Log In | Register
The technology of using DNA as proof in the commission of a crime, the innocence of someone falsely accused, and even to identify unclaimed human remains has become one of the most common, and widely used science in these cases. The use of identifying markers contained within human DNA has solved cold cases after 15 or more years, putting perpetrators in prison for life. DNA evidence has also been used to free men falsely accused of crimes, and imprisoned; it has even saved them from death row. Using human DNA as a way of identifying someone is one of the most accurate means available to date. It is so reliable that many states, and the U.S. government uses the technology, and has created a database of the samples it has collected.
Fletcher Anderson Worrell was convicted in 2005 for a brutal rape he committed in 1973; Mr. Worrell was arrested in 2005 for another crime, his DNA was collected and it matched the evidence collected from the rape in 1973. Mr. Worrell was convicted of his crime 33 years after the fact, thanks to the advances in DNA technology. In the U.K. recently (March 2011), Delroy Grant (aka The Night Stalker) was sentenced to life in prison based on DNA evidence that connected him to brutal rapes, and murders of several elderly people. In one case Mr. Grant had actually attempted to destroy a crime scene where he had murderd a woman and her husband by setting fire to their home. In 2001 Mr. Grant’s DNA was checked against information in the U.K. National DNA Database, which connected him to three similar crimes. When confronted with the indisputable evidence, Mr. Grant admitted to the crimes. The use of DNA evidence and the creation of national databases have helped law enforcement agencies worldwide convict people that would have otherwise gone unpunished.
In 2010, two hundred sixty-one people were released from prisons, who had been falsely convicted of crimes. Their cases for release depended on DNA evidence. Of the 261, thirteen were saved from being executed; Thirteen lives saved based on the evidence provided by the use of Human DNA. In July 1979, Gary Dodson was convicted in the kidnapping and rape of a woman; he was sentenced to 25 to 50 years in prison. Mr. Dodson was released in 1985; in 1989 his conviction was overturned based on DNA evidence. Convicted of rape and murder in 1983, Earl Washington was sentenced to death in Virginia. In 1993 newly introduced DNA evidence had Mr. Washington taken off of death row, but not released from prison. In 2001, with the emergence of newer and more reliable science, Mr. Washington was released from prison and granted a full pardon by the Governor of Virginia.
Recently the Supreme Court of the state of Texas awarded three men that were falsely imprisoned monetary awards for their false imprisonment. Mr. Billy Smith was awarded Sixty thousand dollars, Mr. Gregory Wallis Reed was awarded 145,000 dollars, and Mr. Ronald Taylor was awarded 20,000 dollars. Each of these men will also receive a 5% annuity on the money they were awarded for the remainder of their lives. The use of DNA evidence provided these men with the information they needed to gain the freedom they had known of all along, but were unable to prove.
In 1984 the remains of an “Unknown Soldier” from the Vitenam Conflict were laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery at the Tomb of the Unknowns. In 1998, a family who believed that their loved one was one of the service members in the tomb was granted the opportunity to exhume the remains they thought they could identify. Subsequent DNA testing of the remains, and the suspected mother and sister proved that the “Unknown Soldier” was 1LT Michael Blaise. After the finding 1LT Blaise was interred at Jackson National Cemetery in Missouri, closer to his family, and alongside his father.
It is phenomenal how through the advent of DNA technology we have been able to convict the guilty, free the innocent, and close painful chapters in peoples’ lives. It is amazing how the truth can bring happy endings to so many stories, and bring to close so many unresolved issues. It seems that DNA evidence can set you free, it brings truth to the forefront, brings justice to the guilty, and frees the falsely accused. DNA Evidence can release a man from prison, it can return a Soldier to his Family, and it can put the guilty behind bars. DNA Evidence can be used to take away the freedom, and life of a criminal years after a crime was committed. What DNA evidence CAN NOT do, is release you from the liability of paying child support for a child that is not yours. In the very rare instances where it can, it will not get you reimbursed for the time, money and emotional turmoil you endure while being forced to pay for someone else’s child.
It is estimated that over 1.6 million men in the United States are forced to pay child support for children they are not biologically connected to. Even upon learning the truth, through DNA testing a man is still held accountable for the monetary support of a child proven to not be his. If the biological father of a child is later identified, it is almost impossible for that man to be held accountable for his child, and the man who is not the father may still be forced to pay support. Due to the unrealistic statutes of limitations in paternity determination, millions of men are now and historically have been held financially liable for a child, or children that are not theirs. The courts, Social Services, Support Enforcement Agencies, and other special interest groups will claim, “It is in the best interest of the child” for the man excluded through DNA testing to continue paying child support.
Imagine if that same rationale were used in the cases mentioned at the beginning of this article. What would the public outcry be if the courts, prosecutors, and even the laws governing such instances put statutes of limitations similar to those involving paternity, on criminal cases? How often have you heard a judge say, “It is in the best interest of the person wrongly convicted if he stays in prison, though the DNA evidence shows he did not commit this crime”? How about an inmate on death row? What would happen if the judge were to say, “It is in the best interest of the victim if we go ahead and execute the wrong man.”?
What if the person later found through DNA evidence to have committed a crime has children? Do you think the public or a judge would allow for that person to be left alone, and not convicted because it would be in the “best interest” of his children to not have a father that was in prison? Or maybe to state that it is in the best interest of the person wrongfully in prison for the crime to continue to serve the other persons sentence since they were already doing that any way.
All of this sounds absolutely ridiculous to us, because it is. Our criminal justice system would not allow for indisputable evidence to be omitted, if it were being used to free a person wrongly convicted, or jail a criminal walking free. Yet somehow there is justification within our Family Court system to allow that to happen. Every year, men enter courtrooms around the country, present irrefutable evidence that they are not the biological father of a child, and their cases are typically thrown out, or dismissed with prejudice. In many cases the same office that argues to imprison people based on DNA evidence, is the same office that argues to hold a man liable for a child not his, regardless of DNA evidence. The Hypocrisy of the laws in regards to DNA evidence in a criminal case vs. Family Law case is deplorable.
If a man is lucky enough for a court to allow him to be released from financial liability for a child based on DNA evidence, it is highly unlikely he will ever recoup the money he was forced to pay. Even in cases where a man has taken DNA evidence to Support Enforcement Agencies, and still held financially liable; he will most likely not be reimbursed for his losses, even though the agency enforcing the order knew the truth. Nor will the mother who mislead the Social Service Agency, Support Enforcement Agency, and the man be held accountable, or be required to reimburse the man.
Somehow, it is acceptable for state taxpayers to reimburse a falsely accuse criminal when a court, or prosecutor makes a mistake, or omits evidence that convicts the wrong person. Millions of tax dollars annually are paid out to wrongfully imprisoned men and women. Our tax dollars paid to wrongly convict them, our tax dollars paid to wrongfully imprison them, and our tax dollars were used to pay the judge, prosecutor, and (more than likely) public defender, that argued over how the person was wrongfully convicted. Later that same person comes back, and again our tax dollars are used to seek restitution for being wrongly imprisoned. Once the case is settled, and has likely been argued at the tax payer’s expense through appeals, and to the Supreme Court; our tax dollars pay the restitution. Though wrongly convicted, there was not a time where that wrongly convicted person invested any of their own money in to the prison system that held them. They were housed, fed, schooled, and received medical care while in prison, yet they will be reimbursed based solely on the fact that they were wrongly accused, and convicted.
In the case of a man paying support for a child that is not his, proven by DNA testing (the same thing that got our wrongly convicted person set free and paid) he will likely not be reimbursed. During the period of time the man is paying child support, he is not depending on tax payer dollars to provide him with food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, or any other necessities. He has more than likely not used any government money to go to school, or better himself intellectually. He most likely struggled to gather the money for an attorney to present his case on his behalf, only to be denied his request to stop paying child support for a child that is not his. The only time tax dollars enter this equation is when the judge, Support Enforcement, and Prosecuting Attorney’s office fight against this man despite the irrefutable evidence he is presenting. Your tax dollars are used to perpetuate a wrong and despicable practice, not to defend the rights of an innocent person.
The mother knowingly presented inaccurate information, which led to the man being held financially liable for a child that is not his. And she is still receiving money from child support enforcement, protected by tax dollars, the judges, and attorneys are paid with. She will also not be required to repay the man she helped defraud, she will not be held accountable by the state, or the courts, and she will not be required to disclose the name(s) of any other possible father(s) of the child.
It seems that the only person held accountable for anything in a paternity fraud case is the man wrongly held liable for child support. This man would be better off having been falsely accused of rape or murder than falsely accused of parenting a child. This man would have a better chance of recovering his money had he been supported for a number of years by tax dollars, rather than being a productive member of society. When it comes to the use of DNA in the courts of America, the irrefutable proof and the truth can set you free; unless of course you are paying child support for a child that isn’t yours. In that case, you have no rights.
