6 Aug 2012
Technological advances have affected all of our lives, and those advances include everything from computers to forensic science. We’ve all heard about the ramifications of DNA testing, most often in the context of “proving” that one or another person convicted of a crime that took place many years ago did not actually commit the offense. This has led in many instances to defendants being freed from prison, usually with the state reluctantly agreeing that they had convicted the wrong person. (See our blog of May 25, 2012.)
An article published this week by KXAN demonstrates that DNA evidence can cut both ways. The report concerns a murder that took place in 1980 in Georgetown that has remained unsolved for over three decades. In the case, a 73-year old woman was found beaten, strangled and sexually assaulted in her bedroom. Recent DNA test results found a match in the federal DNA database, leading to the arrest of an Austin man now charged with rape and capital murder.
Of course, we don’t know what the DNA sample consisted of in the Georgetown case, nor are we privy to other evidence which may link the defendant to the crime. We do, however, wish to provide a few words of caution regarding the results of DNA testing in general, and the tendency of many people to conclude that DNA results provide absolute proof of guilt or innocence:
- DNA can be retrieved not only from bodily fluid such as semen and blood, but also from sweat, skin cells, hair and other items that may be present at a crime scene. The fact that your DNA is found in a particular place is evidence only of that fact, i.e., that your DNA is present. Without more, it does not even definitively place a person at the scene, although it may provide circumstantial evidence of that fact.
- DNA testing shares with fingerprint analysis the requirement that certain elements match. Thus, it is often easier to eliminate a person from consideration by virtue of a DNA test than it is to prove that a particular sample came from a particular individual.
- DNA test results are only as good as the people and equipment performing the tests, and there are no testing laboratories, and therefore no laboratory tests, that are infallible.
The lesson here is that DNA tests don’t determine guilt or innocence – that’s a job for the jury.
Law Office of David D. White, PLLC
1205 Rio Grande Street
Austin, TX 78701
(512) 369-3737