All crime-scene evidence should be DNA tested. - By Radley Balko - Slate Magazine
Certain Knowledge Why all crime-scene evidence should be DNA tested.
By Radley BalkoPosted Tuesday, June 8, 2010, at 9:59 AM ET
The state of Texas was 47 minutes from executing Henry "Hank" Skinner in March when Justice Antonin Scalia gave him a last-minute stay. Last month, the Supreme Court as a whole agreed to hear Skinner's case in the fall. At issue is whether Skinner should be given access to crime-scene evidence and DNA testing that he and his lawyers say will prove his innocence. However the court comes out, Skinner's case raises a fundamental question about how police and district attorneys investigate and prosecute crimes: Why wasn't this evidence tested before Skinner's trial? And why hasn't it been tested since?
The answers lie in the adversarial nature of our criminal justice system. There are times when neither the prosecution nor the defense is particularly interested in discovering the truth. That's where policy makers need to step in. In cases like Skinner's, they should establish a common-sense rule: When there is biological evidence at the crime scene, all of that evidence should be sent for DNA testing. No exceptions.
The details of Hank Skinner's case illustrate both the problem and how such a rule would solve it. Skinner was convicted in 1995 for the 1993 murders of his girlfriend Twila Busby and her two adult sons.
Advertisement
Skinner doesn't dispute that he was in the house when his girlfriend and her sons were murdered. He claims he was unconscious at the time, knocked out by a near-lethal mix of alcohol and codeine. Back in 1995, the evidence against him seemed formidable. He was present at the crime scene. He had smears of blood from two of the three victims on his shirt. Andrea Reed, Skinner's neighbor and ex-girlfriend, says Skinner came to her home shortly after the crime and first implicated himself, then told Reed a number of other implausible and contradictory stories about who committed the murders.
But Skinner has always maintained his innocence. In 1999, Northwestern University's Medill Innocence Project began looking into Skinner's conviction. As professor David Protess and his student journalists began interviewing witnesses and reviewing evidence, the state's case against Skinner started to unravel. Reed recanted her testimony and now says she was pressured by police investigators to implicate Skinner. Toxicology reports showed the amount of codeine and alcohol in Skinner's blood at the time of the murders would have likely have rendered him unconscious or put him in a hazy stupor. His defenders say he couldn't have killed three adults in that condition. The students also found that Busby had been stalked by an allegedly lecherous uncle named Robert Donnell, whom witnesses said had approached her at a party the night of her death. She left frightened, and he appeared to have followed her. Friends say Donnell had raped Busby in the recent past. Days after the murders, a neighbor saw Donnell cleaning and repainting his truck.
There are other problems with Skinner's conviction. His court-appointed attorney, Harold Lee Comer, was a disgraced former prosecutor who left office after pleading guilty to siphoning off asset forfeiture funds in a drug case. The judge, a friend of Comer's, appointed him to represent Skinner, then ordered Comer's pay in an amount roughly equal to what Comer still owed for his own criminal conduct. Worse, Comer had previously prosecuted Skinner on a minor assault and theft charge. At Skinner's sentencing trial, the prosecution argued that those two crimes were aggravating factors that should be considered in Skinner's sentencing. Comer didn't object.
Most of these flaws have been litigated, and the courts have found that none of them is enough to win Skinner a new trial. But the most troubling aspect of Skinner's case is the biological material collected from the crime scene. Law enforcement officials tested the small blood smears on Skinner's shirt, and those matched two of the three victims. But given that Skinner admits he was at the crime scene and says he awoke to find the victims' bodies, it isn't surprising that he'd have some of their blood on his shirt. The blood on the murder weapons has never been DNA tested. Nor has any material from the rape kit taken from Busby. The state also never tested skin cells taken from under Busby's fingernails, or a blood-stained windbreaker left at the scene that witnesses say matched one often worn by Donnell. "They only tested the material they thought would implicate Skinner," Protess told me via phone. "They fixated on their suspect, and once they thought they had enough for a conviction, they stopped."
Actually, it's worse than that. In 2000, on an episode of the Nancy Grace Show, Protess publicly challenged Skinner's prosecutor to test the remaining biological evidence, even offering to pay for the testing himself. "He agreed, and I actually sent him an e-mail complimenting him," Protess says. But when mitochondrial DNA testing of the hair Busby was clutching in her hand at the time of her death didn't match Busby or Skinner, the state halted the testing of any more evidence and has refused to run any tests since. As Skinner's execution neared in March, Texas Gov. Perry again declined to grant Skinner a stay so the evidence could be tested, even after a lab in Arizona offered to conduct the tests for free. Never mind that all of this comes amid continuing controversy over Texas' 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham, a man many believe was innocent, as well as allegations that Texas Gov. Rick Perry subsequently undermined an investigation into the dubious forensic evidence used at Willingham's trial.
For the prosecution, refusing to test the crime scene evidence is about establishing finality and closure, regardless of justice. But Skinner's defense counsel wasn't interested in discovering the truth either. At trial, Skinner could have asked for DNA testing of the remaining evidence. Skinner actually told his attorney Comer, in writing, that he wanted the tests. But Comer declined on his behalf. Comer says he feared the test would have confirmed Skinner's guilt. That's possible, Comer's shortcomings aside. Criminal defense attorneys often represent guilty people, and they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they allowed for testing that may confirm a client's guilt. Of course, Comer also seems to have been incompetent. But Skinner's request for the tests doesn't mean his attorney would have been obligated to ask for them.
Nor does Skinner have a constitutional right of due process to DNA testing following conviction. In a case last year, the Supreme Court rejected exactly this proposition, and so Skinner is asking the court to revisit the question under federal civil rights law. In District Attorney's Office for the 3rd Judicial District v. Osborne, last year's case, Justice Alito argued in a concurring opinion that guilty people could refuse to request DNA testing at trial, then prolong the appeal process (and stave off execution) by requesting DNA testing afterward. To find a right to post-conviction testing in the Constitution's protection of due process, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his concurrence, "would allow prisoners to play games with the criminal justice system."
That's precisely why the testing should be done before trial. Arguing over which evidence gets tested shouldn't be part of either side's strategy. The prosecution and the defense should begin knowing that all of the evidence has been tested or will be. For old cases like Skinner's, if there's significant doubt about the defendant's guilt that testing could resolve, legislators shouldn't wait for the courts—they should make sure themselves that testing is done. A typical DNA sample costs about $1,000 to analyze, with a usual turn-around time of about 30 days. Innocence Project spokesman Eric Ferrero told me that his organization on average pays about $8,500 per case for DNA testing, since most cases have multiple samples of evidence.
No less a death penalty supporter than George W. Bush said in 2000, when he was governor of Texas, "Any time DNA evidence can be used in its context and be relevant as to the guilt or innocence of a person on death row, we need to use it." Bush then granted a stay of execution to accused killer Rickey Nolen McGinn to allow for such testing. It confirmed McGinn's guilt. Did McGinn game the system to buy extra time? Probably. Does it matter? McGinn got an extra month of life. Everyone else in Texas got certainty that the state didn't execute an innocent person—and that the actual killer wasn't still running free.
DNA testing may well confirm Hank Skinner's guilt, too. But the incriminating DNA may also match Robert Donnell (or someone else). In which case Skinner would become the 252nd person to be exonerated by DNA. Either way, we'd know. By refusing to answer the question, Texas officials are acting as if preserving a conviction is more important than knowing for certain who killed Twila Busby and her sons.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
New animal CSI unit unveiled to aid animal victims - WDBO Local News on wdbo.com
New animal CSI unit unveiled to aid animal victims - WDBO Local News on wdbo.com
New animal CSI unit unveiled to aid animal victims
By Emily Cassulo 
It's a Crime Scene Investigation unit, but for animals.
On Wednesday night, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) unveiled what it calls its newest mobile "Animal CSI" response vehicle at the third annual Veterinary Forensic Sciences Conference held here in Orlando.
The purpose of this customized 2010 Subaru Outback is to help collect and process evidence at animal crime scenes. Dr. Melinda Merck, Senior Director of Veterinary Forensics at the ASPCA, said that they had it made not necessarily because there's an increase in animal cruelty, but because more people are reporting it and more law enforcement are getting involved.
She told WDBO that they've had a unit similar to this new Subaru before.
"I have a larger 26-foot-long CSI unit that was donated in 2007 to the ASPCA, but we needed a smaller unit so we could reach some of the crime scenes where we can't always get the bigger unit back there," she said. "We needed something that could carry people, supplies and evidence."
Dr. Merck said the older unit was primarily used to examine animals, but the new response vehicle focuses more on examining evidence from animal crime scenes.
"The one [older] unit wasn't enough," she said.
The modified unit is unique and gives them more flexibility. It has everything needed to respond to animal crime - special lighting, a radio, computer, exam table, roof rack and refrigerator to store evidence.
The new unit will be based out of Gainesville, home to ASPCA's other crime scene unit and veterinary forensics program, but it will primarily assist local agencies across the state.
For information on how to get involved with the ASPCA, visit the non-profit organization's website at www.aspca.org.
It's a Crime Scene Investigation unit, but for animals.
On Wednesday night, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) unveiled what it calls its newest mobile "Animal CSI" response vehicle at the third annual Veterinary Forensic Sciences Conference held here in Orlando.
The purpose of this customized 2010 Subaru Outback is to help collect and process evidence at animal crime scenes. Dr. Melinda Merck, Senior Director of Veterinary Forensics at the ASPCA, said that they had it made not necessarily because there's an increase in animal cruelty, but because more people are reporting it and more law enforcement are getting involved.
She told WDBO that they've had a unit similar to this new Subaru before.
"I have a larger 26-foot-long CSI unit that was donated in 2007 to the ASPCA, but we needed a smaller unit so we could reach some of the crime scenes where we can't always get the bigger unit back there," she said. "We needed something that could carry people, supplies and evidence."
Dr. Merck said the older unit was primarily used to examine animals, but the new response vehicle focuses more on examining evidence from animal crime scenes.
"The one [older] unit wasn't enough," she said.
The modified unit is unique and gives them more flexibility. It has everything needed to respond to animal crime - special lighting, a radio, computer, exam table, roof rack and refrigerator to store evidence.
The new unit will be based out of Gainesville, home to ASPCA's other crime scene unit and veterinary forensics program, but it will primarily assist local agencies across the state.
For information on how to get involved with the ASPCA, visit the non-profit organization's website at www.aspca.org.
Monday, May 17, 2010
What goes on inside the Florence Police Department's Crime Scene Unit and Evidence Division | SCNow
What goes on inside the Florence Police Department's Crime Scene Unit and Evidence Division | SCNow
Below the main level of the Florence City-County Complex and isolated from the everyday hustle of government business is a room that breaks and makes criminal cases, exonerates and imprisons suspects and assures and casts doubt for jurors.
Below the main level of the Florence City-County Complex and isolated from the everyday hustle of government business is a room that breaks and makes criminal cases, exonerates and imprisons suspects and assures and casts doubt for jurors.
The Florence Police Department’s evidence room is in the basement of the complex and is part of the former jail and bookings intake area.
While patrol officers and crime scene investigators frequent the area, few are allowed inside the actual evidence room which is locked, gated and armed with an alarm, said Florence Police Sgt. Angela Becker.
She and Lt. Floyd Harrell are the only people allowed in the actual evidence room, with the exception of the two top officers on the force: Florence Police Chief Anson Shells and Inspector Allen Heidler, said Becker, who is the sergeant over evidence and property.
“Mainly this is for court purposes and for the chain of custody, which is the very important aspect of someone’s trial,” she said. “When an officer logs in evidence, it is strictly under our control, no matter what the evidence is.
“This is best. The less people that have access to the evidence, then the less someone can say someone tampered with the evidence.”
Everything from swords to cases of beer are being held in the evidence room, Becker said. While certain materials are eventually destroyed or sold at a police auction, some evidence has been around more than 30 years.
Materials from homicides are usually kept the longest because of the appeals process for convicted felons and because some pieces are evidence in death penalty cases, she said.
“The oldest is probably from 1979 and 1981. It’s an unsolved homicide,” she said.
While Becker said she hasn’t seen any apparitions in the evidence room, she sometimes gets a funny feeling when she walks through the area where homicide evidence is kept.
“I don’t know, it’s just eerie,” she said.
In 2008, when police kept bringing in articles of clothing and other evidence from the unearthed bodies of 42-year-old Joretha Lynn Kirk and 51-year-old Rachel Samuel, Becker said she felt that same eerie feeling. The two women were killed, then buried behind a Gaillard Street home in September 2008.
All evidence is turned in at the end of an officers’ shift, as they are not allowed to take home evidence or leave it in their cars.
Each officer makes a log in the evidence book and locks the evidence in lockers in the evidence holding room, to which only Becker and Harrell have keys. From there it’s moved into the evidence room, she said.
All drugs and narcotics have to be sent to the State Law Enforcement Division in Columbia for analysis.
“And it has be secured, that’s another part of the chain of custody. They put it in a plastic bag, (the officer) is the only one that seals it, I can’t even seal it and I can’t take it out,” Becker said.
Drugs stay in the evidence room until someone from the Florence Police Crime Scene Unit delivers it to SLED.
At some point, it is sent back to Florence where it is kept until a case comes to court, which can take several years, she said.
The drug area, like the homicide area, has a distinctive smell, Becker said. After a court case, most drug evidence is destroyed.
Guns in evidence are taken to a local steel mill where they are melted and destroyed, Becker said.
Citizens try to liken the job to the CBS television series “CSI: Miami,” but the officers who actually work in the Florence crime scene unit say it’s not quite the same and not even close to being the way it’s portrayed in Hollywood.
“We might handle something as minor as someone breaking into a car or handling an extreme scene such a homicide,” Florence Police Crime Scene Unit Investigator Shannon Hill said. “We handle armed robberies, burglaries — basically whatever the investigator needs. We’re like a tool in his toolbox.”
The four-man squad also uses advanced computer equipment to analyze surveillance video and audio in missing persons and crime cases.
The unit conducts chemical analysis on substances thought to be marijuana, said Florence Police Cpl. Bo Myers, who is also a member of the unit.
Myers and Hill said the unit members work in concert and processes a crime scene in a procedural manner.
During homicide investigations, they coordinate with EMS workers and first responders to establish what happened at a scene, Myers said.
“We like to talk to EMS to just see how the body was positioned to see what different things were around it,” he said. “Initially something may look out of place to us, but (EMS) may have rolled body just to do what they need to.”
Every death scene is treated as a homicide until they discover evidence that leads them to believe otherwise, Myers said.
“This lets us be more thorough,” Hill said. “We don’t want to miss anything. So we treat it as a homicide. We do a lot of that work with the coroner.”
It can take several hours to several days to process a scene.
“It has to do with what your mindset is,” Myers said. “It’s the blinder effect; you’ve got to work with your blinders on. You’ve got to be able to focus.”
There are some cases that affect the crime scene unit members more than others and there are cases that cause them to lose sleep at night, Myers said.
But the members of the unit lean on each other for support outside the crime scene, he said.
“Everybody handles it in their own way. Some people make little jokes, some people get real quiet,” Hill said. “It’s like a fireman, I guess you wonder why he goes into burning building. He does it cause that’s his job.”
“We’ve been chosen for the position we’re in. Not everybody can do it,” Myers said. “Day to day, it’s not dramatic and glamorous at all.”
When cases are presented before a judge and jury, crime scene investigators encounter what is known as the “CSI effect,” Myers said.
They have to explain their jobs to jurors and sometimes convince them that it isn’t what they see on TV, he said.
The real crime scene techs find TV shows that portray their job laughable at times.
“They (actors) take a picture of a fingerprint with their camera and then they automatically get a report,” Myers said. “That’s the funny thing.”
“People think you can take a tube of plaster and insert it into a stab wound , give it a couple of minutes and pull it out and it’s the exact shape of the knife,” said Maj. Carlos Raines, who oversees
Florence police investigations. “That’s not true ... you’re going end up with a glob of whatever substance it is you stuck down there.”
Television crime scene programs are grossly exaggerated pieces of truth, Hill said.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Crime Scene Cross Training - Evidence Response Technicians
The April/May 2010 digital edition of Forensic Magazine just came out. Another great article by Dick Warrington on the need for crime scene investigation cross training within police departments. The manpower that it takes to process a crime scene can be overwhelming if a deparment only has one or two csi in their department. Cross training other patrolmen to become Evidence Response Technicians (ERTs) is becoming a preferred method for solving csi manpower issues. An added benefit, Mr. Warrington mentions is the potential linking of suspects & evidence across crimes.
Read the entire article at this link.
Read the entire article at this link.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
FSI: Fish Scene Investigator - Using DNA evidence to track species instead of perps
Metro Times - News+Views: FSI: Fish Scene Investigator
FSI: Fish Scene Investigator
Using DNA evidence to track species instead of perps
The test that detected Asian carp's environmental DNA, or eDNA, above the electric barrier in the Chicago waterways leading to Lake Michigan, was developed in the past year by New Zealand scientist Lindsay Chadderton and researchers at Notre Dame. They say this is the first time DNA testing has been used on such a scale to find evidence of invasive fish in fresh water, and they think their method will ultimately be used around the globe to detect invasive species and protect endangered ones.
In January 2007, the Nature Conservancy hired Chadderton, an aquatic ecologist, as the first director of aquatic invasive species for its Great Lakes Project, a program to rejuvenate and protect the ecosystem of the lakes. Chadderton had been working with invasive species for New Zealand's Department of Conservation, and soon after he arrived in the Midwest, he and a team from Notre Dame began experimenting with DNA detection. Now this technology has taken center stage in perhaps the most politically charged invasive species controversy ever to hit the Great Lakes region.
Kari Lydersen: How does the DNA test work?
Lindsay Chadderton: We go out, take between 60 and 100 two-liter water samples, put them in coolers on ice to slow natural breakdown, and bring them back to the laboratory. Within 24 hours of collection, we filter each sample through really fine filter paper ... to remove any particles in the water, including any possible cells. Then we extract the DNA off the filter paper, using kits that break the cells open and release the DNA. We then use a centrifuge to take the liquid off, and that gives us a DNA extract. Then we amplify — sort of clone — the species-specific DNA we're looking for so we have enough to detect, and we run these on simple gels that allow us to compare each sample with controls that contain the target DNA.
Lydersen: The Army Corps of Engineers and state officials have repeatedly stated that no Asian carp have been found above the electric barrier. How confident are you of the DNA tests?
Chadderton: We are confident that our results are real, and the more testing we do, [the more] this confidence increases. In the criminal justice system, we regularly use DNA to place people at the scene of a crime. People, like other animals, shed DNA into the environment — skin, hair, bodily fluids. Carp do the same thing — DNA cells associated with mucus or sloughed off from the gills, attached to scales, shed from the gut system, and contained in feces and urine. Once those cells are released into the water they are held in suspension for some time and we are simply collecting them in the water column. We're looking for evidence of a species, instead of individuals like you do with people, but the principles are the same.
[One] thing that gives us confidence is the fact we can go back to certain places and repeatedly detect DNA. The distribution is consistent with the movement of fish. For example, the number of positive samples decreases as we get closer to the barrier. That's consistent with an upstream invasion.
Lydersen: Why are the Asian carp moving past the barrier at all? They don't know there's good habitat farther on, do they?
Chadderton: It's probably just an innate sense. These fish prefer slow-flowing water and the canal is probably not particularly good habitat for them. It's like a box, there are not a lot of places to get out of the current so we'd expect these fish to continue pushing up through the system searching for better food or habitat. With any population there are dispersers that keep moving and other animals that hang around. For one thing, if you're at the front of the pack there might be more food. If you've got hundreds of thousands of individuals behind you all feeding in the same water, wouldn't you want to be up front?
Lydersen: When fish in the canal were poisoned in December, just south of the electric barrier, just one dead Asian carp was found. Why was that, if there are so many Asian carp in the system?
Chadderton: We didn't expect to see many — if any — Asian carp, as when they are killed by rotenone they sink. It was cold, which makes them slower to decompose and bloat and float. There were apparently large numbers of fish on the bottom being fed on by crayfish and other invertebrates not affected by the fish poison. All these conditions would have acted to prevent the fish floating to the surface.
Lydersen: You've spoken of using a "Judas carp" to find Asian carp already past the barrier and possibly in Lake Michigan. What is it?
Chadderton: We think some fish have gotten into Lake Michigan — it's the most plausible explanation for what we have found. So, if we want to stop Asian carp, we need to track them down and prevent them from spawning. One way would be to use Judas fish. These are fish with a transmitter attached to them. You follow the Judas fish around, and once it's hanging out you encircle the area and fish it out or treat it [with rotenone or another poison]. The technique is used to control invasive species around the world. The Aussies have used it very successfully to control and almost eradicate common carp in two lakes in Tasmania. We need to remove the Asian carp between the barrier and the Great Lakes, and we could use the Judas fish to locate areas to treat.
Lydersen: Do you think we could actually find the probably very few Asian carp in Lake Michigan?
Chadderton: When the carp are in the lake, they have an Achilles' heel — they need long distances of running water to successfully spawn. So while it's going to be hard to find them in the lake itself, the fact they will likely need to go inland and upstream to spawn may make the search easier. There's a lot we can learn from the sea lamprey control program, which is the poster child of integrated aquatic pest management. [The government spends about $18 million a year fighting invasive sea lampreys, which latch on to Great Lakes fish and suck their blood. Fishery managers employ various barriers on Great Lakes streams to block and capture lamprey after they move inland to breed. They also poison the larvae and release thousands of sterile male lampreys to mate with the females.]
Lydersen: Could you apply rotenone to all the canals and rivers leading into the lake?
Chadderton: Treating the whole thing would be something you'd want to explore. There are other methods you could use, like electrofishing or seining. But treating the waterway with a fish poison like rotenone is the only surefire way of making sure you got them all.
Lydersen: Do you still have faith in the electric barrier?
Chadderton: It's a numbers game — the more fish that get into the lake, the greater likelihood we will see successful establishment. We know the largest numbers of fish are still below the barrier and we need to keep them there. Over the last two to three years the upper barrier has been taken down for maintenance on at least one occasion, on the assumption Asian carp weren't present. But Chris [Jerde, from Notre Dame] estimated the carp probably made it to right below the barrier two to three years ago, and it seems possible that during the 2008 maintenance operations fish got through.
Lydersen: You are pretty certain Asian carp are in Lake Michigan. Does that mean the worst fears of environmental groups — that the lake will be taken over by Asian carp — will come true?
Chadderton: It's definitely not game over. We've got some amount of time. There's got to be enough fish, they've got to find each other, they've got to find suitable spawning habitat, their eggs have to survive and hatch, the larvae have to survive. At each stage all sorts of things could go wrong, there's still lots of uncertainty.
If we look at invasion history around the U.S. and the world, invasive species often don't do what we expect. They may not end up being more than a nuisance, but they could conversely end up being a disaster. We won't know until it happens, at which stage it's too late. It seems incredibly risky or foolhardy to let these things into the Great Lakes unchecked. We know enough about them to be really concerned about the potential consequences. There is too much at stake. And we never really know what exactly is going to happen until it happens.
Lydersen: Since Lake Michigan has relatively sparse plankton and Asian carp need faster-moving water to spawn, it doesn't sound like it's even an ideal habitat for them.
Chadderton: In their native range, they prefer slow-flowing or standing water, like lakes — except for when spawning. The big issue is whether there is enough food. This is likely to vary across each of the Great Lakes, and some recent work suggests that in the open water of most lakes there isn't enough food. But that research work didn't take into account all possible food sources — like the larvae of [invasive] zebra and quagga mussels. Everybody generally accepts that Asian carp are probably likely to do well in Lake Erie and in embayments in Lake Michigan like Green Bay.
Lydersen: They've already been found in Lake Erie, right?
Chadderton: About five bighead carp have been found in Lake Erie over the last 14 or so years. The assumption is these fish represent individual releases. At least two of them were in really good condition — they were fat and large.
Kari Lydersen is a Chicago-based freelancer, author and journalism instructor. Her latest book Revolt on Goose Island (Melville House) chronicled the 2008 Republic Windows factory occupation. A longer version of this interview originally appeared in Chicago Reader.
FSI: Fish Scene Investigator
Using DNA evidence to track species instead of perps
In January 2007, the Nature Conservancy hired Chadderton, an aquatic ecologist, as the first director of aquatic invasive species for its Great Lakes Project, a program to rejuvenate and protect the ecosystem of the lakes. Chadderton had been working with invasive species for New Zealand's Department of Conservation, and soon after he arrived in the Midwest, he and a team from Notre Dame began experimenting with DNA detection. Now this technology has taken center stage in perhaps the most politically charged invasive species controversy ever to hit the Great Lakes region.
Kari Lydersen: How does the DNA test work?
Lindsay Chadderton: We go out, take between 60 and 100 two-liter water samples, put them in coolers on ice to slow natural breakdown, and bring them back to the laboratory. Within 24 hours of collection, we filter each sample through really fine filter paper ... to remove any particles in the water, including any possible cells. Then we extract the DNA off the filter paper, using kits that break the cells open and release the DNA. We then use a centrifuge to take the liquid off, and that gives us a DNA extract. Then we amplify — sort of clone — the species-specific DNA we're looking for so we have enough to detect, and we run these on simple gels that allow us to compare each sample with controls that contain the target DNA.
Lydersen: The Army Corps of Engineers and state officials have repeatedly stated that no Asian carp have been found above the electric barrier. How confident are you of the DNA tests?
Chadderton: We are confident that our results are real, and the more testing we do, [the more] this confidence increases. In the criminal justice system, we regularly use DNA to place people at the scene of a crime. People, like other animals, shed DNA into the environment — skin, hair, bodily fluids. Carp do the same thing — DNA cells associated with mucus or sloughed off from the gills, attached to scales, shed from the gut system, and contained in feces and urine. Once those cells are released into the water they are held in suspension for some time and we are simply collecting them in the water column. We're looking for evidence of a species, instead of individuals like you do with people, but the principles are the same.
[One] thing that gives us confidence is the fact we can go back to certain places and repeatedly detect DNA. The distribution is consistent with the movement of fish. For example, the number of positive samples decreases as we get closer to the barrier. That's consistent with an upstream invasion.
Lydersen: Why are the Asian carp moving past the barrier at all? They don't know there's good habitat farther on, do they?
Chadderton: It's probably just an innate sense. These fish prefer slow-flowing water and the canal is probably not particularly good habitat for them. It's like a box, there are not a lot of places to get out of the current so we'd expect these fish to continue pushing up through the system searching for better food or habitat. With any population there are dispersers that keep moving and other animals that hang around. For one thing, if you're at the front of the pack there might be more food. If you've got hundreds of thousands of individuals behind you all feeding in the same water, wouldn't you want to be up front?
Lydersen: When fish in the canal were poisoned in December, just south of the electric barrier, just one dead Asian carp was found. Why was that, if there are so many Asian carp in the system?
Chadderton: We didn't expect to see many — if any — Asian carp, as when they are killed by rotenone they sink. It was cold, which makes them slower to decompose and bloat and float. There were apparently large numbers of fish on the bottom being fed on by crayfish and other invertebrates not affected by the fish poison. All these conditions would have acted to prevent the fish floating to the surface.
Lydersen: You've spoken of using a "Judas carp" to find Asian carp already past the barrier and possibly in Lake Michigan. What is it?
Chadderton: We think some fish have gotten into Lake Michigan — it's the most plausible explanation for what we have found. So, if we want to stop Asian carp, we need to track them down and prevent them from spawning. One way would be to use Judas fish. These are fish with a transmitter attached to them. You follow the Judas fish around, and once it's hanging out you encircle the area and fish it out or treat it [with rotenone or another poison]. The technique is used to control invasive species around the world. The Aussies have used it very successfully to control and almost eradicate common carp in two lakes in Tasmania. We need to remove the Asian carp between the barrier and the Great Lakes, and we could use the Judas fish to locate areas to treat.
Lydersen: Do you think we could actually find the probably very few Asian carp in Lake Michigan?
Chadderton: When the carp are in the lake, they have an Achilles' heel — they need long distances of running water to successfully spawn. So while it's going to be hard to find them in the lake itself, the fact they will likely need to go inland and upstream to spawn may make the search easier. There's a lot we can learn from the sea lamprey control program, which is the poster child of integrated aquatic pest management. [The government spends about $18 million a year fighting invasive sea lampreys, which latch on to Great Lakes fish and suck their blood. Fishery managers employ various barriers on Great Lakes streams to block and capture lamprey after they move inland to breed. They also poison the larvae and release thousands of sterile male lampreys to mate with the females.]
Lydersen: Could you apply rotenone to all the canals and rivers leading into the lake?
Chadderton: Treating the whole thing would be something you'd want to explore. There are other methods you could use, like electrofishing or seining. But treating the waterway with a fish poison like rotenone is the only surefire way of making sure you got them all.
Lydersen: Do you still have faith in the electric barrier?
Chadderton: It's a numbers game — the more fish that get into the lake, the greater likelihood we will see successful establishment. We know the largest numbers of fish are still below the barrier and we need to keep them there. Over the last two to three years the upper barrier has been taken down for maintenance on at least one occasion, on the assumption Asian carp weren't present. But Chris [Jerde, from Notre Dame] estimated the carp probably made it to right below the barrier two to three years ago, and it seems possible that during the 2008 maintenance operations fish got through.
Lydersen: You are pretty certain Asian carp are in Lake Michigan. Does that mean the worst fears of environmental groups — that the lake will be taken over by Asian carp — will come true?
Chadderton: It's definitely not game over. We've got some amount of time. There's got to be enough fish, they've got to find each other, they've got to find suitable spawning habitat, their eggs have to survive and hatch, the larvae have to survive. At each stage all sorts of things could go wrong, there's still lots of uncertainty.
If we look at invasion history around the U.S. and the world, invasive species often don't do what we expect. They may not end up being more than a nuisance, but they could conversely end up being a disaster. We won't know until it happens, at which stage it's too late. It seems incredibly risky or foolhardy to let these things into the Great Lakes unchecked. We know enough about them to be really concerned about the potential consequences. There is too much at stake. And we never really know what exactly is going to happen until it happens.
Lydersen: Since Lake Michigan has relatively sparse plankton and Asian carp need faster-moving water to spawn, it doesn't sound like it's even an ideal habitat for them.
Chadderton: In their native range, they prefer slow-flowing or standing water, like lakes — except for when spawning. The big issue is whether there is enough food. This is likely to vary across each of the Great Lakes, and some recent work suggests that in the open water of most lakes there isn't enough food. But that research work didn't take into account all possible food sources — like the larvae of [invasive] zebra and quagga mussels. Everybody generally accepts that Asian carp are probably likely to do well in Lake Erie and in embayments in Lake Michigan like Green Bay.
Lydersen: They've already been found in Lake Erie, right?
Chadderton: About five bighead carp have been found in Lake Erie over the last 14 or so years. The assumption is these fish represent individual releases. At least two of them were in really good condition — they were fat and large.
Kari Lydersen is a Chicago-based freelancer, author and journalism instructor. Her latest book Revolt on Goose Island (Melville House) chronicled the 2008 Republic Windows factory occupation. A longer version of this interview originally appeared in Chicago Reader.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Failed Bombing Attempt in New York City's Times Square
Unbelievably sick people in this world! In keeping with the sentiment of the blog, the nature of our business and need to catch the creep that did this, I am linking to the US Dept. of Justice Guide to Explosion and Bombing Scene Investigation.
As amateurish as it was, it can be easily replicated & copycatted in cities around the US. US Intelligence didn't catch this coming, so preventing it wasn't an option. Catching the perp(s) will be key! Be prepared to investigate before they hit close to home.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
PhillyBurbs.com: Fighting the CSI Effect
PhillyBurbs.com: Fighting the 'CSI' effect
By: LAURIE MASON SCHROEDER AND BEN FINLEY
Fighting the 'CSI' effect
By: LAURIE MASON SCHROEDER AND BEN FINLEY
Bucks County Courier Times
Police and prosecutors say fighting crime is more difficult because jurors believe what they see on TV. One defense attorney says the so-called CSI effect is an "insult" to jurors.
It was a gruesome and bloody crime scene, as stabbings tend to be. To solve this murder, the detectives needed to match the stab wound to the knife.
Fast.
Luckily, they had a tube of plumbing caulk handy. Pumped into the gash, it produced an exact replica of the knife, which the killer had conveniently kept as a souvenir.
Within the hour (not counting commercials) the murderer was in handcuffs, and surely headed for death row. The evidence against him was overwhelming.
And completely impossible.
Every week for nearly 10 years, millions of viewers have tuned in to "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation," TV's most popular police procedural show.
Since the first airing, police and prosecutors have laughed about the show's over-the-top crime-solving methods and fictional high-tech gadgetry.
But with more and more juries demanding fingerprints, DNA and other forensic evidence before they'll find a suspect guilty, those in law enforcement say they have to take the so-called "CSI effect" seriously, and fight against it.
"On one show, they got a fingerprint off the edge of a dime," said Upper Southampton Detective Craig Rudisill. "Oh, come on."
Experts are divided on whether the CSI effect is a real phenomenon, or whether police and prosecutors are using it as an excuse when they lose a case.
Defense attorneys say more frequent not-guilty verdicts are a byproduct of our increasingly skeptical society, the result of an era where fact checking is easy and instant on the Internet.
But prosecutors say "CSI" has a definite presence in the courtroom these days. So much so, that lawyers now routinely ask prospective jurors what TV shows they watch when they pick a jury.
"They definitely come into the courtroom with heightened expectations because of what they see on TV," said Robert James, a deputy Bucks County district attorney. "No matter how thoroughly a crime is investigated, what comes out in court isn't going to be anywhere near what they show on 'CSI.' Most cases don't have any forensic evidence."
And forensic evidence is what juries want. When they found the defendant not guilty in a recent Bensalem vehicular homicide case, jurors polled after the verdict said one reason they acquitted the man was because police didn't test the steering wheel for his DNA.
Their answer frustrated detectives, who believed they had plenty of evidence to secure a conviction.
"I have a CSI speech every time I get on the stand," said Bensalem Detective Glenn Vandegrift. "When I'm explaining what I did at the scene, I go into how it's not like it is on CSI. You can't get fingerprints off of everything.
"Years ago, I didn't have to make that speech," he said. "They took it at face value. Now you have to justify why you didn't find certain evidence. Because on television - they always find it."
Not every criminal leaves behind his DNA, despite what CSI technicians accomplish on the show. Still, jurors and crime victims are demanding that police try to find it.
Rudisill, the Upper Southampton detective, said a victim recently asked him to swab his entire car for DNA after a thief broke in and stole $2 worth of change. That would be too cost-prohibitive, with officers having to sort out the DNA of everyone who'd ever been in that car, Rudisill said.
"Before, people said: 'Wow, you can really do that?' Now it's, 'How come you can't do that?' "
Jurors also believe that DNA testing can be done within days, or even hours. In reality, the average test takes about eight months, according to Major Ken Hill of the Pennsylvania State Police.
Because of budget cuts and an ever-increasing workload, the state police - who do the majority of DNA tests for local police departments - have accrued a backlog of evidence to be tested for DNA.
To fight the "CSI" effect, prosecutors are now careful to show jurors that tests have been done, even when the results are negative. In drug cases, for example, a detective will often take the stand to testify that the small glassine bags dealers use to sell crack were dusted for fingerprints, even though those tests are usually fruitless.
"We never find usable fingerprints on those bags," James said. "Multiple people handle them. But we have to show the jury that we tried."
Earlier this year, Bensalem police arrested four men from Florida who were accused of running a nationwide identity theft ring. Vandegrift said he knew there was a slim chance he'd get prints off the dozens of credit cards found in the group's possession, but he took them anyway, anticipating the jury's expectation.
"More crimes are solved by old-fashioned police work," Vandegrift said. "And they think police work in today's society is all technology. It's not. A lot of it is pounding the pavement and interviews."
Heather Costello teaches a law class at Bucks County Community College. She said "CSI" and similar shows are doing a disservice to the justice system.
"It's giving the public this idea that if there is no DNA, the person can't be guilty," she said. "In reality, most cases are won and lost on circumstantial evidence."
Advertisement Consider a rape case, she said. Most of the cases are he-said, she-said, without DNA evidence and sometimes without visible physical trauma to the victim.
"And the public is like, 'Where is the DNA?' " she said. "A lot of people are buying into the idea and expecting it."
Sara Jane Phillips, a visiting assistant professor at the University of Texas-Arlington's department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, studies juries. She said the "CSI" effect is not a new phenomenon.
"Any attorney knows when seating a jury, they come in the door with preconceived ideas," Phillips said. "It is then your job to figure out what those ideas are and see if there will be a bias that cannot be overcome."
She said defense attorneys do, and should, take advantage of juror skepticism. The concept of finding a suspect guilty beyond a reasonable doubt can translate to having no doubt at all, when jurors believe that scientific tests should be able to prove every prosecutorial theory.
"As a defense attorney, you will want to poke as many holes in the state's case and create as much doubt as possible," Phillips said. "If the defense can suggest that the prosecution was negligent by not getting fingerprints or hair analysis, then you can win your case. It would also make sense for a defense attorney to push more and more cases to trial instead of plea bargaining."
Before becoming a professor, Phillips was an assistant DA in Dallas County, Texas, which has the highest exoneration rate in the nation. She said prosecutors there learned that they wouldn't win unless they showed jurors forensic evidence.
"Juries are now looking to absolutely have DNA before they will convict in a rape case. Trials in those cases appear to be avoided for that reason," Phillips said.
Rebecca Hayes-Smith, a professor at Central Michigan University who has studied the issue, said one effect of the concerns over TV's influence is that lawyers now discuss the differences between TV and real life to help jurors recognize poor quality forensic evidence.
She said the problem is not as widespread as some believe.
"Overall, it seems that the CSI effect is a media-perpetuated phenomenon which has led criminal justice professionals to be concerned with the general population having unrealistic expectations of them in their jobs. While it may have a tiny influence, it does not have more influence than the traditional biases surrounding racism and sexism that are prevalent in our society."
Doylestown defense attorney Craig Penglase, a former prosecutor, said prosecutors use the "CSI" effect as an excuse. He called it an "insult" to jurors.
"The 'CSI' effect is a rationale that claims that jurors will replace their common sense and life experience with the fiction that is squeezed into an hour-long TV show. This is nonsense," Penglase said.
To suggest that there is such a thing as the "CSI" effect is to say that jurors are too stupid to differentiate between reality and fiction, he said. Penglase said jurors are smart enough to know when police haven't investigated a crime properly.
"Jurors will not tolerate a police investigation that is incomplete because of laziness or incompetence," Penglase said. "When the police fail to take the time to collect fingerprint evidence or DNA evidence, or to examine a firearm or other weapon for forensic evidence, they are sending a message to the jury that they either didn't have time to correctly complete the investigation, or didn't care enough to complete the investigation."
Penglase said there's nothing unfair about a defense lawyer pointing out the lack of forensic evidence in a case.
"What's unfair is when police fail at their job, and do not collect necessary evidence," he said.
Princeton attorney and former federal judge Stephen Orlofsky has been on both sides of the jury box, after recently serving as a juror in a New Jersey drug trial. He said he's convinced the CSI effect is real.
"As a trial judge, I would meet with jurors after they completed their deliberations to discuss the process, how it could be improved, and solicit their impressions. What I noticed, especially in criminal cases, was that they often wondered why law enforcement had not obtained fingerprints, hair samples or other forensic evidence. They were clearly influenced by what they saw on 'CSI,' and believed that all criminal prosecutions involved high-tech cutting-edge technology."
Orlofsky said his time as a juror confirmed that impression.
"My fellow jurors wondered why, for example, there was no fingerprint evidence. The reason was obvious. The case was based on the police officer's personal observations of the defendant, and there were no issues involving the identity of the defendant."
James, of the DA's office, called CSI "pure science fiction," and said he'll continue to ask jurors to set aside what they've seen on TV.
"What they do on that show is so far from reality," he said. "It's becoming our job to educate the public about this at trials."
It was a gruesome and bloody crime scene, as stabbings tend to be. To solve this murder, the detectives needed to match the stab wound to the knife.
Fast.
Luckily, they had a tube of plumbing caulk handy. Pumped into the gash, it produced an exact replica of the knife, which the killer had conveniently kept as a souvenir.
Within the hour (not counting commercials) the murderer was in handcuffs, and surely headed for death row. The evidence against him was overwhelming.
And completely impossible.
Every week for nearly 10 years, millions of viewers have tuned in to "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation," TV's most popular police procedural show.
Since the first airing, police and prosecutors have laughed about the show's over-the-top crime-solving methods and fictional high-tech gadgetry.
But with more and more juries demanding fingerprints, DNA and other forensic evidence before they'll find a suspect guilty, those in law enforcement say they have to take the so-called "CSI effect" seriously, and fight against it.
"On one show, they got a fingerprint off the edge of a dime," said Upper Southampton Detective Craig Rudisill. "Oh, come on."
Experts are divided on whether the CSI effect is a real phenomenon, or whether police and prosecutors are using it as an excuse when they lose a case.
Defense attorneys say more frequent not-guilty verdicts are a byproduct of our increasingly skeptical society, the result of an era where fact checking is easy and instant on the Internet.
But prosecutors say "CSI" has a definite presence in the courtroom these days. So much so, that lawyers now routinely ask prospective jurors what TV shows they watch when they pick a jury.
"They definitely come into the courtroom with heightened expectations because of what they see on TV," said Robert James, a deputy Bucks County district attorney. "No matter how thoroughly a crime is investigated, what comes out in court isn't going to be anywhere near what they show on 'CSI.' Most cases don't have any forensic evidence."
And forensic evidence is what juries want. When they found the defendant not guilty in a recent Bensalem vehicular homicide case, jurors polled after the verdict said one reason they acquitted the man was because police didn't test the steering wheel for his DNA.
Their answer frustrated detectives, who believed they had plenty of evidence to secure a conviction.
"I have a CSI speech every time I get on the stand," said Bensalem Detective Glenn Vandegrift. "When I'm explaining what I did at the scene, I go into how it's not like it is on CSI. You can't get fingerprints off of everything.
"Years ago, I didn't have to make that speech," he said. "They took it at face value. Now you have to justify why you didn't find certain evidence. Because on television - they always find it."
Not every criminal leaves behind his DNA, despite what CSI technicians accomplish on the show. Still, jurors and crime victims are demanding that police try to find it.
Rudisill, the Upper Southampton detective, said a victim recently asked him to swab his entire car for DNA after a thief broke in and stole $2 worth of change. That would be too cost-prohibitive, with officers having to sort out the DNA of everyone who'd ever been in that car, Rudisill said.
"Before, people said: 'Wow, you can really do that?' Now it's, 'How come you can't do that?' "
Jurors also believe that DNA testing can be done within days, or even hours. In reality, the average test takes about eight months, according to Major Ken Hill of the Pennsylvania State Police.
Because of budget cuts and an ever-increasing workload, the state police - who do the majority of DNA tests for local police departments - have accrued a backlog of evidence to be tested for DNA.
To fight the "CSI" effect, prosecutors are now careful to show jurors that tests have been done, even when the results are negative. In drug cases, for example, a detective will often take the stand to testify that the small glassine bags dealers use to sell crack were dusted for fingerprints, even though those tests are usually fruitless.
"We never find usable fingerprints on those bags," James said. "Multiple people handle them. But we have to show the jury that we tried."
Earlier this year, Bensalem police arrested four men from Florida who were accused of running a nationwide identity theft ring. Vandegrift said he knew there was a slim chance he'd get prints off the dozens of credit cards found in the group's possession, but he took them anyway, anticipating the jury's expectation.
"More crimes are solved by old-fashioned police work," Vandegrift said. "And they think police work in today's society is all technology. It's not. A lot of it is pounding the pavement and interviews."
Heather Costello teaches a law class at Bucks County Community College. She said "CSI" and similar shows are doing a disservice to the justice system.
"It's giving the public this idea that if there is no DNA, the person can't be guilty," she said. "In reality, most cases are won and lost on circumstantial evidence."
"And the public is like, 'Where is the DNA?' " she said. "A lot of people are buying into the idea and expecting it."
Sara Jane Phillips, a visiting assistant professor at the University of Texas-Arlington's department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, studies juries. She said the "CSI" effect is not a new phenomenon.
"Any attorney knows when seating a jury, they come in the door with preconceived ideas," Phillips said. "It is then your job to figure out what those ideas are and see if there will be a bias that cannot be overcome."
She said defense attorneys do, and should, take advantage of juror skepticism. The concept of finding a suspect guilty beyond a reasonable doubt can translate to having no doubt at all, when jurors believe that scientific tests should be able to prove every prosecutorial theory.
"As a defense attorney, you will want to poke as many holes in the state's case and create as much doubt as possible," Phillips said. "If the defense can suggest that the prosecution was negligent by not getting fingerprints or hair analysis, then you can win your case. It would also make sense for a defense attorney to push more and more cases to trial instead of plea bargaining."
Before becoming a professor, Phillips was an assistant DA in Dallas County, Texas, which has the highest exoneration rate in the nation. She said prosecutors there learned that they wouldn't win unless they showed jurors forensic evidence.
"Juries are now looking to absolutely have DNA before they will convict in a rape case. Trials in those cases appear to be avoided for that reason," Phillips said.
Rebecca Hayes-Smith, a professor at Central Michigan University who has studied the issue, said one effect of the concerns over TV's influence is that lawyers now discuss the differences between TV and real life to help jurors recognize poor quality forensic evidence.
She said the problem is not as widespread as some believe.
"Overall, it seems that the CSI effect is a media-perpetuated phenomenon which has led criminal justice professionals to be concerned with the general population having unrealistic expectations of them in their jobs. While it may have a tiny influence, it does not have more influence than the traditional biases surrounding racism and sexism that are prevalent in our society."
Doylestown defense attorney Craig Penglase, a former prosecutor, said prosecutors use the "CSI" effect as an excuse. He called it an "insult" to jurors.
"The 'CSI' effect is a rationale that claims that jurors will replace their common sense and life experience with the fiction that is squeezed into an hour-long TV show. This is nonsense," Penglase said.
To suggest that there is such a thing as the "CSI" effect is to say that jurors are too stupid to differentiate between reality and fiction, he said. Penglase said jurors are smart enough to know when police haven't investigated a crime properly.
"Jurors will not tolerate a police investigation that is incomplete because of laziness or incompetence," Penglase said. "When the police fail to take the time to collect fingerprint evidence or DNA evidence, or to examine a firearm or other weapon for forensic evidence, they are sending a message to the jury that they either didn't have time to correctly complete the investigation, or didn't care enough to complete the investigation."
Penglase said there's nothing unfair about a defense lawyer pointing out the lack of forensic evidence in a case.
"What's unfair is when police fail at their job, and do not collect necessary evidence," he said.
Princeton attorney and former federal judge Stephen Orlofsky has been on both sides of the jury box, after recently serving as a juror in a New Jersey drug trial. He said he's convinced the CSI effect is real.
"As a trial judge, I would meet with jurors after they completed their deliberations to discuss the process, how it could be improved, and solicit their impressions. What I noticed, especially in criminal cases, was that they often wondered why law enforcement had not obtained fingerprints, hair samples or other forensic evidence. They were clearly influenced by what they saw on 'CSI,' and believed that all criminal prosecutions involved high-tech cutting-edge technology."
Orlofsky said his time as a juror confirmed that impression.
"My fellow jurors wondered why, for example, there was no fingerprint evidence. The reason was obvious. The case was based on the police officer's personal observations of the defendant, and there were no issues involving the identity of the defendant."
James, of the DA's office, called CSI "pure science fiction," and said he'll continue to ask jurors to set aside what they've seen on TV.
"What they do on that show is so far from reality," he said. "It's becoming our job to educate the public about this at trials."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
