Random DNA stockpiling by government is not about exoneration

In the more than 200 DNA-based exonerations nationwide, only a handful resulted from DNA databank checks. The reality is that those who are exonerated typically have to fight with law enforcement to have their DNA tested and compared with crime scene DNA samples.

The most egregious example is the case of Kirk Bloodsworth, Maryland’s first DNA-based exoneration. It was years after he was exonerated in the 1984 rape and killing of a 9-year-old girl that law enforcement ran crime scene DNA against the DNA databank to identify the actual perpetrator despite being repeatedly asked to so by Bloodsworth.

Maryland’s most recent exoneration shows that little changed over the decades of DNA database expansion from convicted sex offenders to all those convicted of a felony. It was over the objections of law enforcement that Webster obtained a court order to compare his DNA to crime scene DNA collected from the rape he was convicted of committing. It was only after the court exonerated Mr. Webster that law enforcement searched the DNA databank.

If Maryland is serious about solving violent crimes like rape and murder and preventing wrongful convictions, like those of Bloodsworth and Webster, we would be investing in better crime scene DNA collection and analysis.

We know from sexual assault victim advocates that the rape kit backlog alone is more than 100 unanalyzed rape kits in the custody of the Maryland State Police. This represents 100 rapes that could be solved by testing crime scene DNA and that cannot be solved with the most universal DNA database without testing the crime scene DNA.

Consider the case of Keith Longtin. He was arrested for the rape and murder of his wife. Although DNA was immediately recovered from the crime scene and Mr. Longtin was immediately arrested, he was jailed for three months before the DNA was tested. The DNA test exonerated Mr. Longtin, yet he was kept in jail for another six months. He was not released until two weeks after the real killer was arrested and identified through a DNA match. Meanwhile, the killer had raped eight more women.

Crime scene DNA can and does serve an important role in identifying criminals and exonerating the innocent. However, pending legislation to permit warrantless random expansion of the DNA databank diverts attention and resources away from the needs of effective law enforcement and potential victims of violent crime.

Michele Nethercott of Baltimore is chairwoman of the Maryland Innocence Coalition.