|
Quasimodo
|
Nov 3 2010, 03:14 PM
Post #1
|
|
- Posts:
- 38,130
- Group:
- Tier1
- Member
- #17
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2008
|
Duke was pleased earlier this year to offer its professors as experts who could be cited in stories about bills to revamp DNA collection and storage (the NC legislature passed such a bill in 2010).
Evidently these people believe NOW in the reliability of DNA as an indicator of presence (just like fingerprints).
But where were they four years ago when DNA proved the innocence of 46 Duke students?
And where was DUKE four years ago, when it did not release sample articles and suggested experts on the subject to the media who were writing about this?
- Quote:
-
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2010/07/dna_backlog.htmlAddressing the DNA Backlog
By Christopher Heaney and Sara Huston Katsanis Tuesday, July 13, 2010 Note to Editors: Christopher Heaney and Sara Huston Katsanis are researchers at Duke's Institute for Genome Sciences & Policy. [/big]
- Quote:
-
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2010/06/tip_dnadatabase.html
News Tip: Expert Can Comment on Expansion of DNA Collection
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Note to Editors: More information about the DNA database expansion and a video are available at http://genome.duke.edu/issues/katies-bill/. Sara Huston Katsanis Associate in research, Duke Institute for Genome Sciences & Policy, Center for Genome Ethics, Law & Policy
Expertise:
Policy around DNA applications in law enforcement and medicine, genetic testing oversight, pharmacogenetics, forensic DNA.
Quote: "Until recently, law enforcement agencies in the United States collected DNA samples only from convicted offenders and entered the DNA profiles into CODIS for comparison to crime-scene evidence. That's changed since 23 states have expanded their DNA databases to include all individuals arrested on suspicion of a felony offense.
"Many more states, including North Carolina, appear set to do the same in spite of the fact that DNA testing laboratories already have a huge backlog of DNA evidence waiting to be tested.
"But processing more and more DNA samples from arrestees who may or may not be convicted over DNA evidence means that the backlog of rape kits that plagues DNA labs across the U.S. will only get worse.
"What we would like to see is that samples from evidence get prioritized above samples coming from offenders because there's not yet evidence that the expansion of the database to include arrestees will lead to more convictions and, at the same time, the rape kits are sitting on the shelf."
|