g surveillance ou svudl starter pack genetic …

GENETIC SURVEILLANCE: YOU DECIDE

SVUDL STARTER PACK:

GENETIC

SURVEILLANCE

Did you know that California has the 3rd largest database of DNA in the world? Did you know that if you

are ever pulled over by the police here they will take and forever store your personal DNA? Welcome to

the exciting world of debating genetic surveillance! This packet of evidence contains a variety affirmative

and negative arguments on the topic. It is your ticket to delving deep into the DNA databanking practices

in the USA and the consequences of these actions. What kind of world do you want to live in? How will

you make it a reality? Read on….

Genetic Surveillance: The Rundown ...................................................................................................................... 2 Welcome and Hot Tips .......................................................................................................................................... 3

How to Use The Pack ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Making your Expando ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Glossary of terms.................................................................................................................................................. 6

Aff: 1AC ................................................................................................................................................................ 8

Aff: Solvency Extension ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Aff: Racial Profiling Extension.............................................................................................................................. 14 Aff: Narrative ...................................................................................................................................................... 15

Aff AT: Big Data ................................................................................................................................................... 16 Aff AT: Kritiks (False Hope)......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Aff AT: Solvency (Crime) ...................................................................................................................................... 19 Aff AT: Solvency (States) ............................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Neg: Big Data 1NC .............................................................................................................................................. 22 Neg: Big Data DA Extensions............................................................................................................................... 26

Neg: Critical Legal Theory.................................................................................................................................... 27

Case Neg: Solvency ............................................................................................................................................ 29 Case Neg: Impact Turn (Crime) .................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Case Neg: Narrative ............................................................................................................................................ 33

Domestic Surveillance Novice Pack

SVUDL 2015-2016

2

GENETIC SURVEILLANCE: THE RUNDOWN

The 2015-2016 National High School policy debate topic is “Resolved: The United States Federal

Government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance”. This timely topic seeks to

center debates about US policy on the controversial issue of domestic surveillance – who, how,

and how much the government watches people here in the USA. These debates will be about

whether the US should reduce, weaken, or eliminate these various forms of surveillance and what

the consequences of those decisions will be.

The SVUDL Starter Pack affirmative narrows the overall topic of surveillance to focus on the

curtailing federal DNA databases. The argument goes like this:

Inherency. The government is in the process of creating a massive database of innocent

people’s DNA with no end in sight.

Harms. The collection of this database destroys our privacy and steals our most personal

information, giving the government powers that it will inevitably abuse. Because the

database is used to justify more arrests and convictions, it also deepens racial disparities

at all levels of law enforcement.

Plan. To address this, the Affirmative enacts legislation to require the federal government

to stop capturing the DNA of people who are not convicted of a crime and to delete the

DNA records of all people who are not convicted of a crime.

The negative side is equipped with multiple positions to contest the affirmative:

The Big Data disadvantage, which suggests that all of the data out there (including our

DNA) is necessary for research, which results in scientific innovations which can help

address world problems.

The Critical Legal Theory argument, which suggests that the more we think our privacy is

protected, the more we trust a system that pacifies and dominates us. Because the

affirmative reforms the system of law, it strengthens that system; it would be better to

challenge it directly than work within its confines.

A series of On-Case Arguments that disagree directly with the truth claims of the

affirmative. The first set talk about the importance of a very large DNA database to solving

crimes and exonerating wrongfully accused people. The second set highlight the system of

state DNA databases and how the plan fails to address them, so the problems will still

continue anyway.

As always, these arguments are a starter, waiting for you to add your own evidence on these main

points and to invent original arguments of your own!


SVUDL 2015-2016

3

WELCOME AND HOT TIPS Welcome to Debate.

Debate is an opportunity for you to build your voice and be heard.

When you debate, you will have the chance to speak your mind on topics from Iraq to poverty in the inner

city, and to prove your skills against young people from all over the bay. Debate is a sport: it calls on you to

join a team, represent your school, and win trophies, championships, and prizes. If you commit yourself to

this sport you will have much fun; most importantly, you will gain the tools to better yourself, to earn

college scholarships, and to speak up for your entire community.

What is Debate?

Debate is a competition between two teams, each with two debaters. One team takes the Affirmative,

proposing a plan to change the world and explaining why it is a good idea. The other team is the Negative,

who attacks the plan and tries to prove that it will do more harm than good.

There are 8 speeches and 4 cross-examinations in a debate round. You and your partner will each take the

lead on 2 speeches (1 Constructive and 1 Rebuttal) and 1 cross-examination.


SVUDL 2015-2016

4

HOW TO USE THE PACK

This is debate. Your voice is most important. The Starter Pack is designed for two purposes: to give you the

support you need to make solid arguments and to challenge you to make these arguments creative and

compelling. There are also several pages that challenge you to find your own evidence or write your own

arguments – at all times, fill the debate with your voice and your creativity!

Here are the main parts you will find on every page of the Novice Pack:

The Card: Evidence to support your arguments.

Every page will give one piece of evidence supporting

the argument – remember that this is just the start,

and it is your job to find more evidence to back up your

points.

The tag, at the top, summarizes the argument in the

card. The citation just below it tells you where the evidence comes from – read at least the last name

and the year. The card below the citation – just like the evidence you find yourself – is usually worth

reading aloud in the debate. Focus on the underlined words, and over time make your own underlines

to emphasize the points most important to you.

Your Words: You make the knowledge.

The point of debate is building your own personal intellectual power – not just reading the thoughts of

other people, but expressing your thoughts.

Whenever any card ends, that is a cue to make your own original points. How does this card help you

win the round? What can you say that drives the argument home? Make sure to support every point

you make with evidence – but remember that evidence can come from your own experiences and the

experiences of people in your community as well as academic or expert sources.

General Reminders:

1. The job of the affirmative team is to make a case for change, typically one that affirms this

year’s national resolution. Make sure that the benefits of your plan are crystal clear.

2. The goal of the negative team is to show that the affirmative plan (or advocacy) is not

desirable. You have many options on the arguments you choose to pursue this goal.

3. You will have to choose the evidence and arguments you will include in your 1AC - your first

affirmative speech – so choose wisely! Make sure you can fit it all into an 8 minute speech!

4. Write notes and arguments on all these pages – including underlines or highlights that show

the most important parts you will read in your speech. Use the Your Words and make this

pack yours!


SVUDL 2015-2016

5

MAKING YOUR EXPANDO

THE FINISH LINE: MAKING YOUR EXPANDO

The Expando is a crucial tool for every debater. Once you have finished digesting the Starter Pack

you should immediately tear off the staple and assemble the pages into an expando.

Like Batman’s utility belt, the Expando is where you reach when you are looking for just the right

thing to save the day. Expando pockets hold pages of evidence, and a well-designed Expando gives

you the power to quickly answer any argument your opponents can bring against you.

You have creative control over which pockets your Expando contains, but these are a good start:

1. 1AC. The 1AC is the first speech in the round, and the 1AC Pocket calls for the most powerful

evidence and arguments you have. Make sure you choose just enough so that you can fill an

8-minute speech!

2. Answers to Neg. This pocket is for evidence and arguments that directly answer the

arguments you are expecting to hear from the Neg. Reach for this pocket before your 2AC or

any of your Affirmative Rebuttal speeches.

3. Aff Extensions. This pocket is for evidence and arguments that back up – or extend –the

points you make in the 1AC. Use them if you have extra time, or if you want to make the

judge feel the impacts of your case.

4. 1NC. The 1NC is your front-line attack on the Affirmative case. Fill 1NC Pocket with the cards

you choose as the most important for the negative – and make sure that there are just

enough so that you can fill an 8-minute speech!

5. 2NC. As you advance past novice, you will want to have a separate pocket for every major

negative position. For now, you can lump them all together into a 2NC pocket.

6. Flows and notes. After every round, make sure to put your flow paper into your expando. You

will use it later with coaches and mentors to train up and get ready for the debates to come.

SO IMPORTANT: After every round, make sure that your Expando is ready to go for the next round.

Make sure every card is in the right space, and pack your flow and any important notes into the last

pocket.


SVUDL 2015-2016

6

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

General definitions:

Surveillance: the act of carefully watching someone or something, especially in order to prevent

or detect a crime

Domestic: of, relating to, or originating within a country

Curtail: to reduce or limit

Privacy: freedom from unauthorized intrusion

Civil rights: the right that every person should have

Genetic information:

DNA: a substance that carries genetic information

Genome: An organism’s complete set of DNA

Genetic information: results of all genetic tests a person and his/her family has taken

Swab: an absorbent pad or material used to take specimens or collect genetic information

DNA Collection: the genetic information of multiple people

DNA Databanking: the sharing of genetic information between the local, state, and federal

government

National database: a government database containing genetic information

Genetic surveillance: the process of using DNA to identify a person

Biomedical research: the area of science that explores the cause of diseases and how to cure

them

Familial information: data about a family’s DNA

Law enforcement:

Felony: a major crime with significant legal punishment

Misdemeanor: a minor wrongdoing

Pretextual stops: A pretextual stop occurs when an officer pulls over a driver for a traffic

violation in order to investigate the driver for a completely different crime (ex: drug possession)

Indefinite retention: records with significant legal value are held forever

Innocent arrestee: a person who is arrested but is proven innocent

Racial disparities: A racial group receives worse or favorable treatment (ex: longer sentences,

worse health care)

Disproportionate: too large or too small in comparison with something else

Feedback loop: a situation in which the output of one event is used as the input for another

event


SVUDL 2015-2016

7

GLOSSARY OF TERMS, CONTINUED United States:

Supreme Court: the highest judicial body in the United States; consists of 9 Supreme Court

Justices

Constitutional principle: the idea that the US government should be limited

4th Amendment – the right to individual privacy

14th Amendment – equal protection of the law

Majority opinion: a judicial opinion agreed to by more than half the members of any court

Minority dissent: a judicial opinion held by fewer than half the members of any court

Maryland v. King: Landmark Supreme Court Ruling that made a cheek swab of an arrestee’s

DNA legal

FBI Combined DNA Index System (CODIS): A database of DNA from all arrestees

US DNA Identification Act of 1994 – provided funding for law enforcement to amass DNA into a

giant federal repository

2005 DNA Fingerprint Act – authorizes federal agents to take and store DNA from anyone they

detain and permits CODIS to retain profiles from arrestees that were submitted by the states

that collected their DNA

California:

DNA and Forensic Identification Database and Databank Act (1998) – established a databank

and permitted police to retrieve DNA from anyone, including children, convicted of a felon, sex

offense, or arson

Prop 69, the DNA Fingerprint, Unsolved Crime, and Innocence Protection Act – broadened the

scope of individuals in the state who are subject to warrantless DNA seizures to anyone, even

children, arrested on suspicion of committing any felony. Also authorizes retroactive DNA

databanking from any Californian in prison or on probation or parole with a felony record.

Europe:

European Court of Human Rights: An international court that ensures that all 47 member

nations follow moral standards set by court

S. and Marper v. U.K.: European Court of Human Rights ruled that holding the DNA of a person

who has been acquitted is illegal and a violation of the right to privacy

U.K. Protection of Freedoms Act: States that all collected DNA from an acquitted person will be

destroyed


SVUDL 2015-2016

8

AFF: 1AC

Contention One: Inherency

The government now has the authority to collect your DNA even if you are not convicted of

a crime. This guarantees the endless expansion of the government’s genetic database.

Gregory McNeal, Forbes, 6/3/2013

“Congress Should Act To Protect DNA From Genetic Surveillance,”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2013/06/03/congress-should-act-to-protect-dna-from-genetic-surveillance/

It’s time for innocent people to open their mouths for royal inspection and DNA collection by agents of the

government … In today’s opinion in Maryland v. King, the Court authorized the collection of DNA from anyone arrested for a “serious crime.” While the majority claimed to limit its holding to “serious crimes,” there was no

articulated Constitutional principle to limit its judgment , … As a consequence of this judgment, they continued, “your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly,

and for whatever reason.”

The opinion thus narrowed the difference between an innocent arrestee and convicted criminal, with innocent

arrestees bearing the brunt of the narrowing. Convicted criminals can already have their DNA collected as a consequence of their conviction, thus the Supreme Court’s opinion extending the collection of DNA to arrestees

will have its biggest impact on those who have been acquitted of the crime for which they were arrested… If

you’re arrested by the police for a crime they may swab your mouth for DNA, and if it turns out they made a mistake and arrested the wrong person, you’ll be released but your DNA may (subject to local policies) sit

indefinitely in a government database somewhere… the possible future use of DNA might be one of bureaucratic identification. Is it implausible to think that in a decade the government may ask for a drivers

license, registration and a DNA sample at a traffic stop?



SVUDL 2015-2016

9

AFF: 1AC

DNA databases are expanding around the country, especially in California, creating a

national federal database of our genetic profiles

Roberts, 2011. Dorothy Roberts, Faculty Fellow at Northwestern University School of Law, Howard Law Journal, Vol. 54, No.3,

ingpapers/54HowLJ567(2011)

Genetic testing was first introduced as a type of supplemental evidence to help convict criminal suspects by comparing their DNA to crime scene samples. Data banking extended the purpose of DNA from confirming the

guilt or innocence of particular suspects to detecting unknown suspects from crime-scene evidence… The DNA

profiles function as “genetic fingerprints” that can help match the crime scene sample with one in the DNA database… Initially, DNA was collected only from violent felons and sex offenders … The reach of this collateral

penalty has extended drastically in the last two decades. Not only have the categories of people subject to DNA seizure increased, but the government’s use of the banked DNA has also broadened… Citizens who have not

been convicted or charged with any crime and immigrants de-tained on suspicion of Immigration and

Naturalization Service violations may also have their profiles retained. A similar escalation is taking place at the state level. All fifty states now

extract DNA from at least some classes of offenders and send it to CODIS. Forty-seven states take a sample

from anyone convicted of a felony, and some states include misdemeanor offenders. In eighteen states, people who are only arrested are forced to submit DNA, even if they are never convicted of a crime. Thirty five

states have extended their genetic collection law to children. California, which has amassed the third-largest

DNA database in the world… the state’s DNA database is expected to mushroom to more than two million samples over the next five years.


SVUDL 2015-2016

10

AFF: 1AC Contention Two: Harms and Advantages

Furthermore, DNA databases incentivize racial profiling: law enforcement will default

towards arresting individuals in borderline cases so that they can collect their DNA

Michael T. Risher, 2009

Council for Responsible Genetics, “Racial Disparities in Databanking of DNA Profiles,” .GeneWatch 2009 July-August; 22(3-4):

22-24, 35. http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=204

Arrestee sampling adds another incentive for police officers to make questionable or outright illegal arrests.

Whether or not the arrest leads directly to charges being filed, the arrestee's DNA profile will automatically be included in the database and run against all crime-scene evidence, now and in the future. Because of the

barriers to having DNA samples removed, few arrestees will be able to have their samples and profiles expunged, thus allowing a single law enforcement officer the power to place people under lifetime genetic

surveillance.

The low level of proof required to make an arrest, combined with the difficulties of preventing arrests that are

illegal for lack of proof or for discriminatory enforcement of laws, means that allowing DNA collection immediately after arrest will lead to large databases full of innocent people. Furthermore, given the ubiquity of

racial profiling, people of color will largely populate the databases. The bottom line is that police end up with

enormous discretion to determine who is in a database, with absolutely no review of many of their arrests. The consequence of the arrest of a plainly and indisputably innocent person will be not only a short stint in jail, but

a lifetime of genetic surveillance.

http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=204


SVUDL 2015-2016

11

AFF: 1AC

Unfortunately, this expanding genetic database does not affect all populations equally.

Communities of color are uniquely negatively impacted by a DNA database, for a number

of reasons.

Michael T. Risher, 2009 Council for Responsible Genetics, “Racial Disparities in Databanking of DNA Profiles,” GeneWatch

2009 July-August; 22(3-4): 22-24, 35.

http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatch Page.aspx?pageId=204

Of the hundreds of thousands of arrests every year in California on suspicion of a felony, nearly 320,000 in

2006, approximately 30% never lead to any conviction. A disproportionate number of these innocent arrestees

are people of color. In the U.S. justice system, people who are arrested but never convicted are presumed innocent; yet, as of January 1, 2009, all arrestees have been forced to let the State of California take a DNA

sample, analyze it and include the resulting profile in a criminal database, to be compared evermore with

crime-scene evidence. There are procedures for some of these people to try to get the samples and profiles expunged; however, these procedures often require arrestees to wait three or more years before even

requesting expungement and necessitate the help of a lawyer.

As a result, the overwhelming majority of people arrested but not convicted of any crime are unlikely even to try to get their samples destroyed. Tens of thousands of profiles taken from innocent people will thus remain in

these criminal databases. The consequence will be a magnification of the current racial disparities in our

criminal justice system as more and more people of color's DNA profiles are included in databases that make them potential suspects whenever DNA is recovered from a crime scene. The effects of this disproportionate

inclusion of people of color in the databanks are made clear by the other papers in this series on genetics and

race… California's system because it is one of the world's largest criminal justice systems in one of the nation's most diverse states. It is also the system in which I have practiced law for the last decade, and is

representative of where DNA databanks throughout the country will likely be in the next few years as more and more states and the federal government collect DNA from arrestees.

http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=204


SVUDL 2015-2016

12

AFF: 1AC Contention Three: Plan and Solvency

We propose the following Plan: The United States federal government should curtail its

domestic surveillance by enacting legislation to require that the federal government delete

the DNA records of all persons who are not convicted of a crime.

The plan solves by helping to combat the government’s genetic surveillance

Gregory McNeal, Forbes, 6/3/2013. “Congress Should Act To Protect DNA From Genetic Surveillance,”


So what can Congress do to protect innocent people while still ensuring DNA can be used to solve crimes?

Why not take a cue from Europe and automatically delete the DNA of innocent persons from government databases… Such indefinite retention of innocent persons data is in the ECHR’s words an “interference with

the applicants’ right to respect for private life and cannot be regarded as necessary in a democratic society.” Following the decision the UK passed the Protection of Freedoms Act which required the removal of innocent

persons DNA from government databases, prohibited the storage of DNA from people arrested and charged

but not convicted of a minor offense, and imposed a three-year limit on the storage of DNA for people charged, but not convicted, of a serious offense.

Thus, the opinion and the Protection of Freedoms Act, shifted the U.K.’s approach from one of automatic

indefinite retention (with a right to request deletion similar to the U.S. expungement policy) to one of automatic

deletion after a period of time. Congress should follow the U.K.’s lead and pass legislation to protect innocent people. Such legislation should require that the government delete DNA records of arrestees who are not

charged with crimes or who are acquitted of minor offenses. Second, for serious offenses (which Congress will need to define), the legislation should require that the government delete the DNA records of persons who are

charged with but not convicted of serious offenses (perhaps after 3-5 years). For those concerned about the

impact of such a decision on national security, Congress could implement procedures to allow for the continued retention of DNA information about suspects in ongoing national security investigations,.. But DNA is

far more revealing than a fingerprint, it gives the government ethnic and familial information and as technology

advances may enable far more intrusive tracking and analytical capabilities.



SVUDL 2015-2016

13

AFF: SOLVENCY EXTENSION

Need Safeguard protections on DNA capture (like the Aff) to prevent misuse of DNA

Yasmin Elaine Waring, J.D., Fall 2005, University of Dayton School of Law, “Is DNA ‘TNT’ for Civil Liberties?,” Fall, 2005,

University of Dayton Law Review, 31 Dayton L. Rev. 105

If laws like the ORC DNA continue to expand without express provisions protecting these rights, then intrusions

like "DNA dragnets" of non-suspects could become real routine police procedure and not the inconsequential sub-plot of a CSI episode. Worse yet is the possibility that these procedures could triumph over constitutional

challenges resulting in draconian actions by law enforcement and an increased state of paranoia by the

general public. This is why it is necessary for the drafters of the ORC DNA to incorporate expungement provisions, establish and uphold mandatory quality and assurance standards, punish the misuse of DNA

information, modify procedures for post- conviction testing, and offer remuneration for post-conviction exonerations. Otherwise, the Buckeye State will be guilty of bucking constitutional integrity and public trust


SVUDL 2015-2016

14

AFF: RACIAL PROFILING EXTENSION


SVUDL 2015-2016

15

AFF: NARRATIVE

Families can be destroyed by DNA databases. Listen to the story of an innocent man who

went through a legal nightmare because his father’s data had been collected decades ago

Mustain 5/4/15—staff writer for the New Orleans Advocate [Jim, 5/4/2015, Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative, False positive

highlights limitations of familial DNA searching, http://dnapolicyinitiative.org/false-positive-highlights-limitations-of-familial -

dna-searching/]

Michael Usry, a young New Orleans filmmaker, has a flair for the macabre. His award-winning output includes

titles like “Murderabilia,” a dark production that spotlights the trade in collectibles related to real -life killings and other violent crimes. Usry’s work can come off as gratuitously violent, as in a clip from the short film

“Winding Down” in which his protagonist disembowels a corpse in a basement. But for the Idaho Falls Police Department, his filmography seemed outright suspicious.

The authorities in that Idaho city targeted Usry last year as a suspect in the 1996 murder of Angie Dodge, a

case that’s drawn national media attention amid claims that the wrong man was convicted. The fatal stabbing

remains steeped in mystery, as DNA from the crime scene failed to match any of the millions of genetic profiles on file in the national criminal database. Police still believe Dodge had multiple attackers, but traditional

forensic testing has failed to identify the man whose semen was found on the 18-year-old’s body. Investigators

last year turned to a controversial technique known as familial searching, which seeks to identify the last name of potential suspects through a DNA analysis focusing on the Y chromosome.

A promising “partial match” emerged between the semen sample and the genetic profile of Usry’s father,

Michael Usry Sr. — a finding that excluded the father but strongly suggested one of his relatives had a hand in the young woman’s murder. The results instantly breathed new life into a high-profile investigation in which

Idaho Falls authorities have weathered intense criticism. But the story of how the police came to suspect the

younger Usry and then eventually clear him of murder raises troubling questions about civil liberties amid the explosive — and increasingly commercial — growth of DNA testing.

The elder Usry, who lives outside Jackson, Mississippi, said his DNA entered the equation through a project,

sponsored years ago by the Mormon church, in which members gave DNA samples to the Sorenson Molecular

Genealogy Foundation, a nonprofit whose forensic assets have been acquired by Ancestry.com, the world’s largest for-profit genealogy company. Ancestry.com received a court order last summer requiring it to reveal

Usry’s name to the police, although it is listed as “protected” in the Sorenson Y -chromosome database, according to court records obtained by The New Orleans Advocate.

Following this new lead, the police mapped out five generations of Usry’s family, narrowing their focus to three

men. Only one, the New Orleans filmmaker, fit the mold of a plausible suspect, according to an application for

a search warrant. Usry, 36, had ties to Idaho, including two sisters who attended a private university about 25 miles from the crime scene. In addition, some of Usry’s Facebook friends lived in the state. And in their search

warrant application, police also mentioned Usry’s short films, which they said generally have “dealt with some sort of homicide or killings.”

“All of the circumstantial evidence was right,” said Sgt. James Hoffman, of the Idaho Falls Police Department.

“He seemed like a really good candidate. But we’ve had that happen before.” Days of suspense Detectives

traveled to New Orleans in December and persuaded a magistrate judge to sign a search warrant ordering Usry to provide his DNA for comparison. For about a month, Usry lived in a state of suspense, fearing he’d be taken

into custody regardless of the test results. “I had lots of days sitting at the house with the dog,” he recalled in

an interview, “wondering if these guys were going to use a battering ram to bust open the door and shoot my dog after he started barking at them.” On. Jan. 13, Usry received the email he’d been awaiting. His DNA,

Hoffman wrote, did not match the semen from the scene of Dodge’s murder.

.

http://dnapolicyinitiative.org/false-positive-highlights-limitations-of-familial-dna-searching/

http://dnapolicyinitiative.org/false-positive-highlights-limitations-of-familial-dna-searching/


SVUDL 2015-2016

16

AFF AT: BIG DATA

Big Data not as important as the Neg claims – can make connections but not explain

reasons

Eight (No, Nine!) Problems With Big Data. By GARY MARCUS and ERNEST DAVIS APRIL 6, 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/opinion/eight-no-nine-problems-with-big-data.html

The first thing to note is that although big data is very good at detecting correlations, especially subtle

correlations that an analysis of smaller data sets might miss, it never tells us which correlations are meaningful. A big data analysis might reveal, for instance, that from 2006 to 2011 the United States murder

rate was well correlated with the market share of Internet Explorer: Both went down sharply. But it’s hard to

imagine there is any causal relationship between the two. Likewise, from 1998 to 2007 the number of new cases of autism diagnosed was extremely well correlated with sales of organic food (both went up sharply), but

identifying the correlation won’t by itself tell us whether diet has anything to do with autism.

Big Data analysis not as accurate or valuable as neg claims

Eight (No, Nine!) Problems With Big Data. By GARY MARCUS and ERNEST DAVIS APRIL 6, 2014.


Fourth, even when the results of a big data analysis aren’t intentionally gamed, they often turn out to be less

robust than they initially seem. Consider Google Flu Trends, once the poster child for big data. In 2009, Google reported — to considerable fanfare — that by analyzing flu-related search queries, it had been able to detect the

spread of the flu as accurately and more quickly than the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A few years later, though, Google Flu Trends began to falter; for the last two years it has made more bad predictions

than good ones.

As a recent article in the journal Science explained, one major contributing cause of the failures of Google Flu

Trends may have been that the Google search engine itself constantly changes, such that patterns in data collected at one time do not necessarily apply to data collected at another time. As the statistician Kaiser

Fung has noted, collections of big data that rely on web hits often merge data that was collected in different ways and with different purposes — sometimes to ill effect. It can be risky to draw conclusions from data sets

of this kind.



http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/0314policyforumff.pdf

http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/03/google-flu-trends-failure-shows-good-data-big-data/


SVUDL 2015-2016

17

AFF AT: BIG DATA


SVUDL 2015-2016

18

AFF AT: BIG DATA

Turn: Big Data Becomes Big Brother

BRUCE GELLERMAN, 2014. WBUR Boston. http://www.wbur.org/2014/03/04/mit-big-data-privacy At MIT Workshop,

Researchers Weigh Pros, Cons Of ‘Big Data’

Big data has the potential to become Big Brother as we willingly invite access into our lives because of the

perceived benefits. Carol Rose, executive director of Massachusetts ACLU, says there’ll be hearings in the State House Wednesday on the use of big data from drones and license plate readers.

“Drones, license plate readers may have uses but they’re only useful if they’re used in a way that isn’t abused

by people who have access to that information to track you, to harass you or to otherwise violate your rights,” she said. “So we need to find a way to balance the law that protects our privacy with the ability to have

technology. I think it’s possible for us to be both safe and free.”

http://www.wbur.org/about/people/bruce-gellerman

http://www.wbur.org/2014/03/04/mit-big-data-privacy


SVUDL 2015-2016

19

AFF AT: SOLVENCY (CRIME)

Surveillance is not the best way to solve crime. It doesn’t work and has a huge negative

impact on privacy.

Dorothy Roberts (Kirkland & Ellis Professor, Northwestern University School of Law; faculty fellow, Institute for Policy

Research) 2011 “Collateral Consequences, Genetic Surveillance, and the New Biopolitics of Race” 54 Howard L.J. 567 2010 -

2011, HeinOnline

It makes no sense to correct a problem created by law enforcement's abuse of power by handing over even more authority to law enforcement in the form of DNA collection. The way to reduce wrongful convictions is to

remove the biases based on race and class that corrupt our criminal justice system. Extending the reach of

state surveillance does just the opposite. Besides, contrary to the public's belief that DNA evidence is infallible, there have been numerous cases of errors in the handling and analysis of DNA that have led to false

accusations and convictions of innocent people.6 6 These weaknesses in the state's use of DNA data banking as a tool for reducing crime make it harder to justify the resulting breach of individual privacy.

Society recognizes that the government violates its civil liberties if it taps our telephones or secretly searches

our homes without court permission. 7 Collecting and storing our DNA is also a serious intrusion into our

private lives because DNA is a part of the body; taking it without consent violates our bodily integrity. In addition to this material aspect, DNA contains sensitive personal information that can be used to identify our

family members and us, can be matched with other private records, including medical files. 8 Society tolerates

the state forcibly extracting highly personal data from people convicted of serious crimes because these offenders have a diminished right to privacy as a result of their antisocial conduct. 9 But as the categories of

people who are compelled to submit DNA broaden, it becomes less clear why the state should have so much power over them.


SVUDL 2015-2016

20

AFF AT: SOLVENCY (CRIME)

DNA databases will make all family members suspect even when they are not involved in

crime.

Candice Roman-Santos (Corporate Counsel and Manager, Healthcare Compliance at Nevro, Associate, Enterprise Regulatory

Law Group, Juris Doctor, Certificate in Health Law & Policy, Health Law at University of California, Hastings College of Law)

2011 “Concerns Associated with Expanding DNA Databases” 2 Hastings Sci. & Tech. L. J. 267

http://hstlj.org/articles/concerns-associated-with-expanding-dna-databases/

Privacy is not threatened by the means of obtaining DNA samples, but rather the information inherent in DNA and the individual’s lack of control over such information.[cliii] There are few subject areas more personal and

more likely to implicate privacy interests than that of an individual’s health or genetic make -up.[cliv] The

concern is that as the uses for and access to the DNA database increases, the threat to privacy also increases.[clv] DNA samples have been analogized to medical information stored on a computer disk because

both can be “read” by the application of technology.[clvi] Though medical information may be strongly

correlated with particular diseases, DNA is inherently linked to one person (except in the case of identical twins).[clvii] An individual’s medical information may change over the course of his or her lifetime (e.g., people

being diagnosed with diabetes, asthma, high cholesterol, or heart disease well into adulthood), but with the exception of mutations, DNA does not change over time.[clviii]

An individual’s medical information may have implications for others (e.g., a virus infection has implications for

others as the infected person may get others sick), just as DNA has implications for individuals other than the

person from whom the information was derived.[clix] However, the implications of medical information are not as serious as those of DNA, which involve invading the privacy of a person’s family when no family member is

guilty of any wrongdoing. Close relatives such as parents, siblings and children share about fifty percent of

each other’s genetic variants and STR lengths, and more distant relatives such as uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces, grandparents, grandchildren, and half-siblings share about twenty-five percent of each other’s DNA

variants.[clx] Thus, using partial matches to identify potential suspects radically expands the power and purpose of DNA databases, implicating a number of people who may have nothing to do with the original crime.


SVUDL 2015-2016

21

SVUDL STARTER PACK:

ARGUMENTS FOR THE

NEGATIVE


SVUDL 2015-2016

22

NEG: BIG DATA 1NC

Link

Plan prevents more data to be collected and used for other benefits

Candice Roman-Santos (Corporate Counsel and Manager, Healthcare Compliance at Nevro, Associate, Enterprise Regulatory

Law Group, Juris Doctor, Certificate in Health Law & Policy, Health Law at University of California, Hastings College of Law)

2011 “Concerns Associated with Expanding DNA Databases” 2 Hastings Sci. & Tech. L. J. 267


The National Bioethics Advisory Commission estimated that as of 1998, more than 282 million human biological specimens were collected and stored in the U.S. for research studies, newborn screening tests,

organ banks, blood banks, forensic DNA databases, and for other purposes, which increases at a rate of 20

million samples per year. The issue lies in the fact that an individual undergoing diagnostic tests or donating samples for clinical or research purposes has a reasonable expectation of privacy that their test results and

DNA will not be shared with a non-medical third party without his or her consent. Function creep has already

begun with DNA databases as law enforcement has expanded DNA collection to include new categories of people. Examples of future uses of DNA databases include research to increase understanding of patterns of

criminal behavior, research to correlate genetic variation with disposition to certain behaviors, and creation of a universal database by combining all existing databases to facilitate data sharing.



SVUDL 2015-2016

23

NEG: BIG DATA 1NC

Impact

Big Data can explain and solve financial crashes, political upsets, flu pandemics and more

– outweighs the case

Pentland 2013 (October. “The Data-Driven Society” ebsco host //HS)

By the middle of the 19th century, rapid urban growth spurred by the industrial revolution had created urgent

social and environmental problems. Cities responded by building centralized networks to deliver clean water,

energy and safe food; to enable commerce, facilitate transportation and maintain order; and to provide access to health care and energy. Today these century-plus-old solutions are increasingly inadequate. Many of our

cities are jammed with traffic. Our political institutions are deadlocked. In addition, we face a host of new

challenges -- most notably, feeding and housing a population set to grow by two billion people while simultaneously preventing the worst impacts of global warming. Such uniquely 21st-century problems demand

21st-century thinking. Yet many economists and social scientists still think about social systems using Enlightenment-era concepts such as markets and classes -- simplified models that reduce societal interactions

to rules or algorithms while ignoring the behavior of individual human beings. We need to go deeper, to take

into account the fine-grained details of societal interactions. The tool known as big data gives us the means to do that. Digital technology enables us to study billions of individual exchanges in which people trade ideas,

money, goods or gossip. My research laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is using

computers to look at mathematical patterns among those exchanges. We are already finding that we can begin to explain phenomena -- financial crashes, political upsets, flu pandemics -- that were previously mysterious.

Data analytics can give us stable financial systems, functioning governments, efficient and affordable health care, and more. But first we need to fully appreciate the power of big data and build a framework for its proper

use. The ability to track, predict and even control the behavior of individuals and groups of people is a classic

example of Promethean fire: it can be used for good or ill.


SVUDL 2015-2016

24

NEG: BIG DATA DA EXTENSIONS

Link

CORPORATE INTERESTS ARE VERY INVOLVED IN THE GROWTH OF LOCAL DNA

DATABASES

Jason Kreag 15

(Visiting Assistant Professor, University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law) “GOING LOCAL: THE FRAGMENTATION OF

GENETIC SURVEILLANCE” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2583957

Corporate interests have played a role in the development of local DNA databases since their inception. The first local DNA database was designed jointly by a private DNA lab and the Palm Bay Police Department. And

private firms are integral to the continued expansion of these databases. Large firms, such as Bode Technology and Orchid Cellmark, view local law enforcement databases as potential revenue streams,

particularly because they promise to promote the use of DNA beyond violent crimes (sexual assaults and

homicides) to property crimes. These firms see a business opportunity in processing the evidence swabs collected from property crimes. Indeed, in marketing their products, they trumpet the studies that have

highlighted DNA’s promise for solving these crimes.

Similarly, smaller firms have also sought to benefit from and to drive the expansion of local databases. These include SmallPond and IntegenX. These companies have been consistent participants in law enforcement

conferences in the last several years, and they have sought meetings with local agencies to pitch their

products. Furthermore, IntegenX offers to help potential buyers secure grants to purchase its products. The influence of private firms on policing techniques is not new and is certainly not unique to genetic surveillance.

However, it is important to recognize that these private interests will influence the expansion, use, and long-

term viability of this surveillance tool. And because these private interests have evolved simultaneously with local law enforcement’s push to enter the genetic surveillance space, the prospect of a genetic surveillance

industrial complex further entrenching the practice of local databases seems likely.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2583957


SVUDL 2015-2016

25


Internal Link

Big Data catalyzes important science and technological innovations

Marr 13 (Nov. 13, 13. Bernard Marr is an author, speaker, and leading business and data expert. “The Awesome Ways

Big Data is Used to Change Our World” Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20131113065157-64875646-the-awesome-ways-big-data-is-used-today-to-change-our-world //HS)

Science and research is currently being transformed by the new possibilities big data brings. Take, for

example, CERN, the Swiss nuclear physics lab with its Large Hadron Collider, the world’s largest and most

powerful particle accelerator. Experiments to unlock the secrets of our universe – how it started and works - generate huge amounts of data. The CERN data center has 65,000 processors to analyze its 30 petabytes of

data. However, it uses the computing powers of thousands of computers distributed across 150 data centers worldwide to analyze the data.

Such computing powers can be leveraged to transform so many other areas of science and research. 7.

Optimizing Machine and Device Performance Big data analytics help machines and devices become smarter

and more autonomous. For example, big data tools are used to operate Google’s self -driving car. The Toyota Prius is fitted with cameras, GPS as well as powerful computers and sensors to safely drive on the road

without the intervention of human beings. Big data tools are also used to optimize energy grids using data from smart meters. We can even use big data tools to optimize the performance of computers and data

warehouses.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20131113065157-64875646-the-awesome-ways-big-data-is-used-today-to-change-our-world

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20131113065157-64875646-the-awesome-ways-big-data-is-used-today-to-change-our-world


SVUDL 2015-2016

26


Impact

Impact Extension - Integrating big data into society revolutionizes it and solves Economic

crashes, disease spread, and resource efficiency

Pentland 13 (October. Alex Pentland is a computer science pioneer, MIT Professor, and oft cited author of computer science

writings. He created the MIT Media lab and has been called by Forbes one of the “7 most powerful data scientists in the

world.” “The Data-Driven Society” ebsco host //HS)

FOR THE FIRST TIME in history, we can see enough about ourselves to build social systems that work better than the ones we have always had. Big data promises to lead to a transition on par with the invention of

writing or the Internet. Of course, moving to a data-driven society will be a challenge. In a world of unlimited data, even the scientific method as we typically use it no longer works: there are so many potential connections

that our standard statistical tools often generate nonsense results. The standard scientific approach gives us

good results when the hypothesis is clear and the data are designed to answer the question.

But in the messy complexity of large-scale social systems, there are often thousands of reasonable hypotheses; it is impossible to tune the data to all of them at once. So in this new era, we will need to manage

our society in a new way. We have to begin testing connections in the real world far earlier and more frequently

than we ever have before. We need to construct "living labs" in which we can test our ideas for building data-driven societies. One example of a living lab is the open-data city we just launched in Trento, Italy, with

cooperation from the city government, Telecom Italia, Telefonica, the research university Fondazione Bruno Kessler and the Institute for Data Driven Design. The goal of this project is to promote greater idea flow within

Trento.

We believe that experiments like the one we are carrying out in Trento will show that the potential rewards of a

data-driven society are worth the effort -- and the risk. Imagine: we could predict and mitigate financial crashes, detect and prevent infectious disease, use our natural resources wisely and encourage creativity to

flourish. This fantasy could quickly become a reality -- our reality, if we navigate the pitfalls carefully.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=90337034&site=ehost-live


SVUDL 2015-2016

27

NEG: CRITICAL LEGAL THEORY

TURN: LAW IS A FALSE HOPE

The law and the Affirmative seems to deal with racism but perpetuates racism at a deeper

and more invisible level – more important to critically interrogate how the law reproduces

and normalizes racism in society

Lopez, 2003 (Gerardo [Professor of Political Science], "The (Racially Neutral) Politics of Education: A Critical Race Theory

Perspective", Educational Administration Quarterly Vol. 39, No. 1 (February 2003) 68-94, 6/28,

eaq.sagepub.com/content/39/1/68.full.pdf) // cjh

By necessitating tangible documentation of its existence, legal and juridical apparatuses have, in effect, dealt

with racism’s most obvious forms but have perpetuated its existence at deeper and more invisible levels. In addition, racism has now been turned on its head, as allegations of reverse racism and calls for equal

protection are increasingly used by Whites to prove discrimination or racial harm against them.

This is particularly true in affirmative action cases (Hopwood v. Texas, 1996; Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 1978), where Whites have sued their organizations using the same legal statutes designed

to protect African Americans and other marginalized groups. Indeed, racism has taken on a new twist, as

Whites reclaim their positionality and power in society by using the courts as their vehicle . The staying power of case law only institutionalizes the current power relationships between Whites and non-Whites while protecting

the material and symbolic property interest of White individuals. In response to these growing concerns, a new

area of legal scholarship known as CRT has emerged to analyze the pervasiveness of racism in society.

As an outgrowth of the Civil Rights movement and the Critical Legal Studies movement, CRT’s premise is to

critically interrogate how the law reproduces, reifies, and normalizes racism in society. Rather than subscribe

to the belief that racism is an abnormal or unusual concept, critical race theorists begin with the premise that racism is a normal and endemic component of our social. CRT scholars suggest that the reason why society

fails to see racism is because it is such a common/everyday experience that it is often taken for granted. In

other words, racism is part of our everyday reality. It is part of our social fabric and embedded in our organizations, practices, and structures - it is the usual way “society does business”.


SVUDL 2015-2016

28

NEG: CRITICAL LEGAL THEORY

THE LAW CAN NOT SOLVE

The law and the language of rights used by the plan actually reinforces oppression by

giving a false hope of liberation. It fails to bring about positive racial change. The Aff is

more of the same - it must be rejected

Chang 93 – (Robert S. Seattle University Professor of Law and Executive Director of the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and

Equality “Toward an Asian American Legal Scholarship: Critical Race Theory, Post-Structuralism, and Narrative Space”

California Law Review, Vol. 81, No. 5 (Oct., 1993), pp. 1241+1243-1323 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3480919)

The Critical Legal Studies movement emerged in order to examine the ways in which the law reinforces

hierarchical social relations. Critical Legal Scholars draw from several political and intellectual movements,

including Marxism, Legal Realism, poststructuralism, and postmodemism. Critical Legal Scholars contend that legal doctrine is indeterminate, contradictory, and partial to privileged classes. Far from being a site of abstract

and neutral reasoning, law, Critical Legal Scholars contend, is ideological and political. Critical Legal Scholars

also argue that the law invokes imposing images and technical language in order to mystify its audiences and to convince them that legal arrangements are natural and inevitable. Critical Legal Scholars often target legal

rights in their critiques.

Critical Legal Scholars believe that rights are malleable and that they alienate individuals from one another and induce a false consciousness among oppressed people who, believing they are truly protected by rights, do

not actively resist their oppression. Several, though not all, Critical Legal Scholars trash rights and argue that

progressives should stress informality over the structure of rights; rights simply reify law and nurture the illusion of law's naturalness. Postmodemism leads Critical Legal Scholars to question reliance upon law as a

vehicle for achieving justice. Critical Legal Scholars conclude that rights are part of an oppressive social regime

and that progressive scholars should forcefully deconstruct their seemingly natural status. Critical Race Theorists share Critical Legal Scholars' skepticism toward law's purported neutrality. They accept Critical Legal

Scholars' indeterminacy thesis, believe that the law reinforces hierarchical social relations, and concur with the

notion that the law is a limited, perhaps even improper, instrument for pursuing equality.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3480919


SVUDL 2015-2016

29

CASE NEG: SOLVENCY TURN (LOCAL DBS)

Local DNA databases are rapidly expanding now-Federal Regulation like the Plan makes

this worse

Jason Kreag 2015

(Visiting Assistant Professor, University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law “GOING LOCAL: THE FRAGMENTATION OF

GENETIC SURVEILLANCE” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2583957)

The expansion of local DNA databases comes on the heels of a deep and sustained commitment from

Congress to build a national network of DNA databases overseen… local law enforcement agencies have

increasingly sought to create their own, non-CODIS DNA databases… While the FBI continues to exert significant control over law enforcement’s use of DNA databases, its grip is weakening as a result of the

expansion of local databases. This fragmentation, which leaves local agencies increasingly in control of the use of genetic surveillance, is the result of several factors.

They include: 1) restrictions in the CODIS regulations, which, according to many local law enforcement officials,

limit law enforcement’s ability to take full advantage of DNA databases to solve crime; 2) advances in DNA

technology—allowing for quicker processing and the analysis of extremely small biological samples—that have coincided with reduced costs; 3) federal funding that allows local law enforcement officials to bypass the local

budget process; and 4) private firms interested in expanding the use of forensic DNA analysis… the FBI’s

regulations for its use are too restrictive, preventing law enforcement from performing certain searches and from including DNA profiles from certain individuals in CODIS…

Local DNA databases are not required to comply with any of these federal regulations. For example, they are

free to include consensual DNA samples from people deemed merely suspicious… Local DNA databases are also built with DNA processing from private laboratories. Furthermore, local law enforcement is free to set its

own protocols for including and searching partial DNA profiles in their databases and for expunging DNA

records.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2583957


SVUDL 2015-2016

30

CASE NEG: SOLVENCY

The Plan does not solve: police can access a huge range of DNA from commercial databases

despite legal regulations

Shah 14 (Aditi Shah, August 2014, Council for Responsible Genetics, Genetic Privacy and Non-Forensic Biobanks,

http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/L0Z6I8MLM3.pdf)

Another concern about the genetic privacy of customers who submit their DNA to these databases is the

potential for bleeding between different types of databases. Many companies say in their privacy policy that if required by law enforcement authorities, they will disclose personal information without the approval of the

individual. This represents the potential for bleeding, or interaction, between commercial and forensic DNA databases. If law enforcement officials are able to access commercial DNA databases to assist them in their

criminal investigations, what is the difference between the people who willingly submitted their DNA to learn

more about their ancestry and the people who were compelled to submit their DNA upon arrest?

According to the policies of commercial DNA companies and federal law, there is no actual difference since they allow police to use their databases if required. Along with creating a sense of uneasiness for the

customers, this type of interaction shows that the genetic privacy of the customers is almost nonexistent, as

their DNA samples might become subject to forensic search if a court order or legal proceeding says it is necessary. While some may argue that this helps investigators solve crimes, this does not detract from the

larger concern that doing so invades the genetic privacy of millions of people, including the customers and their relatives who share their DNA. The potential for the sharing of information between databases also shows

the disparity between people’s expectations and the reality, as customers usually do not expect police officers

to be able to make use of these commercial databases to find suspects. Also, as mentioned earlier, DNA cannot be canceled as a credit card can be if it is caught in the wrong hands.


SVUDL 2015-2016

31

CASE NEG: IMPACT TURN (CRIME)

Even keeping the DNA of people not convicted helps to reduce crime

Easton 2013 Mark Easton, BBC News, “DNA and individual freedom v crime prevention” http://www.bbc.com/news/uk -

21198259

Last month Jennifer Doleac, assistant professor of public policy and economics at the University of Virginia,

published a paper entitled The Effects of DNA Databases on Crime, which suggested that size matters: "larger DNA databases reduce crime rates".

The paper estimates that each new profile added to the US DNA database - the Combined DNA Index System,

or Codis - resulted in 0.57 fewer serious offences. Uploading a profile costs about $40, which means that in

2010 the database cost the American taxpayer $30.5m but, according to the research paper, saved a whopping $21bn in crime prevention.

Retaining DNA from individuals who are not convicted of an offence is as controversial in the US as it is in the

UK. Some American states do keep samples from people arrested but not convicted while others do not. So the University of Virginia study was able to compare the two approaches.

Ms Doleac calculates that if every state kept the profiles of people arrested but not convicted, the US would

see a fall of 3.2% in murders, 6.6% in rapes and 5.4% in vehicle thefts.

This conclusion flies in the face of current British government policy that does the opposite. In a Commons

debate in October 2011, Home Office Minister James Brokenshire challenged the suggestion "that the more people's DNA is on the database, the more effective it is".

He made the point that in 2004/5 there were 2.8 million people on the database and 35,605 detections. In

2009/10 there were 4.8 million profiles but 32,552 detections.

However, it's also true that in 2008/9 there were 79 murder, manslaughter or rape cases in which DNA was matched to individuals who had been arrested but not convicted.

The Labour party argues that profiles of people arrested but not convicted should be kept for six years rather

than three. The Association of Police Officers says even that change would lead to an extra 1,000 crime/profile

matches a year.

With the murder rate in England and Wales now at its lowest level since Jim Callaghan was prime minister, there are many theories as to why violent crime has seen such a significant fall in recent years. One answer is

the DNA database.


SVUDL 2015-2016

32

CASE NEG: IMPACT TURN (CRIME)

DNA samples more effective than fingerprints because it exposes the blood relatives of

criminals and prevents them from hiding or committing further crimes

Ross 14

(Valerie Ross. “Forget Fingerprints: Law Enforcement DNA Databases Poised To Expand”,

pbs.org,http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/dna-databases/, SIN)

One of the primary concerns with adding arrestees to DNA databases is how much information the samples

could reveal. Proponents say the profiles are similar to mug shots and fingerprinting. In fact, the technique is

often called “genetic fingerprinting.” In terms of how much information they divulge about a person, “they’re effectively just like a fingerprint,” says John Butler, a forensic genetics researcher at the National Institute for

Standards and Technology. They’re sufficiently different from person to person, but they don’t tell you what that person looks like or where they’re from. But unlike fingerprints, DNA is inherited in a far more consistent

way. It shows who’s related to whom—something a standard fingerprint could never reveal.

California, Colorado, Virgina, and Texas are using that to their advantage, employing a technique called familial

search. Law enforcement agencies turn to familial search when a crime scene sample only contains a partial match. That partial match may point investigators to that person’s father, brother, son, or another close

relative, giving them new leads where there otherwise may be none. (Most familial searches use data points on

the Y chromosome, which only men have.) The Supreme Court ruling noted that Maryland’s law forbids familial search, though that particular part of the law hasn’t been tested yet. Still, the technique has been used in

recent high-profile cases, such as the Boston Strangler and Grim Sleeper murders. As databases expand to include more arrestees, familial search will become a more pressing issue.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/dna-databases/

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/07/how-dna-led-to-the-arrest-of-the-grim-sleeper.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/07/how-dna-led-to-the-arrest-of-the-grim-sleeper.html


SVUDL 2015-2016

33

CASE NEG: NARRATIVE

Narrative of Exoneree Gerard Richardson

By Gerard Richardson. New Jersey Star Ledger, June 7, 2014

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/06/wrongly_imprisoned_man_fix_new_jerseys_dna_testing_law_opinion.html

Imagine spending 19 years in prison for a murder you did not commit. Imagine enduring the indignities of life

behind bars, and missing out on the lives of your children and grandchildren, knowing that you are innocent.

Imagine that while you sit in a cell, the real killer is somewhere out there, possibly destroying other lives.

This is my story. In 1994, I was wrongly convicted of the murder of Monica Reyes, a 19-year-old from Elizabeth.

The conviction was based largely on the testimony of a forensic dentist who claimed that my teeth matched a bite mark found on the victim’s body. I always maintained my innocence and refused to give up hope. Finally

last year DNA testing on the bite mark excluded me as the perpetrator, and my conviction was overturned.

I’ve officially been a free man for six months, but I find it difficult to find true closure knowing that the person

who took Monica Reyes’ life has not been found. Even more frustrating is the fact that technical rules are standing in the way of detecting this person.

The DNA testing in my case was conducted by a private California laboratory that specializes in getting results from old, degraded evidence. The FBI, however, will not allow test results from private accredited labs to be

entered into the federal DNA database unless the facility is first reviewed by state forensics experts — either

through a site visit or by obtaining a review conducted by another state.

In my case, a site visit report of the California lab expired, and the New Jersey State Laboratory, likely struggling

with resources, did not send an employee to conduct an in-person site visit. So while the state now has the genetic profile of the true killer from the crime scene, and it could match one of the 10 million criminal

offender profiles in the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS, bureaucratic rules are preventing authorities from uploading the test results into the national databank and potentially solving the crime.

These bureaucratic roadblocks to the DNA dataank can have serious implications for the wrongfully convicted and for public safety in general. For every innocent person behind bars, there is a guilty person who could be

committing more crimes. Of the nation’s 316 DNA exoneration cases such as mine, 153 real perpetrators have

been identified. The actual offenders went on to commit — and be convicted of — more than 30 murders, 70 sexual assaults and 30 additional violent crimes while innocent people were incarcerated.

Assemblyman Gordon Johnson (D-Bergen) and Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) have proposed a sensible law to cut through the red tape and to enhance the use of CODIS as a crime-solving tool in New Jersey. Under their

proposed legislation, a court would be able to order the New Jersey State Laboratory to conduct preapproval of a private facility, provided a judge agrees that it is appropriate. The cost to the state taxpayers would be

negligible because defendants would be responsible for paying any travel expenses associated with the review

process.

The proposal before the Legislature would also permit non-incarcerated individuals to prove their innocence

through DNA testing, helping more wrongfully convicted people finally taste true freedom by clearing their names and enabling law enforcement to identify the true perpetrators of crimes connected to those wrongful

convictions. In other words, this legislation would help the innocent and protect the public’s safety.

Rebuilding my life has not been easy, but I am convinced that something positive can come from the two

decades I undeservingly spent behind bars. I hope the Legislature and Gov. Chris Christie pass and sign this law to give victims like Monica Reyes and her family the justice and closure they deserve and to help exonerate

other wrongfully convicted people like me.

Gerard Richardson of Elizabeth spent nearly two decades in a New Jersey prison for a murder he did not

commit. He was exonerated on Dec. 17.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/06/wrongly_imprisoned_man_fix_new_jerseys_dna_testing_law_opinion.html