March 30, 2009
Regional crime lab

This has been talked about for some time, and not unexpectedly it's starting to move forward.


After years of scandal at crime labs across the state, local officials have proposed opening a regional lab based at the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office.

Previous debacles include three Houston exonerations, which occurred because of flawed forensics, questions about conditions at state labs and concerns about mounting backlogs of cases never tested.

To restore public confidence in the Houston Police Department, Harris County District Attorney Pat Lykos and Police Chief Harold Hurtt plan to halt DNA testing at HPD and use the regional lab, which could grow to serve the entire Houston-Galveston Area Council region.

Some small counties see no need for a new facility. They already use outside labs such as those operated by the Department of Public Safety.

"It is more wishful thinking than a reality to think that the 13-county region would want to be involved," said Judge A.G. Jamison, of Colorado County, who chairs the Houston-Galveston Area Council. "There is zero interest in our county."

However, larger players, such as HPD and DPS, support the proposal. DPS analyzes DNA at its Houston lab but cannot keep up with requests for testing. Last year, DPS' local lab received more than 1,700 cases with DNA evidence. It completed work on just 1,040, and the total backlog of cases exceeds 1,200 cases.

"There is plenty of forensic DNA demand," said Tela Mange, a DPS spokeswoman.

The idea of creating an independent regional crime lab has been discussed since the first signs of problems at the HPD crime lab, where the DNA division was shuttered in 2002 after auditors uncovered widespread problems with the quality of work.

Plans gained new momentum in recent months with the election of Lykos.


Three things:

1. Not to sound cranky, but this idea was a plank in C.O. Bradford's platform for District Attorney as well. As with many other changes Lykos has been implementing since her election, Bradford was speaking about them before she was even a candidate. I'm glad to see this happening, but these plans would be going forward regardless.

2. While I agree with this concept, there are many questions that need to be settled. What jurisdiction would this lab have? Would it operate independently, or would it be aligned with the prosecution, as it the default now? What governance would it have? Maybe we're too early in the process to have the answers to these questions, but those answers will determine whether this is indeed better than what we have now or not.

3. And of course, there's the matter of funding. Will the creation and/or funding of this lab require legislative intervention? If so, it may already be too late for this session, though perhaps a budget appropriation is still doable. I realize nothing could really have been done until a new DA was in place, but that does make it hard to get something going in a timely fashion.

I'm not asking these questions because I'm skeptical of this idea. I like this idea, and I want to see it done right. I just want to know more about what they have on the drawing board.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on March 30, 2009 to Crime and Punishment
Comments

"While I agree with this concept, there are many questions that need to be settled. What jurisdiction would this lab have? Would it operate independently, or would it be aligned with the prosecution, as it the default now? What governance would it have? Maybe we're too early in the process to have the answers to these questions, but those answers will determine whether this is indeed better than what we have now or not."

My personal experiences with the Harris County District Attorney's Office along with the experiences of quite a few others would demand "independence" but then the citizens simply don't matter when it comes down to this "above question and reproach" attitude that actually permeates our entire prosecutorial system in this state. We are to merely trust, always, that they are the good guys.

While Pat Lykos appears to be intent on changing things, just as I believe C.O. Bradford would have, many of her assistant district attorneys are not. She just called two of them on the carpet for excluding African-Americans from juries. Says quite a bit.

For them, winning is all. And for some, that means by hook or by crook. And for some it also is not a matter of justice but revenge as a favor to someone.

Our justice system is corrupt. And it will remain corrupt until people finally wake up and speak up. Most are still cowering in the corner.

We really need a citizens review commission, preferably one on a state-wide basis, to address the corruption. To investigate the "mistakes" as they are called the few times they are admitted. A commmission with the power to investigate and seek indictments. And to govern, perhaps, these labs.

Anyone who thinks DNA cannot be "manipulated" is a fool. And in some cases, all it will take is someone in a lab doing a favor for someone in a district attorney's office to "manipulate" the results. Some would like mandatory DNA samples uppon arrest. Which will do nothing but ensure that DNA evidence can be "manipulated" and the innocent falsely convicted. by a district attorney who "knows" they are guilty even if the evidence indicates otherwise.

Posted by: Baby Snooks on March 30, 2009 10:41 AM
Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)