DNA shockers

"DNA ought to humble us. But it doesn't humble some people."

--Attorney Jed Stone

The Chicago Tribune ran a story by Steve Mills recently about some pending murder cases in Lake County, Illinois that ought to put the voters of that county on notice: your local department of justice is run by a moron.

In four rape-murder cases -- involving female victims who were eight, nine, eleven, and sixty-eight -- the DNA from the semen did not match the man charged with the crime.

The prosecutor is pursuing these cases anyway, waving away the DNA evidence and the science upon which it is founded as a "red herring." 

As one observer notes in this stunner of an article, it's very rare for a prosector to continue with a case when DNA excludes a suspect.

Unfortunately, I know it's not really that rare.

It's happened here in suburban Detroit. 

And in Toledo. I watched it happen on television in 2006 when Father Gerald Robinson was convicted of murder despite the fact that DNA from blood scraped from beneath the victim's fingernails did not match him.  Meanwhile, as the Toledo Blade is reporting, the Supreme Court of Ohio, Father Robinson''s court of last resort,  just turned down his appeal.

I hope the voters of Lake County turn down this prosecutor's next appeal for support.

For more reaction to the Shame of Lake County see the blog for Reason magazine.

Comments

[BobH]

I used to be a supporter of the death penalty, but since moving to the Chicago area I have changed my views. The entire political/governmental structure here is so corrupt that I don't believe in the courts anymore. The corruption is so pervasive -- the judges, cops, prosecutors (and probably the public defenders) -- that nothing they do can be trusted, and no one should be put to death based on their actions.

[Fiz]

Having just read a copy of Vanished, about Madeleine MacCann's disappearance, the only "DNA" the police ever found was "possibly related to Madeleine's" and it was found by the British police, not the Portuguese, and last and most important of all, it was "low copy DNA" which is increasingly coming under scrutiny in Ireland, the UK, and the US, I believe, as an unsafe method of scientific proof...

[Inspector Winship]

DNA has become a tricky bit of evidence of late. The old steadfast fingerprint has been replaced and in some cases, DNA has overturned convictions based on prints. I recall a case in Michigan (I think, it was a 48 Hours Mystery thing) where a co-ed was found strangled in a cemetery in the late sixties. Fingerprints were on her body along with a blood smear and some sweat on her pantyhose. The fingerprints didn't match anyone but the blood and sweat were tested recently and the contained two different profiles. One of a man who's only connection to the victim was his attending the same college and the other to a man who was three years old and living miles away at the time. A jury convicted the first man, completely ignoring the presence of the second DNA profile and the fingerprints.

[Laura James]

Inspector: The case you're talking about was the subject of "Red Parts" by Maggie Nelson, which was very well done. It was a very bizarre case with bizarre facts, and I don't know if we'll ever understand the DNA evidence there.

But I take your point that DNA evidence is highly fact-specific -- where was the DNA found? What other evidence is there?

But.... these other cases in Illinois - there are no bizarre facts there that would suspend the principles of science and physics; those are straightforward DNA cases.

[Cari]

I just finished the article, and I cannot believe the arrogance of that prosecutor. This seems to happen time and time again. The police and/or prosecutors get a suspect in their heads, and then they use the evidence to prove that suspect guilty, instead of using ALL of the evidence to determine guilt or innocence. Have they asked the witness whether or not she had consensual sex with someone else?

This reminds me of John Grisham's book "The Innocent Man" -- I believe you've written here about how those police and prosecutors actually sued him rather than admitting they were just flat out wrong about who they convicted of the crime.

As for eye-witness testimony, it has been proven that it is highly suspect, especially if it is cross-racial. I'd be interested to see what type of line-up or photos were shown to the 68 year old woman for her to identify a possible suspect.

I also saw the "Red Parts" case on tv. I remember thinking that in spite of the bizarre evidence, the man was guilty. He had the same car that had been seen in the area, and there was other evidence (sorry can't remember what it was). I believe there was an obvious contamination of the blood evidence because of the 3 year old's DNA profile, but I don't think it negates all of the other evidence.

It's prosecutors like this guy, though, who give attorneys a bad name. (Sorry, Laura. I know you're an attorney).

[KittyMomma]

This prosecutor should be removed from his position, he shows clear mental issues based on his arrogant and "I am God" complex. This is a human life and innocent to boot.

Just as with OJ's "if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit"

The same here; "If the DNA's no match, the charges must be scrapped"

I pray someone like that group of students [name slips my mind] that investigate innocent cases steps in or the very least the networks or Nancy Grace or someone, anyone--- throws fire under this idiot prosecutor and have him publically impeached--but not by members of his peers because apparently all of Chicago is corrupt!

[A Voice of Sanity]

"Convicting the guilty is easy. Convicting the innocent takes real skill ... and real money!" -- the mantra of the US prosecutor.

[Sandra Hender]

HAS ANYONE EVER HEARD OF CHIMERISM??? THIS IS WHEN A PERSON MAY HAVE TWO DISTINCT DNA PROFILES IN THEIR BLOOD! THERE WAS A CASE ON THE DISCOVERY FOR HEALTH CHANNEL WHERE A WOMAN HAD HER THREE CHILDREN REMOVED FROM HER HOME WHEN THEY APPLIED FOR WELFARE. THEY WERE TOLD SHE COULD NOT BE THEIR MOTHER AND SHE WAS. SHE BECAME PREGNANT AGAIN...AND THE COURT APPOINTED SOMEONE TO WITNESS THE DELIVERY. THE BABY'S FATHER WAS NOT IN QUESTION BUT THE MOTHER WAS TOLD AFTER GIVING BIRTH TO HER FOURTH CHILD THAT SHE WAS NOT THAT CHILDS MOTHER! FINALLY, DUE TO ANOTHER CASE LIKE HERS IN THE UK, SHE WAS TESTED AND TESTED AGAIN...UNTIL THEY FOUND THE OTHER DNA SEQUENCE IN HER. PART OF HER BODY HELD ONE TYPE OF DNA AND OTHER PARTS HELD THE SECOND DNA. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY RARE CONDITION KNOWN AS CHIMERISM. IT HAPPENS WHEN POSSIBLY THE BABY IN UTERO HAS A TWIN AND SOMEHOW ABSORBS IT LONG BEFORE BIRTH. LOOK UP "I AM MY OWN TWIN" ON THE DISCOVERY FOR HEALTH CHANNEL. IN THE CASES STATTED ABOVE, JUST BECAUSE THE DNA DID NOT MATCH DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE PERSON WASN'T GUILTY....IF THEY HAPPEN TO BE CHIMERIC.

[An Avid Reader]

That is very interesting, Ms Hender; but why did it have to be in all caps? It is really hard to read......