Dna Exonerations

Dna Exonerations

Friedrich Nietzsche said "All truth is simple...is that not doubly a lie?" We learn in basic science classes that DNA is over 99% accurate when trying to identify a person. So, it shouldn't come as a surprise when DNA is said to be accurate within a criminal case. Therefore, a judge in a criminal case accepts this level of accuracy. But, what happens when there are circumstances in which DNA has been tampered with? Shockingly enough, this occurs more often than one would think. Since the first DNA case in 1988, DNA has been used to convict and to prove a person's guilt or innocence. When a crime is committed, the physical evidence left behind is called DNA, which stands for deoxyribonucleic acid.

DNA testing was first introduced in 1985 as a way of identifying perpetrators of a crime. DNA testing provides the most reliable way to gather physical evidence and identification of a person, especially in sex crimes and murder cases. DNA contains our blueprint, the genetics that make us who we are. Forensic testing can determine if distinctive patterns in the genetic material found at a crime scene matches the DNA in a potential perpetrator with better than 99% accuracy (O'Neill np). The first person to be convicted based on DNA testing was a Florida rapist by the name of Tommy Andrews, in 1987. Currently, the FBI holds DNA records on 50 million people. Also, all sex offenders in the United States are required by law to send their DNA for records to local law enforcement agencies. DNA can also help overturn false convictions. Currently, there are approximately 240 convictions being overturned as a result of DNA evidence exonerating the supposed perpetrator (Stutzman A1).

In 1982, Sean Hodgson was convicted of murdering a 22 year old woman, Teresa De Simone. In 1979, her body was found, raped and strangled, in her car behind a pub in Southhampton England. The police began a three year investigation into the murder. They interrogated various suspects based on DNA evidence and blood samples. Of the suspects, Sean Hodgson had supposedly confessed to the crime and a slew of other crimes one year after the murder to his priest. Hodgson was arrested due to the fact that his whereabouts for the night in question could not be verified. Also, his blood type matched that of the killer. Therefore, he was charged with the crime. A fifteen day trial followed, in which Hodgson refused to take the stand due to saying, "I'm a pathological liar and deserved to be punished." The jury came back with a unanimous verdict of guilty and he was sentenced to life in prison. Soon after the trial, Hodgson recanted his confession and had his lawyer file several appeals. However, it was revealed a few years ago that the DNA evidence in question had not matched Hodgson (O'Neill np).

The DNA evidence suggested that the killer was in fact another man by the name of David Lace, who was a teenager at the time of the murder. David Lace had committed suicide in 1988 after confessing to the rape and murder of Teresa. However, the police overlooked the confession and took it as make believe. When the new information was released, the case was referred to a review board. When the evidence was analyzed, it was found that Hodgson was innocent of all charges. Therefore, Hodgson was released in 2009 and his case remains the longest case of police and forensics misconduct in British legal history (O'Neill np).

Another case in which DNA evidence was not valid includes the case of Gerald Wayne Davis. In February of 1986, a woman was attacked while dropping laundry off at a friend's house. The victim claimed that she was raped and attacked by Davis. The victim also stated that the assailant's father was home at the time of the attack and had done nothing to stop the attack. Davis was convicted in May of 1986 by a jury in Kanawha County, West Virginia. He was convicted of kidnapping and 2 counts of sexual assault. Davis was sentenced to 14-35 years in prison (Innocence np) During the course of the investigation, it had been revealed that there was solid DNA evidence to place the victim in the home. Also, evidence showed that the victim and the assailant knew one another. Also, the semen found on the victim could not be ruled out as not belonging to Davis. After the conviction, Davis filed an appeal with the state and got his sentence reduced to10 years. Also, the kidnapping charge and one count of sexual offense were dropped.

The DNA and forensic scientist, who worked on Davis' case was a man by the name of Fred Zain. During Davis' trial, Zain was one of the investigators that had the DNA evidence. Therefore, the jury considered his testimony as valid. However, Zaina was later found as not having the qualifications to be working in forensics. Zain had failed organic chemistry in college and could not be considered an expert