When Prosecutors Clash with Science
I’ve talked about it here and seen it in action in my own practice. The “CSI Effect” is entrenching itself into mainstream public perceptions of the criminal process. With DNA exonerations becoming as newsworthy as tomorrow’s weather, and the utter saturation of crimeshow television, public expectations have set the technology bar high: if you don’t have DNA evidence, something must be wrong.
Witness the Duke University Lacrosse case. When DNA tests performed against the alleged rape victim failed to match a single one of the 49 players tested, it wasn’t only lawyers who questioned the veracity of the charges. There was loud public outcry from many for an end to the prosecution. But Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong remained undaunted, claiming “We prosecute our cases the old-fashioned way”. Meaning what, exactly? In this case, I think he means “without evidence”.
Whatever in particular is motivating this dogged prosecutor, the case raises troubling questions about the clash between prosecutors who need to solve crimes, and the science they employ. In 1930, Dr. Edmond Locard proposed what he termed “Transference Theory”. Simply stated, the theory holds that for any two points of contact there is always a cross-transference of material from one to the other. Always. This principle of Transference is a core principle of modern forensic science and is responsible for the government’s heavy reliance on Hair, Fiber, and DNA evidence analyzed in virtually all criminalistics labs across the country. Any time a criminal comes into contact with some object, place, or person, he leaves behind trace evidence. Always.
But in this case the chief prosecutor is arguing that some of the 49 men on the team came into intimate sexual contact with one woman, who was brought promptly before sexual assault medical experts for examination, yet nothing, not a single hair or DNA sample, was found linking any of the players with the alleged victim. No transference of any kind. Nada. Zip. Butkus. All those sweaty, hormone busting bodies, and not a single bit of transference. Never mind the science, the local black community is putting pressure on the DA in an election year and, well, Edmond Locard died a long time ago …
Read a news account here and check out the FBI’s take on Transference Theory.
RP
April 27th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
[…] Undaunted, prosecutors are now arguing that the male DNA sample found on Sister Pahl’s underwear was small, and could have come from one of the investigators or someone else on the scene. Never mind Edmond Locard’s Transference Theory (when two objects meet, there is always a transference from one object to the other), or the small detail that if they could find small samples of an investigator’s DNA on the nun 26 years later, why are they not able to find ANY belonging to the man they claim brutally stabbed her repeatedly? […]