Group: Reform DNA testing for inmates

The state’s DNA testing
program began five years ago.

COLUMBUS (AP) — A group seeking to fix problems in Ohio’s DNA testing program for inmates who claim they are innocent has recommended that lawmakers establish statewide standards for preserving crime-scene evidence and put police crime labs under greater oversight.

The recommendations are included in a 42-page proposal submitted to Gov. Ted Strickland last week by a group that includes former state Attorney General Jim Petro and the Ohio Innocence Project, a nonprofit legal clinic based at the University of Cincinnati.

The plan is a response to an investigation published by The Columbus Dispatch in January that found police and courts routinely discard evidence after trials, and prosecutors and judges often dismiss inmate applications for DNA testing without a stated reason.

“We need to establish additional safeguards to make sure this stuff doesn’t happen here,” said Petro, the state’s attorney general from 2003-07.

Since the state’s DNA testing program began in 2003, 313 inmates have applied but only 14 tests have been done, The Dispatch reported in its investigation.

Strickland also has called for an overhaul that would speed up the review process and open up testing to more inmates.

“Make a list of the worst things that can happen in life, and being locked in prison for a crime you didn’t do is near the top of that list,” said Ohio Public Defender Tim Young. “We have a fundamental responsibility, especially with DNA evidence, to make sure justice was done.”

The group’s recommendations also include a requirement that police make an audio or video recording of their interviews with suspects, which can help prevent false confessions and unsavory police tactics.

Ohio should also eliminate a time limit on inmates to apply for DNA testing, the group said. The state currently requires inmates to have at least a year left on their sentence.

Other states have had success in establishing standards for preserving evidence and creating oversight commissions.

Twenty-two states have rules on preserving biological evidence. The laws focus on blood, semen, hair, fingernails, teeth and bones.

Texas, Maryland, Minnesota, Oklahoma and Virginia are among the states that have outside oversight of government crime labs or require professional accreditation.

“Both are important,” said Brandon Garrett, a University of Virginia law professor who studies the role of labs in wrongful convictions.

Flawed science is among the leading cause of wrongful convictions in the U.S.