Van de Kamp OKs ‘Genetic Fingerprint’ Use in Trials

Court trial use by California prosecutors of a new genetic code technique for linking suspects to sexual attacks and other crimes was approved Tuesday by state Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp because of growing enthusiasm on the part of scientists and criminalists.

The so-called “genetic fingerprinting” system uses samples of blood, semen or body tissue to establish an individual’s genetic code or DNA pattern.

Theoretically, Van de Kamp said, “the odds against two people having the same DNA structure are 30 billion to 1.”

Although Van de Kamp had insisted that California take a go-slow approach, the technique has already been accepted by courts in several other states, where many investigators consider it more helpful than actual fingerprints in tracing criminals.

Van de Kamp announced his approval of the new tool Tuesday in a speech to the California District Attorneys Assn. meeting in Palm Springs.

Invented in England in 1985, genetic fingerprinting involves extracting the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which serves as a blueprint for all living organisms, from a specimen of blood, semen or tissue, then chemically chopping the DNA into short fragments. The fragments are separated by a technique called electrophoresis to form an identity profile.

Van de Kamp said two California cases involving DNA evidence are “ready to go.” One is that of a serial rapist in Orange County, and the other is a murder case in Ventura.

“Once this technology is admitted in court,” Van de Kamp said, “we must quickly make it available to prosecutors and investigators around the state.”

Van de Kamp said that a year ago, he wanted to wait to make certain that genetic code evidence would stand up in court.

He said Tuesday that he and his DNA Advisory Board were at last persuaded by the successful use of genetic code evidence in cases around the country, as well as by the satisfaction of the California Bureau of Forensic Services, with the results shown by private laboratories doing such work in the state.

“From my standpoint,” Van de Kamp said, “I am most pleased that our people kept their shirts on and waited until we were ready, until our own DNA experts were ready to go.”

California’s use of the technique, the attorney general said, “is going to be done carefully and with a lot of thought.”

In his speech, Van de Kamp said, “One year ago this month, I stood before a room full of police and prosecutors who were eager to use DNA technology to convict murderers, rapists and other violent criminals. They were waiting for a green light. But I had to give them a stop sign instead.”

He told his audience that he knew last January that “if we rushed to trial with DNA-typing evidence, only to have it thrown out of court, we could lose this revolutionary new tool for years to come. . . .”

‘New Era’

But now, said Van de Kamp, “a new era of crime fighting will begin in California . . . I am ready to announce that DNA is ready to go to court and ready to win.”

He said DNA analysis “may be the strongest form of evidence there is for identifying criminals--especially in cases of sexual assault.”

Genetic fingerprinting already has been used to obtain convictions in several cases where no other evidence was available. On the basis of such evidence, Alan J. Haynes, 35, was convicted in 1987 of raping a 57-year-old Alzheimer’s victim in Tacoma, Wash.

Genetic fingerprinting was also the key evidence in the rape conviction of Tommy Lee Andrews, 25, in Orlando, Fla., early last year.

Last October, 46-year-old Victor Lopez was convicted of sexual attacks on three women after the first New York state trial in which a defendant was linked to the crime through an analysis of his own genetic material.

Ventura County prosecutors expect to go to trial in March in a murder case against Lynda Axel, who was allegedly linked to the crime through DNA analysis of 60 human hairs at the death scene.

Danny Harris, charged with 63 counts of rape, faces a June trial in Orange County based on DNA matching.

With genetic fingerprinting kits now available commercially, authorities say, the odds that such patterns from two individuals will be identical are typically about 1 in 10 million--far shorter than the “theoretic” odds cited by Van de Kamp.

By comparison, the odds that conventional fingerprints from two individuals will be identical are about 1 in 64 billion, but such fingerprints are not always clear or available. Van de Kamp said the latter give “a much weaker identification.”

The attorney general said his office will set up regional laboratories to perform genetic tests after he obtains financing from the Legislature.

He noted that the DNA code for every registered sex offender in the state could be kept in data bases and matched against codes found at crime scenes.

The technique, he said, can also be valuable in helping to clear the innocent.