Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/02/2003 01:53 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSHB 49(JUD)-EXPAND DNA DATABASE
CHAIR SEEKINS announced CSHB 49(JUD) to be up for consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE TOM ANDERSON, sponsor of HB 49, said that
collection and examination of DNA is the next step in
technological advancement in the art and science of criminal
investigations. Forensic DNA typing has made a broad and
positive impact on the criminal justice system in terms of
solving crimes and innocent people have been freed both before
trial and after incarceration due to this. HB 49 will make
police investigation more efficient and more accurate helping
both law enforcement and crime victims and will expand the
Alaska state database of DNA samples to include all persons with
a felony conviction under Alaska law and juveniles adjudicated
as a delinquent for these same offenses. There are provisions
for volunteer and anonymous donations. Persons who register as
sex offenders are also required to submit DNA samples into the
database. It will require offenders and minors currently
incarcerated or on state supervised parole for felony
convictions or certain sexual misdemeanor offenses to provide a
sample to the Department of Public Safety. The collection of DNA
will be in line with the collection of fingerprints, which are
currently collected at an arrest or, in some cases, during the
process of applying for a job.
SENATOR OGAN asked if the law could collect a sample from an
unknown person.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON replied that wasn't the intent and the
Department of Law could clarify that.
SENATOR FRENCH said it should be made clear that they are
talking about a plane wreck or an arson case when a house burns
down and you're not sure who's in or who's out.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if the bill needs a findings section.
SENATOR ANDERSON replied that he didn't think that was in the
original, but was added in later.
SENATOR ELLIS said he has concerns about privacy issues because
DNA is an even more powerful identifier than fingerprinting. It
also identifies everybody else in the bloodline of that
individual. Some time in the future they might find themselves
passing laws to keep health insurance companies from not
excluding all people with a genetic predisposition for certain
diseases. Significant safeguards should be in place for it to be
used for good and not for other purposes.
Page 3, line 27, says "law enforcement purposes including
criminal investigation prosecutions" and he thought it would be
okay to just read "criminal investigations and prosecutions".
"Law enforcement purposes" was a very subjective phrase and open
to just anything.
Another concern he has is with keeping the sample of genetic
material after everything has been processed because someday we
will regret not being more careful about this subject.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON responded that he understands Senator
Ellis's concern and that page 2, section 4, has a new section
about unlawful use of DNA samples, which addresses those
concerns. Page 2, line 25, says that unlawful use of DNA samples
is a Class C felony.
TAPE 03-34, SIDE B
2:48 p.m.
SENATOR FRENCH said he thinks they should hear from the crime
lab folks before they decide anything. Everyone agreed that they
would eventually have to protect the use of DNA for insurance
and other purposes.
MR. CHRIS BEHEIM, Director, Scientific Crime Detection
Laboratory, prepared a handout to explain the history of
biological testing at the state crime lab. In 1987, they first
started doing blood type testing and in 1992, they added DQ
Alpha, the first DNA testing marker. They used it first on a
homicide in Fairbanks and were able to eliminate the first
suspect. They found the killer by testing blood that was found
in his watchband.
In 1996, they added another DNA marker, known as the polymarker
technique, which eliminated about 99.9 percent of the
population. The big breakthrough came in 1999, when STR (short
tandem repeat) typing became available, which involves analysis
of 13 different markers on the DNA molecule. In 1997, all labs
began using this one technique so they could create databases
and exchange information. Prior to that time, there wasn't a
consistent technology.
The mechanism that allows them to store and compare DNA profiles
is known as CODIS (combined DNA index system), which is a
software package the FBI provides to laboratories at no cost.
CODIS has two indexes - the Convicted Offender Index and the
Forensic Index, which contains crime scene evidence DNA
profiles. There is no personally identifying information in the
database that is uploaded into CODIS. If there is a hit on the
database, they have to go to another database to find out where
the sample came from.
The primary purpose of CODIS is to identify suspects and it is
done by searching and comparing the convicted offender DNA
database against the forensic database. Law enforcement is
notified if a match occurs and they determine the significance
of it.
SENATOR OGAN asked why they have to retain the DNA material.
MR. BEHEIM explained that it is primarily for quality assurance.
When they achieve a match in the database, they go back and
retrieve the original sample and retype it to make sure there
hasn't been any sample switching. Contract labs are used, but
they deal with thousands and thousands of samples. When law
enforcement is notified, they want an additional sample to use
in any legal proceedings.
SENATOR FRENCH said he could see his concern about future misuse
of the sample and keeping a sample here, at least, guarantees
that the evidence being used is from the right person.
MR. BEHEIM said currently they have about 3,200 convicted
offender profiles in the database and DNA profiles from 165
unsolved crimes (17 homicides, 91 sexual assaults, 48 burglaries
and 9 miscellaneous). The database has helped enormously. Since
April 30, they have had 30 hits in the database; 15 hits have
matched unsolved crimes to specific convicted offenders; 15 of
them have linked cases together showing the same perpetrator is
involved.
Currently, Alaska's DNA database law is very weak; only
Connecticut's is weaker. When Oregon expanded their DNA database
to collect from all felons, their hits went up 400 percent. If
we can have a similar success rate, many crimes will be cleared
up. We are hampered now because our law is not retroactive, but
40 other states do have retroactive DNA laws. Under Alaska law,
you can't compare a sample for a crime unless it was committed
after 1996.
CHAIR SEEKINS held CSHB 49(JUD) for further work.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|