[Back to Document View]

                            LexisNexisª Academic

               Copyright 2002 St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Inc.
                          St. Louis Post-Dispatch

                June 4, 2002 Tuesday Five Star Lift Edition

SECTION: EDITORIAL; Commentary Column; Pg. B7

LENGTH: 679 words

HEADLINE: ALAS, THERE IS NO GOLDEN LASSO

BYLINE: Jennifer M. Joyce

BODY:
DNA TESTING: NO

When I was growing up, I never missed the television show "Wonder Woman."
Wonder Woman had a golden lasso that, when looped around a crook, compelled
him by Amazonian magic to tell the truth. This bit of superhero wizardry
reminds me of the miraculous powers that some criminal-defense lawyers
ascribe to DNA testing. Those lawyers seem to regard post-conviction DNA
testing as a golden lasso that automatically demonstrates that a rapist is
innocent simply because his DNA does not match the evidence found on the
rape victim.

The Golden Lasso theory is appealing -- even to me. I wish life could be
that simple, but it is not. DNA testing is not a magic golden lasso. It is
merely a forensic tool, an expensive one that may or may not be valuable
depending on the circumstances of a case. As a prosecutor, my primary
responsibility is to pursue justice. This is where I trade the comic books
for common sense. In most cases post-conviction DNA testing will shed
absolutely no light on the culpability of the defendant.

In one case, a teen-age girl was raped multiple times by multiple rapists.
The victim testified at trial that the defendant, Jimmie Hughes, did not
ejaculate during the rape. Therefore, one would expect that Hughes' DNA
would not be present, and that a post-conviction DNA test would be
meaningless.

In such cases, there is absolutely no benefit to be gained in testing, but
there are substantial costs --financial and emotional costs.

The interests of society demand that post-conviction DNA testing be carried
out in a manner that is scientifically above reproach. The crime lab at the
St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department is one of the most highly
accredited labs in the country. For this reason, when I consent to
post-conviction DNA testing, I insist that the testing be done in St. Louis.
Police-lab officials estimate that DNA testing costs $1,500 to $2,000 per
case.

Clearly this cost is warranted where post-conviction DNA testing can provide
definitive proof of innocence. Yet it defies common sense to expend scarce
public resources in cases where we know from the outset that testing will
tell us nothing.

Victims, however, pay the greatest cost. Rape victims must be contacted
prior to post-conviction DNA testing to rule out any alternative source of
biological material, such as a husband or boyfriend.

The effect of this notification is often like ripping a scab off of an
enormous wound. Take the case of Fred Hamilton, a defendant who was
convicted in 1986 of raping a young girl on her way to school. The evidence
at trial consisted primarily of the victim's eyewitness identification. I
decided that post-conviction DNA testing was appropriate because it had the
potential to exonerate the defendant. When we notified the victim of our
intent, she became extremely upset and even suicidal.

Ultimately, the test results confirmed Hamilton's guilt. I was heartsick
that the defendant, knowing he was guilty, subjected his victim to
additional suffering. Yet I do not regret my decision to do the testing.

Unfortunately, justice sometimes requires us to rob victims of their peace
of mind and sense of closure if post-conviction DNA testing has the
potential to exonerate the defendant. However, it is unthinkable to subject
these victims to needless emotional trauma when testing cannot possibly
establish innocence.

There are 1,400 inmates in the Missouri prison system who were convicted in
the city of St. Louis prior to the widespread use of DNA testing. I believe
each of these cases must be carefully examined to determine the
appropriateness of post-conviction DNA testing. My office, through the
Circuit Attorney's Justice Project, is conducting a comprehensive review of
each of these cases. We will continue to do post-conviction DNA testing in
all cases where such testing has the potential to conclusively establish
innocence.

I have recruited law students from all over Missouri to assist me in this
task. Together, we can pursue justice without abandoning common sense.

NOTES:
Jennifer M. Joyce is circuit attorney of the city of St. Louis.

GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC; Graphic / ILLUSTRATION BY PAUL LACHINE - (of someone
"behind the bars" of a DNA strand)

LOAD-DATE: June 4, 2002