The “CSI Effect”: Maximizing the
Potential of Forensic DNA
October 10, 2012
Maximizing the Potential of DNA
Technology
Chris Asplen, Esq.
Asplen and Associates, LLC
ChrisAsplen@Gmail.com
How is DNA technology
different than other
forensic disciplines?
Why does it matter?
How is DNA technology different
than other forensic disciplines?

The important distinguishing feature of DNA
technology is not the scientific rigor with which it
was developed


Nor is it the extensive judicial scrutiny to which it was
subjected. (Castro etc)
Nor is it the discriminating / identifying power of
the technology

Fingerprint technology has been applying source
attribution results for years and DNA does not (in
most jurisdictions)
How Did DNA become the
Phenomenon That It Is?
Numerous “Drivers.”





Postconviction Applications
Accountability Dynamic
Legislative Drivers
Technology Drivers
Media Drivers
Jurisprudential History
Admissibility

Prosecutors “let it in”


Postconviction Applications

Defense Attorneys “Let it in – justice demands it!”


Prosecutors “keep it out – The value of finality!”
Statute of limitations extensions

Prosecutors “It was good enough for Postconviction
laws!”


Defense Attorneys “keep it out”
Defense Attorneys “It’s a violation of rights!”
Database challenges
TISSUE (SKIN)
CLOTHING
TISSUE (SKIN)
GLOVE
PLANT DNA
TISSUE (SKIN)
“CONTACT
DNA”
Fingerprints
TISSUE (SKIN)
BIRD DNA
“Bird”
United Kingdom
The Metropolitan Police
Service
“A Strategic shift that had taken
place in the use of forensic
science following the
development of forensic
intelligence databases that
identify suspects rather than
provide evidence for the
courts”
Familial searching
Utilized in many places throughout the world


Including the "Shoe Rapist" who took
his victims' stilettos as trophies and
was caught 20 years later when his
sister was arrested for drink-driving
Not as effective in the US because of
bad policy
Local DNA “Intelligence”
Databases: The Power to
Solve and Prevent More
Crime
Introduction – The Basics



CODIS DNA databases provide an important
national tool for fighting crime
However, some of the restrictions imposed
by the CODIS system restrict the
investigative value of DNA Databases
Local DNA databases can maximize the
investigative value of DNA technology by
placing the databasing technology directly in
the hands of police and encouraging faster
turnaround time
Forensic DNA Databases Make DNA a
Better Investigative Tool
Not Just a Better Piece of Evidence

Make cold cases relevant again




Instant and ever expanding database of
suspects
“Reinvestigate” a case every time new profiles
are added to the database at no extra cost.
Identify serial offenders and connect cases
Identify Offenders across national, state and
local boarders
Forensic DNA Databases
Two examples

CODIS (Combined DNA Indexing System)






Established and administered by the FBI
Subject to Federal FBI Guidelines
Input into a national system
CODIS approved labs
FBI developed database software
Local / Non CODIS affiliated DNA databases

DNA testing done by laboratories with the same
accreditation as CODIS



Many of these labs provide DNA profiles to the
CODIS system
Profiles are compatible with the CODIS system
Commercially produced software
How Did CODIS Begin?



CODIS was initially a pilot project that began in
1990 serving 14 state and local laboratories.
The DNA Identification Act of 1994 (Public Law 103
322) formalized the FBI's authority to establish a
national DNA index for law enforcement purposes.
In October 1998, the FBI's National DNA Index
System (NDIS) became operational.
CODIS is implemented as a distributed database
with three hierarchical levels (or tiers) - local,
state, and national.
US DNA Database Architecture
How Does Data Get Entered into
CODIS?

The tiered approach allows state and local agencies to operate their
databases according to their specific legislative or legal
requirements.



Only a CODIS administrator can enter data into the national database.
All DNA profiles originate at the local level (LDIS), then flow to the
state (SDIS). SDIS allows public laboratories within states to
exchange DNA profiles.
NDIS enables the public laboratories to exchange and compare DNA
profiles against all other state entered profiles
Who Enters Data into CODIS?



National DNA Index System (NDIS) – maintained by
the FBI
State DNA Index System (SDIS) - each state has one
designated SDIS maintained by a CODIS
administrator
Local DNA Index System (LDIS) – each local database
has a Local CODIS administrator database that
receives that is responsible for what profiles go into
the LDIS
Who Cannot Enter Data into
CODIS?

Law Enforcement Agencies themselves


Unless that agency has its own CODIS approved local
Database
Private laboratories

Even though private laboratories maintain the same
accreditation and certifications as public laboratories
do.

FBI regulations require that all DNA profiles analyzed by
a private laboratory must be “technically reviewed” by
the State CODIS approved laboratory
What type of information is compared
in CODIS?
Convicted Offender Samples
Arrestee Samples
(in 25 States)
Unknown Forensic Crime Scene Samples
Unidentified Human Remains
What type of information CANNOT
be compared in CODIS?
Suspect profiles
Volunteers profiles
Arrestee
(in 25 States)
Known Forensic Crime Scene Samples
CODIS Statistics

The National DNA Index (NDIS) contains
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
180 + participating laboratories
over 9,875,100 offender profiles
1,216,400 Arrestee profiles
447,300 forensic profiles
187,700 hits
180,000 Investigations aided
So why a Local DNA Database?
◦
Most Crime is Local !
◦
◦
◦
Property crimes are the most recidivistic crimes
Criminals usually offend repeated in the same area
Burglars break into one house in a neighborhood
then move to the next house
- not the next state
So why a Local DNA Database?
◦
DNA is only an effective investigative tool if
the DNA analysis is performed quickly enough
to be of value
◦
◦
◦
Investigators cannot “stop” investigating while they
wait for results from over worked public labs
No time or money is saved if turn around time for
results beyond several weeks
CODIS restrictions on private laboratories extend the
length of time and money it costs to get a profile
into the database system
So why a Local DNA Database?
◦
CODIS rules and guidelines restrict the kinds
of profiles that can be entered into the
database
◦
For example
◦
◦
◦
Suspects cannot be entered
Known forensic profiles cannot be entered
Law Enforcement agencies have little control over
the database with CODIS
◦
Local databases are driven by the local agency not federal
authorities
Comparison of Local Databases
and CODIS
Local Databases





CODIS
Are specifically designed to solve crime
locally and are governed by criteria set
by the investigating agency

Maximize the investigative value of
forensic DNA technology

Focuses 100% of financial and
personnel resources on local agencies’
crimes and perpetrators.

Can provide rapid turn-around time for
DNA profile and database search
results thereby solving and preventing
crimes quickly.
•

Emphasizes a national crime fighting
network and is governed by rules
established by Federal authorities
Can restrict the investigative potential
of forensic DNA technology
Spreads resources across state and
national systems diluting the local
crime fighting impact.
Usually places DNA evidence in a long
line of backlogged cases limiting the
investigative and crime prevention
value of DNA
Comparison of Local Databases
and CODIS
Local Databases




CODIS
Provide database search results
directly to investigating officers

Empower investigators to determine
their own criteria for DNA testing and
database inclusion

Empower local investigators to set
priorities for when evidence gets
tested

Direct access by investigators allows
them to perform follow-up searches
when new information becomes
available.

Restricts database access to a small
number of state and federal officials
Restricts database use to policies
established by the federal and state
authorities
Subjects local departments to state
laboratory established testing priorities
and whether or not the state
laboratory will test at all.
Investigators have NO direct access
requiring investigators to contact state
officials and wait for a reply as to
whether a search can even be
performed
National Institute of Justice sponsored
Property Crime Experiment





Twice as many suspects identified with DNA
Twice as many cases accepted for prosecution
DNA is 5 x as likely to ID a suspect compared with
fingerprints
Suspects identified by DNA had at least twice as many
prior felony arrests and convictions
Material collected by technicians is no more likely to
result in a suspect being identified than material
collected by patrol officers.
Burglary
Denver Project identified over 40 prolific burglars since
November 1, 2005.
• A prolific burglar commits an average of 243 cases per
year.
• When DNA is recovered, the prosecution rate is 5 X
higher
• Average sentence for burglars linked to DNA is over 12
years in prison (6 months without DNA evidence).
• After police arrested one man - who later admitted to
over 1000 burglaries – the burglary rate in the West
Washington Park neighborhood dropped about 40%.
Conclusion



CODIS provides an important national tool
for fighting crime
However, some of the restrictions imposed
by the CODIS system restrict the
investigative value of DNA Databases
Local DNA databases can maximize the
investigative value of DNA technology by
placing the databasing technology directly in
the hands of police and encouraging fatster
turnaround time
Taking Control:
Less Taxpayer Funding More DNA Testing
Bensalem Township Pennsylvania

Population 90,000




Bensalem Police Department



Suburban / Urban
Borders Philadelphia
21 Square miles
103 sworn officers
68 admin personnel
Crime rate




318 Average Burglaries per year
598 Average thefts from auto
179 Average auto thefts
149 Narcotics investigations
History of the Bensalem Property Crimes Local
DNA Database

First presented with the concept in Fall of ‘09



Were previously unaware of the potential for use of DNA
in property crimes
Unaware of the ability to create a local database
Visited Palm Bay, Florida Police Department

Had implemented a local database 3 years previously.
Funding Options Considered

Federal Grants



Would take too long
No guarantee of success
Drug Forfeiture Funds


Can use DNA in drug cases
More successful drug prosecutions with DNA would lead
to more forfeitures
Why not use the state lab and
state database?

State Laboratory



Does not take property cases
Turn around time is too long
State Database system



Does not accept suspects profiles
Subject to FBI cases acceptance guidelines
Requires technical review of private lab profiles extending
length of time and cost
Administrative Team
Responsibilities






Coordinate Training of all personnel
Determine which samples will be sent to the laboratory
Coordinate policy development with District Attorney’s Office
Evaluate collections to ensure consistency and legality
Act as Liaison with laboratory
Ensure match follow-up
Collection Protocols

Suspect Collections

Evidence Collections

Evidence Triage
Statistics After One Year

Total number of reference and evidence samples collected
 3800
 2200 reference samples
 1600 evidence samples

Total number of reference and evidence profiles in database
 1800
 1000 reference profiles
 800 evidence profiles
Percentage of evidence samples sent to the lab yielding no DNA
result.
 23%

Statistics After One Year


Collected 3587 reference samples
 1750 profiles in the database
Collected 3225 evidence samples
 1815 profiles in the database
 75 cases where DNA evidence has been a direct

and substantial factor in the disposition
6 cold hits
Breakdown of Investigations
Involving Local Database Hits





Narcotics – 17 cases
Property Crimes – 12 cases
Violent Crimes – 5 cases
Other – 3 cases
5 cases involved handguns where DNA was
obtained from the gun and matched the suspect.
Case Example # 1
Constructive Possession with Multiple
Suspects




30 vials of crack discovered in rear of transport van
after a transport of 5 suspects
All suspects denied possession but consented to
buccal swabs
Exterior of glassine baggie swabbed
One of the suspect’s DNA profile matched DNA profile
from baggie
Case Example # 2
Stolen Vehicle / Hit and Run Accident
investigation




Unknown suspect fled the scene of an accident prior
to police arrival.
Abandoned vehicle was determined to be stolen.
Blood droplets located inside the vehicle and swabbed
by scene officers.
DNA profile from blood droplets matched profile from
suspect in the database because of a Previous
disorderly conduct arrest.
Case Example # 3
Armed Robbery Investigation





Unknown suspect robbed a 7 Eleven at gunpoint and
fled on foot.
Responding officers located a suspect matching
actor’s description
Hand gun was found hidden in a trash can a short
distance away and swabbed for DNA
Suspect provided a consensual buccal swab
DNA analysis matched suspect’s DNA to DNA
identified on the gun
Case Example # 4
Burglary / Criminal Trespass
Investigation (Blind Hit)






Officers responded to a residential burglary
Responding officers processed scene and collected
discarded cigarette butt
There were NO investigative leads
DNA profile developed from cigarette butt
DNA matched profile of suspect previously arrested
for a weapons offense
Suspect confessed and implicated two other actors
who also subsequently confessed as well
Case Example # 5
Narcotics Investigation / Possession with
Intent to Deliver






Officers discover hidden compartment in vehicle
during a traffic stop
Driver denied any awareness of a hidden
compartment
Driver of vehicle provides consensual buccal swab
12 Kilograms of cocaine were found in the hidden
compartment.
DNA swabs taken from cocaine packaging
DNA from the packaging matched the driver.
The Future



Taking the program County-wide
County District Attorney driven application
for funding from the County
Redevelopment Authority
Gambling Money
“Rapid” DNA Testing





How long until it’s a reality?
How fast is fast?
Who will be in charge?
Where will we be testing?
What will we be testing?
Thank you
ChrisAsplen@Gmail.com
(215) 264-0958