Jump to content
Photograph of Smith River by Allen Chronister
Montana Department of Justice  ·  Attorney General Mike McGrath

Guest Editorial

ATTORNEY GENERAL MIKE MCGRATH
STATE OF MONTANA

WRONGFUL IMPRISONMENT PUTS FORENSICS ON TRIAL
By MIKE MCGRATH

The release last week of a man imprisoned for 15 years for a crime he didn't commit causes all of us in the law enforcement community to reflect on our responsibilities to society and to take a hard look at our cases. Our sympathy and concern go out to Jimmy Ray Bromgard and his family. We are also concerned for the victim of this crime, a woman who must now live with the knowledge that her assailant may remain in the community.

The Bromgard case also makes us appreciate the significant technical advances that have been made in forensic science. That evolution also presents new challenges to Montanans involved in law enforcement, forensic science and criminal justice.

Biological comparisons
Crime labs, like the one in Missoula, compare DNA from a crime scene - blood, saliva, semen, for example - with other DNA samples in hopes of finding out whom the sample "belongs" to.

A typical comparison looks at eight sites in the DNA. If even one site does not match, that sample - and the person with that DNA - is excluded. As more and more sites match, the odds that the DNA samples are not from the same person can become astronomical.

In 1995, the Montana Legislature established a DNA identification index. By law, the index includes DNA records for every felony offender and for youth offenders found guilty of a sexual or violent offense. It also includes DNA samples recovered from crime scenes, medical examinations and unidentified human remains.

Montana is also one of 42 states to participate in a federal DNA databank called the Combined DNA Index System or CODIS. Through CODIS, federal, state and local crime labs can exchange and compare DNA profiles electronically.

Each week, Montana crime lab staff members upload profiles of DNA samples from convicted offenders and from cases in which there is a sample - blood, semen, saliva, for example - but no known suspects.

Later, the CODIS system "turns on itself" and looks for matches between newly submitted samples and those already in the system.

It is worth noting that links between forensic science and computer technology are not limited to DNA evidence. Montana recently became the first state in the country to operate the National Fingerprint File, a nationwide database that allows states and the federal government to share fingerprint data.

Reliable evidence
The case of Jimmy Ray Bromgard and cases like it around the country have put forensic science, quite literally, under the microscope.

For labs to include their DNA test results in the CODIS database, the integrity of that evidence must be beyond question. Each lab's procedures, facilities and staff must meet standards set by the DNA Advisory Board, a national governing body for the DNA sections of crime labs.

The state lab in Missoula moved two years ago into a state-of-the-art facility. The lab and the specialists who work there consistently meet or exceed the requirements of the advisory board. Annually, the Montana lab successfully completes demanding technical audits.

With improvements in technology comes an increased demand for postconviction DNA testing. Postconviction testing, who should get it and how the results should be handled present a number of significant legal questions for attorneys and judges around the country.

My office has proposed legislation to address the postconviction DNA testing. While the legislation is in its earliest stages, it is based on three criteria.

The case of Jimmy Ray Bromgard is a personal tragedy for him and many others. It also presents enormous challenges and encourages a closer look at the responsibilities of everyone in the criminal justice system. Through the advancement of science and the improvement of investigative procedures, we can now do more than simply hope it will never happen again.

#