New York Expands DNA Database . . . Again

New York recently expanded its forensic databases to unprecedented levels – without much fanfare beyond a few newspaper articles. Governor Cuomo recently signed an “all crimes” bill into law in late March, making New York the first state to require anyone convicted of a crime – including small misdemeanors like skipping transit fare – to submit DNA to the state database. People convicted of possessing small amounts of marijuana are exempted as long as they have no previous convictions.

New York has an appetite for expanding its forensic database; this new law represents the third time that the state has upped the ante in recent years. This trend, along with Governor Cuomo’s personal determination to expand the database, means that this new inclusion criteria was almost politically inevitable. It has been estimated that this most recent expansion will add 46,000 profiles to the database each year.

One bright spot is that the new law gives defendants and convicts greater access to DNA testing to improve their ability to establish innocence. While this is surely welcome, it raises a broader question: will scientists have access to New York’s DNA database to assess claims regarding DNA forensics’ supposed infallibility?

Accumulating evidence suggests that there is a significant risk that unknown DNA samples left at crime scenes and database profiles with known identities may match coincidentally.  As I explained in a 2010 article in Science Progress:

 A recent examination of Arizona’s 65,493 database profiles led to a surprising result: 122 pairs matched at 9 loci, 20 pairs matched at 10, and two pairs of siblings matched at 11 and 12. There are also reports that other state databases are experiencing similar oddities. Illinois’ state databases reportedly showed that out of 220,000 profiles, 903 matched at 9 or more loci. And has also been reported that Maryland’s database had 32 pairs of profiles matching at 9 loci and 3 matched at 13. These figures call into question the motivating claim behind DNA database searches—that profiles are unique and coincidental matches are extremely rare—which opens up the possibility for false convictions.

The FBI and state law enforcement have largely responded to these rather peculiar findings by restricting outsiders’ access to these databases. Defendants’ and convicts’ greater access to forensic databases is a notable step forward, and other states should follow New York’s lead in this limited regard. But justice and transparency also demand greater access for independent auditors and scholars seeking to verify claims coming out of the databases. 

Previously on Biopolitical Times:

• NY Bill to Expand DNA Database Stalls in Legislature
• Police Balk At Submitting Their Own DNA to Forensic Databases
• Another Expansion of DNA Databases: South Korea Collects DNA from Labor Unionists