Responding to Allegations of DNA Testing & Lab Fraud Schemes

Responding to Allegations of DNA Testing & Lab Fraud Schemes

Where Are the Vulnerabilities?

While DNA analysis methods have improved greatly over the past decades, some vulnerabilities remain. Contamination, whether accidental or intentional, can undermine results. Certain testing methods, like mixed sample analysis or low-template DNA testing, face higher error rates. And there’s always the human factor – lapses in protocol, bias, or even direct tampering by a rogue lab tech.

High-profile cases like Annie Dookhan or Joyce Gilchrist highlight how lab fraud, whether based on laziness, bias or a desire for fame, can impact countless cases. Poor training and lack of accreditation at some labs also raise red flags. And pressure to get results can lead to rushing protocols or fudging data. Any gaps provide openings for allegations against both the labs and related prosecutions.

Gathering Information

When such allegations arise, the first step remains gathering complete information. What specifically is being alleged and on what grounds? Blanket claims of “DNA fraud” lack substance without details on the actual lapses or errors.

Review the DNA testing methods used and get disclosures from prosecutors on all procedures, safeguards, accreditations and more related to the evidence. Thoroughly investigate the testing lab, key personnel, error rates and any past issues uncovered in audits or investigations. Understanding the precise nature of the DNA testing allows properly assessing any associated claims of problems – was evidence contaminated during collection or testing? Do protocol violations undermine reliability?

Evaluating Credibility

Not all allegations hold up under scrutiny. Some stem from a lack of understanding of DNA testing by defense attorneys, as occurred in some early cases in the 1990s. Claims also frequently arise when DNA evidence contradicts clients’ statements or interests in a case. When assessing credibility, consider:

• Motive – Does the allegation stem from surprise at unexpected results or a client changing their story after evidence emerges? Such last-ditch claims often lack merit.
• Timing – Were problems identified immediately with proper disclosure? Or do allegations suspiciously arise only when the evidence proves unfavorable?
• Expert input – Consult an independent DNA expert to evaluate if lab procedures violated standards in a manner that compromises results or conclusions.

Most cases hinge on subjective interpretation of results rather than outright fraud. But sometimes genuine errors or omissions occur. Distinguishing legitimate issues from baseless complaints allows responding appropriately.

Responding Strategically

In cases of unintentional issues with DNA evidence, bringing procedural problems to light may support arguments to limit conclusions drawn from or admission of the evidence. Identifying sloppy procedures or lab errors can raise reasonable doubts related to the testing and undermine associated prosecutions.

When substantial problems emerge, getting the lab or related cases blacklisted can protect additional defendants. But note most common deficiencies, like improper calculations of random match probabilities, rarely totally invalidate DNA evidence. The best approach usually involves nuance rather than seeking outright exclusion.

In cases of outright fraud, raising credibility issues with the lab analyst or testing process often proves most prudent. Seeking to exclude DNA evidence wholesale can seem like obstruction, while discrediting key personnel and testimony can achieve similar ends.

Carefully assess each case’s specifics when charting strategy. Does the DNA evidence form a peripheral or central role in the charges and how much does the case rely on broader lab conclusions versus just the raw DNA data? The right approach depends greatly on context.

Avenues for Recourse

When responding to DNA testing problems, understand the avenues for recourse available in the jurisdiction, including:

• Appeals – Many problems only come to light post-conviction, making appeals essential for remedies in cases with legit testing issues.
• Civil suits – Parties harmed by lab fraud may have grounds for negligence suits against labs or related entities. Where direct harm occurred, pursue litigation for damages.
• Lab accreditation actions – Discovery of significant errors or omissions often trigger audits and can lead to suspensions for labs. Getting questionable DNA labs sanctioned helps protect future defendants.
• Criminal fraud charges – In cases of clear fabrication and falsification, those responsible sometimes face criminal charges though standards for proving intent pose barriers.

Reassessing Affected Cases

In many lab scandal cases, all related prosecutions get reassessed and sometimes overturned. Be prepared for other cases tied to the lab or analyst to get re-opened and the evidence reevaluated once problems come to light. Issues in one case often reverberate through other prosecutions.

Work promptly to identify all cases potentially affected by DNA testing problems. Get disclosures on any other trials or convictions potentially linked to errors and questionable DNA evidence. Cross reference such cases with your own records and court archives to gauge possible issues.

Some jurisdictions have set up formal processes such as conviction integrity units to review all cases associated with discredited analysts or labs. Provide input to such efforts where possible and be prepared to petition for reconsideration of affected convictions.

Avoiding Future Issues

DNA testing remains highly useful in the criminal justice system when properly collected, analyzed, and presented. But the complex science also carries vulnerabilities to errors, misinterpretation and fraud. Carefully scrutinizing DNA evidence provides one key protection against associated pitfalls.

Insist prosecutors provide all the discovery materials related to DNA testing methods, procedures and personnel for review well in advance of trial. Thoroughly investigate labs used and retain DNA specialists early on when questions arise. Rigorous examination protects clients from unfounded conclusions or excessive certainty claims.

Ongoing scrutiny also deters future fraud or misconduct. Labs aware their work will undergo meticulous review have added incentive to foster rigorous standards and avoid exposing themselves to backlash. Robust oversight promotes accountability and quality that benefits all parties.

While DNA analysis will likely continue advancing, the need for vigilance around its use in criminal cases persists. Understanding both the science and its vulnerabilities allows lawyers to effectively respond to allegations around evidence problems. Scrupulous standards for DNA evidence ultimately supports justice on all sides.