Joy
05-21-2003, 12:35 PM
http://www.khou.com/topstories/khou030520_ds_UpCloseDAOfficeDNA.3b298dbf.html
Up Close: New DNA testing problems "Amateurish, slipshod, unprofessional"
05/20/2003
By Anna Werner / 11 News
HOUSTON -- Is there something wrong with the way the Harris County District Attorney's office is retesting DNA from the Houston crime lab? That's what experts are telling the 11 News Defenders, they say they see serious problems with the way the DA is handling the new tests.
Encouraging -- that's how the DA's office has described the results of the DNA retests that have been done. Retests it claims back up the police lab's work.
But our experts say think again. "Amateurish, slipshod, unprofessional," says Criminal defense lawyer Les Ribnik. "Untutored, uneducated."
Ribnik is not happy. "It all comes down to a Mickey Mouse operation," he says. "And I say that without demeaning Mickey Mouse.
He's talking about the retesting of DNA evidence from the Houston crime lab. Retests coordinated by the Harris County District Attorney and done by other labs.
Ribnek says, "The public and the public's officials should be questioning it."
Why? Take Ribnek client Juan Carlos Alvarez. He's on death row for murder. As part of the DA's review an independent lab did DNA retests on the case and turned out a report, which indicated that the original results were confirmed.
But Ribnik says that retest report shows one big problem with the new tests -- instead of testing original evidence from the case the new lab had tested something called extracted DNA.
And he says, "To say it confirms guilt or innocence, it's misleading."
And DNA experts like Elizabeth Johnson agree: "For the DA to rely on that is insincere. I mean that is idiocy."
So what's going on? Before a crime lab can test the DNA from a piece of evidence they have to extract it by adding chemicals, cooking it and purifying it. But getting the colorless fluid is a complicated process that, if done wrong, can make it appear as if an innocent suspect is guilty of a crime.
That's why Johnson says to do a reliable retest you have to start from scratch. "Its not a truly independent test if you're working with someone else's DNA extract," she says. "You have no idea how reliable that tube of liquid is."
Which is why she also says that relying on extract from the troubled HPD lab doesn't make sense. "It's not scientifically sound or right to take extracted DNA product from a lab that has documented horrendous problems to the point they've been shut down," says Johnson, "and treat it as a reliable work product from which to retest."
But the Defenders have found that is exactly what happened in five of 17 retest cases.
Besides Juan Alvarez there's also Perry Williams on death row for murder and Roberto Lopez, who's serving life for murder. Jose Manriquez is in prison for 45 years for sexual assault and Michael Johnson is serving 50 years for robbery.
In each case no original evidence from the cases was retested, but instead questionable DNA extract processed by the Houston Police lab.
The result is that all new tests and analysis's confirmed HPD's lab work.
But Johnson says, "It doesn't matter if 100 Nobel laureates do the analysis, they will only find what is in that tube of liquid. But they can't tell you if the process to extract that DNA and get it out of a blood stain was done right or whether it was contaminated."
But that didn't stop the District Attorney's office from announcing in news stories that said the new tests in these cases "confirmed the initial results by the Houston Police Department crime laboratory."
"Well they're not confirmed," says Johnson. "I have no doubt they want to confirm them, but that's not a valid confirmation."
"Is it fair to accuse me of misleading the public? I don't think so," says Marie Munier with the District Attorney's office, who's coordinating the retest effort. "I'm not a DNA expert."
She says until now no one has questioned testing DNA extract from the crime lab. In short, it's news to her, "Right now I'm not in a position to agree with you. I'm certainly going to educate myself to find out what it means."
But this isn't the only problem we found with the DA's retests. The report shows that the same HPD lab personnel currently under investigation by the police are being allowed to handle and deliver DNA evidence samples to the new labs for retesting.
"This is pretty horrifying," says Bill Thompson. Thompson is a DNA evidence expert and 11 News showed that report to him. He says the situation might present an opportunity for someone to "fix" the evidence. "That is not a recipe for a fair and objective process in my book."
How can the public trust that? "I can see where it raises a question," says Munier. "Would it be nice if other people were doing it? Would that be preferable? Sure."
Johnson isn't alone in her criticisms of the DA's retesting. Bill Thompson and other experts 11 News Defenders spoke to agree that testing the HPD's DNA extract is not the best way to check the lab's work in a case.
Up Close: New DNA testing problems "Amateurish, slipshod, unprofessional"
05/20/2003
By Anna Werner / 11 News
HOUSTON -- Is there something wrong with the way the Harris County District Attorney's office is retesting DNA from the Houston crime lab? That's what experts are telling the 11 News Defenders, they say they see serious problems with the way the DA is handling the new tests.
Encouraging -- that's how the DA's office has described the results of the DNA retests that have been done. Retests it claims back up the police lab's work.
But our experts say think again. "Amateurish, slipshod, unprofessional," says Criminal defense lawyer Les Ribnik. "Untutored, uneducated."
Ribnik is not happy. "It all comes down to a Mickey Mouse operation," he says. "And I say that without demeaning Mickey Mouse.
He's talking about the retesting of DNA evidence from the Houston crime lab. Retests coordinated by the Harris County District Attorney and done by other labs.
Ribnek says, "The public and the public's officials should be questioning it."
Why? Take Ribnek client Juan Carlos Alvarez. He's on death row for murder. As part of the DA's review an independent lab did DNA retests on the case and turned out a report, which indicated that the original results were confirmed.
But Ribnik says that retest report shows one big problem with the new tests -- instead of testing original evidence from the case the new lab had tested something called extracted DNA.
And he says, "To say it confirms guilt or innocence, it's misleading."
And DNA experts like Elizabeth Johnson agree: "For the DA to rely on that is insincere. I mean that is idiocy."
So what's going on? Before a crime lab can test the DNA from a piece of evidence they have to extract it by adding chemicals, cooking it and purifying it. But getting the colorless fluid is a complicated process that, if done wrong, can make it appear as if an innocent suspect is guilty of a crime.
That's why Johnson says to do a reliable retest you have to start from scratch. "Its not a truly independent test if you're working with someone else's DNA extract," she says. "You have no idea how reliable that tube of liquid is."
Which is why she also says that relying on extract from the troubled HPD lab doesn't make sense. "It's not scientifically sound or right to take extracted DNA product from a lab that has documented horrendous problems to the point they've been shut down," says Johnson, "and treat it as a reliable work product from which to retest."
But the Defenders have found that is exactly what happened in five of 17 retest cases.
Besides Juan Alvarez there's also Perry Williams on death row for murder and Roberto Lopez, who's serving life for murder. Jose Manriquez is in prison for 45 years for sexual assault and Michael Johnson is serving 50 years for robbery.
In each case no original evidence from the cases was retested, but instead questionable DNA extract processed by the Houston Police lab.
The result is that all new tests and analysis's confirmed HPD's lab work.
But Johnson says, "It doesn't matter if 100 Nobel laureates do the analysis, they will only find what is in that tube of liquid. But they can't tell you if the process to extract that DNA and get it out of a blood stain was done right or whether it was contaminated."
But that didn't stop the District Attorney's office from announcing in news stories that said the new tests in these cases "confirmed the initial results by the Houston Police Department crime laboratory."
"Well they're not confirmed," says Johnson. "I have no doubt they want to confirm them, but that's not a valid confirmation."
"Is it fair to accuse me of misleading the public? I don't think so," says Marie Munier with the District Attorney's office, who's coordinating the retest effort. "I'm not a DNA expert."
She says until now no one has questioned testing DNA extract from the crime lab. In short, it's news to her, "Right now I'm not in a position to agree with you. I'm certainly going to educate myself to find out what it means."
But this isn't the only problem we found with the DA's retests. The report shows that the same HPD lab personnel currently under investigation by the police are being allowed to handle and deliver DNA evidence samples to the new labs for retesting.
"This is pretty horrifying," says Bill Thompson. Thompson is a DNA evidence expert and 11 News showed that report to him. He says the situation might present an opportunity for someone to "fix" the evidence. "That is not a recipe for a fair and objective process in my book."
How can the public trust that? "I can see where it raises a question," says Munier. "Would it be nice if other people were doing it? Would that be preferable? Sure."
Johnson isn't alone in her criticisms of the DA's retesting. Bill Thompson and other experts 11 News Defenders spoke to agree that testing the HPD's DNA extract is not the best way to check the lab's work in a case.