Unsolved Cases
Until there is a hit, the evidence samples remain in storage. As a result, one of the biggest problems plaguing the justice community is the backlog of untested evidence.14 Aggressively reviewing old unsolved cases can address some of the backlog issues. At a minimum, cold case review policies should: (1) establish a triage system for reviewing cases, submitting existing DNA data into the databases, and initiating DNA testing of untested evidence samples; and (2) address the logistics of implementing the triage system.One of the initial steps in addressing the backlog issue should be identifying which and how many cases have remaining and available biological evidence. Several questions will arise, e.g., will all unsolved cases be reviewed, or only those in which there is reason to believe a serial rapist or a serial burglar was involved? Is viability of a prosecution the determinative factor for testing? Should cases only be tested when all necessary witnesses are available and cooperative, or should all unsolved cases with biological evidence be tested regardless of the viability of the prosecution? Does the DNA laboratory have the availability, resources and/or personnel to test backlog or cold-case evidence, or will the testing have to be outsourced?15 The logistics of an unsolved case policy would resolve the who, what, where and when.
Some of the answers to some of these questions depend on location. For example, jurisdictions that have long-standing SANE programs are likely to have a larger number of cases with preserved biological evidence. Those jurisdictions may want to review sexual assault cases before reviewing homicides or burglaries. Similarly, jurisdictions with established databanks are likely to benefit from early identification of likely serial criminals.
Next, who will review the cases? Is a case to be reviewed by only one person or by several people? Some jurisdictions have used active duty police officers, retired police officers or supervised legal interns. Other jurisdictions have used officers to review unsolved cases while supplementing the case review committees with a couple of prosecutors. Still more have used equal numbers of officers and prosecutors and simply divided the casework proportionately. If the review team is predominantly officers, prosecutors can provide essential legal input. The policy should include guidelines for where the reviewing process will take place, either at the law enforcement facility or at the prosecutor's office. Are the files of such a nature that they can or cannot be removed from the storage facility?
Finally, what deadline will be set for project completion? Is there a sunset date or statute of limitations for certain offenses?
The Solving Unsolved Cases program in Alameda County, California, has addressed a number of these issues, as follows:
When formulating policies to address suspect-less cases, certain responsibilities are shared by prosecutors, police, and labs:
Whenever a truly suspect-less case which involves biological sexual assault evidence arises the investigator should contact DDA Rock Harmon to schedule a review of the case. A copy of the entire investigation, including property records, will be provided at that time. That file will be maintained by the District Attorney's Office.
When formulating policies to address suspect-less cases, certain responsibilities are shared by prosecutors, police, and labs:
- Participating in the development of triage decisions; and
- Assigning case-review responsibilities to specific members of the multidisciplinary team, at specific locations, by certain deadlines.16
In addition, prosecutors have a responsibility to review each case after initial case review by the multidisciplinary team, to anticipate potential defenses and plan appropriate responses.
Police have a responsibility to:
Police have a responsibility to:
- Determine the number of cases with remaining biological evidence,and determine if material witnesses or victims are available.
- Estimate the number of cases that can be tested within established time frames.
Content on this page has been excerpted from DNA Evidence Policy Considerations for the Prosecutor, published by the American Prosecutors Research Institute—the nonprofit research, training and technical assistance affiliate of the National District Attorneys' Association. This information is offered for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. This project was supported by Award No. 2002-DD-BX-0005, from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.
