15 that is useful closer to the scene of a 16 crime is being able to go from a sample to 17 an answer, and in that, amplification of 18 material is still critical. 19 What we envision doing is using in 20 situ amplification, that is anchoring the 21 amplification method at the site of 22 analysis. So the amplification would occur 23 at a point in the array; and this 24 accomplishes a several things. It makes a 25 very elegant solution to a lot of different 620 1 2 steps, it relieves the mechanical movement 3 of DNA from one platform to another, and it 4 also reduces the amount of training that's 5 required for the user. It makes this a much 6 easier system to use. 7 So this is the area that we're 8 focussing on now. I won't go into a lot of 9 detail. The anchored SDA format is one of 10 the formats that we're using for in situ 11 amplification is strand displacement 12 amplification. 13 It's very similar to PCR in that there 14 are opposing primers. It's a geometric 15 amplification system. One of the 16 differences is that it does not cycle 17 thermally. It's run at a temperature that's 18 high enough to allow the polymerase to 19 displace the opposing strand and still allow 20 geometric amplification. 21 Why SDA, why not anchored PCR? We've 22 gotten rights to do this technology. It's 23 isothermal, it's very rapid, it can be 24 multiplexed, and it's well suited for any 25 integrated amplification; and we've been 621 1 2 using this for a while and have some 3 experience. And we believe we can adapt it 4 to the STRs. 5 The STRs are going to be the special 6 challenge because of the differences in size 7 and the similar tiers of sequence. This is 8 an example of doing STRs on chips in the 9 same array. At the time we did not have 10 Y-chromosome SNPs. We now have Y-chromosome 11 SNPs in the lab working, and the next talk 12 that I give, I promise Lisa that we'll share 13 those. 14 Again, this is on the same chip, done 15 at the same time. We have discriminated a 16 heterozygote for, these are in duplicate, so 17 this is a heterozygote CSF; this is a 18 homozygote for TPOX; and then these are some 19 various SNP biallelic demonstrations. 20 Here's the type of discrimination one 21 can get with two homozygotes, a mutant and a 22 wild-type homozygote, and then a 23 heterozygote for the SNPs; and then, again, 24 on the same chip, this is the type of 25 discrimination that we get for STRs. 622 1 2 I'd like to thank several people, Bode 3 Technology Group and, again, Department of 4 Justice and the NIJ for supporting this work 5 along with NIST, ATP, and DARPA and a group 6 of people at Nanogen. So thank you very 7 much. 8 DR. ERLICH: Are there any questions 9 for Ron? 10 DR. PERLIN: With simple tend to 11 repeats, I can see how you can develop 12 certain probes to come off nicely as you 13 change a parameter of hybridization. 14 When you have more complex STR loci 15 that are in CODIS, things like VWAFG, things 16 that have very complex repeats with multiple 17 patterns inside them, have you envisioned 18 devising hybridization probes that will deal 19 with that complexity? 20 DR. SOSNOWSKI: We've actually already 21 approached that. The question is, what 22 happens when you have -- what's the 23 terminology that Tauts uses? It's a 24 microvariance or something along those 25 lines. The one example I showed of THO1 is 623 1 2 a microvariant. 3 So we would just develop along those 4 lines. It can become more complicated, 5 however, the size of the array is really an 6 advantage in that place. You've got a lot 7 of real estate to work with. You can set up 8 more types of assays. 9 DR. ERLICH: Are there any other 10 questions? Ron, you said you were aiming 11 for 400 pads? 12 DR. SOSNOWSKI: Yes. What becomes 13 limiting in the size of the array is not the 14 number of pads but getting the wires to 15 connect to them, and so we have an active 16 chip that uses transistors embedded in 17 silicon that can address individual pads 18 with a much lower number of traces. 19 That's, actually, working in the lab, 20 and we're trying to develop that into a 21 commercial product. 22 DR. ERLICH: Well, thanks very much. 23 We have a few minutes, perhaps, if anyone 24 has questions any questions for any of the 25 panel members or any of those members have 624 1 2 questions for their colleagues on the panel. 3 DR. SOSNOWSKI: I have a question for 4 Dan. Does your device require any particular 5 requirements for sample prep for the DNA? 6 DR. DAN EHRLICH: No, in fact, we were 7 using samples prepared by AFIP way back in 8 the beginning, so identical prep at this 9 point. 10 DR. ERLICH: Is it the case, of the 11 technologies that were discussed, Ron's is 12 the only one that has the potential for 13 being on-site, or Dan, would you say that 14 eventually yours might as well. 15 DR. DAN EHRLICH: I would say that, 16 certainly, ours would also have the 17 potential to be on-site. It would be an 18 integrated optical device, so it would be 19 about suitcase-sized, conveniently. 20 And then you have to deal with the PCR 21 amplification process, which might be 22 another suitcase-sized device using current 23 technologies, maybe made by somebody else. 24 DR. ERLICH: And so, Ron, you said 25 that your goal was to actually carry out the 625 1 2 PCR itself on the same chip that 3 hybridization, both for a length and 4 sequence polymorphism, would be carried out; 5 is that right? 6 DR. SOSNOWSKI: Yes. We want to do 7 some type of in situ amplification. Again, 8 for electrical property reasons and for 9 other scientific reasons as well, we're 10 investigating strand displacement 11 amplification, although, anchored PCR is 12 certainly possible as well as some other 13 perhaps rolling-circle amplification types 14 of technology. 15 But by getting the amplification at 16 the site, it just solves a lot of problems 17 such as changing the buffers in between 18 analysis and amplification processes. 19 DR. ERLICH: So what kind of fold 20 amplification have you been able to achieve 21 using the anchored SDA? 22 DR. SOSNOWSKI: It depends on the 23 system that you're talking about. 24 Currently, our status is that from human 25 genomic DNA, we are still developing the STR 626 1 2 assays. For SNP assays, we've gotten, for 3 anchored SDA, well over a million fold, 4 certainly detectable levels in less than 5 half an hour with an anchored system from 6 genomic DNA. 7 DR. ERLICH: Are there any other 8 questions for any of the panel members? 9 Well, if not, I'd like to thank all the 10 panel members for their excellent and 11 provocative talks and also thank the 12 audience for their perseverance and 13 patience. 14 CLOSING REMARKS 15 DR. FORMAN: We've had a considerable 16 amount of attrition this afternoon, one of 17 those people being David Boyd. And I am not 18 David Boyd, but I will give a few closing 19 remarks any way. 20 I have some not very good news to 21 report. Part of the reason that we have 22 this attrition is because Commissioner Safir 23 at this moment is announcing some health 24 problems publicly, and we have lost our 25 partners here who are going to stand behind 627 1 2 him now. I'm sure we all join in wishing 3 him the best and hoping for the best. 4 That having been said, I would like to 5 make some closing remarks. The housekeeping 6 remarks I would like to make are to ask you 7 to, please, if you could, take a few moments 8 to turn them in to Alanna or Margaret before 9 you go or fax them to you when you get home. 10 I would also like you to know that 11 this entire conference is being transcribed. 12 There are two pieces to this piece of 13 information. The first is that those of you 14 who spoke may be receiving drafts of the 15 transcripts to make sure that they have been 16 transcribed appropriately. So that you will 17 be asked, perhaps, to do some editing. 18 Once that has been done, we will be 19 putting these transcripts up at our website 20 so that they will be available to all of you 21 and anyone who would be interested. 22 And also, again, although Dick told 23 you about this earlier, I just want to 24 reinforce that from October 12th to 14th of 25 this year at the U.S. Grand Hotel in San 628 1 2 Diego, California, we will be holding our 3 Second National Conference on Science and 4 the Law, and we would urge anyone who has 5 the time or the interest to please attend. 6 And, again, I will be very brief. In 7 the last two days we've heard very many 8 interesting perspectives that can provide 9 solutions to the very poignant and important 10 problem our society faces, as so well 11 articulated by both Mr. and Mrs. Scoville 12 and by Mrs. Smith and supported by her 13 husband. 14 And I know that we all appreciate the 15 effort that it takes for them to share that 16 with us, and I hope that they know that 17 their sharing that with us helps us to do 18 our work better. 19 We have heard the commitment of our 20 partners in this conference, the New York 21 State Division of Criminal Justice Services, 22 the New York State Police, and the New York 23 City Police to improving access to and the 24 speed of DNA services. 25 And their commitment was so forcefully 629 1 2 articulated by Governor Pataki and 3 Commissioner Safir to directly address not 4 only victims' need for closure but the need 5 to stop crimes from happening. 6 We've heard from several speakers, 7 Dave Coffman, Dave Werrett, Becky Sparkes 8 that a single convicted offender can be 9 traced to a number and a variety of crimes. 10 We and our partners, the Northwestern 11 Association of Forensic Sciences, also know, 12 all of us here know that simply working 13 harder, faster, and even smarter through new 14 techniques, more effective models, or bigger 15 problems isn't the whole solution. 16 We've heard very clearly and cogently 17 that there are policy and legislative 18 solutions that can either positively or 19 negatively impact on the effective use of 20 forensic DNA. 21 And we've been urged, and, again, I 22 would repeat that David wouldn't allow us at 23 NIJ to urge anyone to lobby, but we have 24 been informed by the conference several 25 times from other speakers that a forensic 630 1 2 scientist can speak with a single voice, and 3 if they remain aware of and knowledgeable 4 about both local, state, and federal 5 legislation, this important information can 6 be used by the forensic science community to 7 impact in the direction that we would like 8 to have occur in our society. 9 There are also educational and 10 training solutions that can raise the bar of 11 our profession if we commit ourselves to 12 their development, and there are 13 technological solutions that will surely 14 occur; new markers that we heard about, new 15 ways of looking at our markers identified by 16 our speakers that are already well underway. 17 What is clear is that it is the 18 awareness of all of these spheres that will 19 bring us closer to the near nirvana that's 20 Dr. Werrett and Dr. Sparkes spoke about 21 that's experienced in the UK, the effective 22 use of DNA, not just as a tool for the 23 courtroom, but the powerful tool that it can 24 be for investigative purposes. 25 I would remind you that this is the 631 1 2 fifth and final National Conference on the 3 Future of DNA Evidence. We are transferring 4 this agenda to the DNA Grantees meeting 5 which we held for the first time last March, 6 and which will be held again, not this 7 coming June, but probably next June. You 8 should watch our website. 9 At that conference we will be 10 marrying, so to speak, our DNA grantees from 11 the laboratories and our DNA grantees from 12 the research and development program. But 13 it is not a closed meeting. You are all 14 invited to attend. There will be 15 announcements. They will be on our website. 16 It will be between a two- and three-day 17 meeting, and there will be a similar set of 18 presentations. However, it will be even 19 more focussed towards what we can do to 20 marry together the practitioner and research 21 communities. 22 Now, I have one more little bit of 23 business. When we and our partners sat down 24 to talk about giving awards, we talked about 25 giving awards to those people who catalyzed 632 1 2 forensic DNA above and beyond what it could 3 have been without them, who made such a 4 foundational and significant difference to 5 the use of DNA in the criminal justice 6 system, that without their participation and 7 contribution, we all wouldn't be sitting in 8 this room today, and there wouldn't have 9 been a second, third, fourth, let alone 10 fifth national conference. 11 Now, NIJ is a major host of this 12 little event, and one should never pat one's 13 self on the back, however, there is one 14 individual that must recognized in the same 15 light as the individuals that we recognized 16 earlier. 17 And that is a person who, by himself, 18 recognized the value of a small, sleepy, 19 boring federal program and said, "You know 20 what, this could really do some good." 21 And then he recognized that the kind 22 of people that would be working in the 23 public laboratories in that small, sleepy, 24 federal program could probably benefit from 25 a little bit of research, the exciting 633 1 2 biomedical research that was going on 3 probably had some application to forensic 4 DNA as well, and so, by himself, he kept 5 making noise in a small, sleepy, little 6 federal agency. 7 And so we would very much like to 8 honor for his contribution to the 9 establishment of federal funding for 10 forensic DNA, Dr. Richard M. Rau. 11 (Applause.) 12 (Presentation of award.) 13 DR. RAU: Thank you very much. 14 DR. FORMAN: Thank you very much. 15 That concludes our program. 16 (Applause.) 17 (Time noted: 5:30 p.m.) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 634 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T E 3 STATE OF NEW YORK ) 4 : ss. 5 COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 6 7 I, JEAN V. GAFA, a Notary Public 8 within and for the State of New York, do 9 hereby certify that the within is a true and 10 accurate transcript of the proceedings taken 11 on May 9, 2000. 12 I further certify that I am not 13 related to any of the parties to this action 14 by blood or marriage and that I am in no way 15 interested in the outcome of this matter. 16 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto 17 set my hand this 19th day of May, 2000. 18 19 20 _____________________ 21 JEAN V. GAFA 22 23 24 25