Crime labs too beholden to prosecutors, critics say

MomSeattle · DadSeattle · SPI · MySeattlePix · My account

Local

US/World

Sports

Business

A&E

Life

Comics

Photos

Opinion

Blogs

Buy Ads

NWsource

Friday, July 23, 2004

Crime labs too beholden to prosecutors, critics say

By RUTH TEICHROEB
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Flawed forensic work not only leads to wrongful convictions, it leaves criminals on the street.

RELATED FEATURES

- Oversight of crime-lab staff has often been lax
- "Shadow of Doubt" special feature

That's a good reason to care about reforming state-run crime labs, legal experts say.

"What you have in this country is an epidemic of crime lab scandals," said Barry Scheck, president-elect of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Scheck is co-founder of the New-York based Innocence Project, a group that has helped exonerate 145 wrongfully convicted prisoners.

"Forensic science has to be an independent third force in the justice system," he said, "not beholden to prosecutors and police."

Proposed solutions center on more government scrutiny and better-funded labs. At the top of the list is a federal law requiring crime labs to comply with the same kind of rules medical labs have had to follow since 1967.

Clinical lab workers have to take frequent "blind" proficiency tests that are mixed into their regular work -- unlike crime lab staff who know when they're being tested.

Blind testing would uncover a lot more errors at state crime labs, said Janine Arvizu, an expert from Albuquerque, who has audited federal and private labs. "The forensic industry just won't bite that bullet," she said. "There's this attitude that, 'We work for the good guys -- just trust us.' "

Even the national voluntary accreditation group recommends, but does not require, blind testing.

"If you know it's a proficiency test, the person may do better work than usual and double-check it more," said Ralph Keaton, executive director of American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors.

Washington crime lab officials say blind testing is too costly and difficult to administer. The system would have to design its own tests and collude with police to pass them off as real since forensic scientists consult with officers, said Barry Logan, director of the Washington State Patrol's Forensic Laboratory Services Bureau.

Critics also want a federal law to require regular inspections by independent outside experts and licensing of forensic scientists.

"We really want to get the bad guys who did it," said John Strait, a Seattle University law professor who teaches forensics. "We want reliability in the system."

Ties to State Patrol defended

More controversial is the proposal that crime labs should operate independently, as Britain's do, rather than be run by police agencies.

That doesn't sit well with Logan, who said the lab's work isn't compromised by its ties to the State Patrol. Only 7 percent of the crime labs' cases are referred by the State Patrol, most of those drug-related. And the State Patrol's clout with legislators on budget matters is a big advantage, he said.

Federal legislation would duplicate standards already established by voluntary accreditation, according to Logan.

Better pay, higher standards

The real problem is inadequate funding for staff and equipment, said Logan and veteran prosecutors.

"There aren't enough people to do the work," said Mark Roe, Snohomish County's chief criminal deputy prosecutor.

Logan is asking legislators to approve funding for 20 new forensic positions next year when updated labs open in Vancouver and Spokane. That will help clear current backlogs of up to a year.

Thanks to the hit TV show "CSI," crime labs are attracting plenty of forensic wannabes. Recruiting experienced forensic scientists is harder because Washington's pay scale is 20 percent below that of other Western states, Logan said. Entry-level wages begin at $31,740 a year and reach $63,000 for veterans. Efforts to secure pay raises have failed during the last two years.

To encourage more applicants, lab officials have worked with Eastern Washington University in Cheney to set up a forensic chemistry program, and will soon have a forensic biology program as well. A bachelor of science degree is now required for most lab jobs.

Fingerprint examiners need only a minimum of four years of related experience. By 2005, a university degree will be the recommended national minimum.

The last voluntary accreditation of the State Patrol lab system, done in September 1999, found that six of its seven fingerprint examiners didn't have university degrees. The fingerprint supervisor had an associate degree in secretarial science.

Independent oversight

The public will be more willing to pay for improvements if crime labs are held accountable, critics say.

State legislators should set up independent agencies that investigate allegations of misconduct at crime labs, according to the national defense attorneys group.

That should include a full review of past cases handled by a discredited scientist.

"Problems are exposed and then it's back to business as usual," said William C. Thompson, a criminology and law professor at the University of California-Irvine. "We need some sort of independent body with the power to hold hearings."

Add P-I Local headlines to