Why isn't $8M set aside for DNA innocence testing not being used?

[babylonsister]

DNA innocence testing for convicts on back burner

By Richard Willing, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Since 2006, the Justice Department has yet to spend any of the $8 million set aside by Congress for DNA tests for convicts to prove their innocence while it has used $214 million to collect DNA from convicted criminals and improve crime labs, records show.

"DNA evidence is such a powerful tool in proving guilt or innocence that it's inexcusable not to use it," says Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the chief sponsor of a bill to provide more funding for what is known as innocence testing.

If spent, the $8 million could affect dozens of cases, says Barry Scheck, a defense lawyer who specializes in using DNA to overturn convictions. Exact costs for a DNA test vary from case to case.

Rules imposed by Congress have made it difficult for states to qualify for post-conviction DNA grants, says the department's National Institute of Justice, which administers the funds. Only Virginia, Connecticut and Arizona have applied.

The law requires a state's attorney general to certify that the state requires police departments to take "reasonable measures" to preserve biological evidence for possible future testing.

more...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-10-DNA_N.htm

[Deep13]

1. There are only a limited number of cases that can benefit from it.

I don't know about the specifics of the Innocence Project, but DNA evidence is only useful if:

1. DNA was preserved from the crime,
2. It or its results are still available,
3. Identity was at issue at trial,
4. DNA evidence demonstrates innocence on the issue of identity.

The text book case is where someone is raped by a stranger and the victim mistakenly identifies the wrong person as the rapist.

If, on the other hand, it was rape by an acquaintance and the defense either claims it did not happen or that it was consensual, then DNA will not solve that. Identity is already known and probably no sample was collected. Another common situation is where the crime is not reported for awhile and no physical evidence remains.

[flashl]

2. Wasn't there reports that some states have destroyed evidence?

In one case that I was close to, the state had mishandled the evidence, therefore, results would not be reliable.

Send it ALL to Texas. The Houston police found 280 boxes of lost evidence from the Houston Police crime lab that affected cases from about 1979 to 1991, evidence that might be linked to more than 379 cases.

[babylonsister]

3. I remember that; there was one really lazy, incompetent person

and I guess, by extension, her staff, that caused that mess IIRC.