Traces of Crime: How New York’s DNA Techniques Became Tainted (original) (raw)

New York|Traces of Crime: How New York’s DNA Techniques Became Tainted

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/04/nyregion/dna-analysis-evidence-new-york-disputed-techniques.html

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

Evidence is examined at the DNA laboratory in the office of New York City’s chief medical examiner. Two DNA analysis methods — high-sensitivity testing and the Forensic Statistical Tool, or FST — have been discarded amid questions about the accuracy of their results.Credit...Mary Altaffer/Associated Press

The city’s medical examiner has been a pioneer in analyzing complex DNA samples. But two methods were recently discontinued, raising questions about thousands of cases.

Evidence is examined at the DNA laboratory in the office of New York City’s chief medical examiner. Two DNA analysis methods — high-sensitivity testing and the Forensic Statistical Tool, or FST — have been discarded amid questions about the accuracy of their results.Credit...Mary Altaffer/Associated Press

Over the past decade, the DNA laboratory in the office of New York City’s chief medical examiner emerged as a pioneer in analyzing the most complicated evidence from crime scenes. It developed two techniques, which went beyond standard practice at the F.B.I. and other public labs, for making identifications from DNA samples that were tiny or that contained a mix of more than one person’s genetic material.

As its reputation spread, the lab processed DNA evidence supplied not only by the New York police, but also by about 50 jurisdictions as far away as Bozeman, Mont., and Floresville, Tex., which paid the lab $1,100 per sample.

Now these DNA analysis methods are under the microscope, with scientists questioning their validity. In court testimony, a former lab official said she was fired for criticizing one method, and a former member of the New York State Commission on Forensic Science said he had been wrong when he approved their use. The first expert witness allowed by a judge to examine the software source code behind one technique recently concluded that its accuracy “should be seriously questioned.”

Earlier this year, the lab shelved the two methods and replaced them with newer, more broadly used technology.

A coalition of defense lawyers is asking the New York State inspector general’s office — the designated watchdog for the state’s crime labs — to launch an inquiry into the use of the disputed analysis methods in thousands of criminal cases. While the inspector general has no jurisdiction over the court system, any finding of flaws with the DNA analysis could prompt an avalanche of litigation. Previous convictions could be revisited if the flawed evidence can be shown to have made a difference in the outcome.


Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.


Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT