Defending Against DNA Evidence in a Cold Case

It is not uncommon today for a cold case to be reopened when technology advances and new DNA evidence is uncovered. In fact, there have been several instances in the news where a case that is as much as 20 or more years old has been solved because of DNA evidence. The Case of the Boston Strangler The Boston Strangler Case was an infamous murder case that involved a string of 11 murders. Albert DeSalvo, known as the Stranger, later confessed to the killings. However, after he was arrested and charged, he recanted his story and left doubts that the real strangler was still out there. While he was never convicted of the actual murders, he was sentenced to life in prison for rape charges. For years, police and criminal experts wondered if he was really the Boston Strangler or if someone got away with the crime.

Over the past few years, the NIJ had been funding local law enforcement agencies to help them close out cold cases, such as The Boston Strangler. In their Solving Cold Cases with DNA Program, it was confirmed that DeSalvo was the Boston Strangler. Making the Case Against DNA While the use of DNA technology has helped law enforcement, it has not helped those accused of crimes decades later. A criminal defense attorney in Oakland County must be able to disprove the evidence, which is difficult when it is scientific evidence presented against a defendant. Genetic profiling was once considered a magical tool used to help catch criminal defendants, but it has been shown to be fallible more than originally thought.

Before, a criminal defense attorney oakland county had little power against the use of DNA evidence. Today, however, there are instances where a trial that hinges solely on DNA may not be successful. A defense attorney can cast new doubts on the DNA evidence, especially when officers mishandle substances or the evidence is repeatedly sent between different laboratories. One of the biggest strategies used by a criminal defense attorney in Oakland County is that of the chain of custody. When the chain of custody is broken by law enforcement, that means that officials cannot guarantee the integrity of the DNA evidence. Therefore, the evidence could have been tampered with or contaminated.

There is also the issue of human error and accident. A technician can suggest that someone is guilty even when they are not. There is always the potential for errors when humans are involved. While machines do a majority of the DNA testing, humans are still involved in the process, and all it takes is low count DNA to capture a DNA profile. However, these low count DNA profiles are unreliable and many DNA experts now report that low count DNA (which contains one or three cells) is inadequate compared to a valuable DNA sample of several hundreds of thousands of cells.