A Colorado Bureau of Investigation forensic scientist manipulated hundreds of DNA test results, including those in a triple murder case. So prosecutors offered Garrett Coughlin a deal allowing him parole after 24 years after he was sentenced to life without parole..
"All of us feel betrayed," said Kathy Eppler, whose two brothers and sister-in-law were murdered.
.
Colorado's crime lab is one of many across the U.S. that have come under fire as the ripple effects of misconduct and lab errors came to light. Colorado authorities have pledged to review DNA testing practices. Eppler believes fixing the system will require a complete overhaul of the lab, greater transparency and more outside oversight.
A scathing report 15 years ago blasted scattershot practices at forensic labs, including shoddy analysis of bite marks and blood splatter, and five years since federal researchers began issuing exacting new standards designed to make forensic science more reliable. Only half of the more than 400 largest crime labs have publicly adopted the standards, reports USA Today.
Experts say many labs are short-staffed and cash-strapped, in some cases receiving hundreds of dollars to complete tests that can cost thousands, such as analyses of rape kits or firearms. Lab results are a crucial piece of evidence in criminal cases, and falling short would undermine their credibility, potentially jeopardizing public safety.
Many labs are connected to law enforcement agencies, which experts say leads to bias and pressure to churn out results that solve cases quickly rather than follow national standards.
When the wrong person is put behind bars, the real perpetrator often goes on to commit more crimes, says Kate Judson of the Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences.
In North Carolina, six perpetrators went on to commit 99 crimes while the wrong people sat in jail. Since 1989, according to the National Registry of Exonerations, more than 1,000 people have been exonerated after being wrongfully convicted of crimes based on false or misleading forensic evidence.
A 2009 National Academy of Sciences report offered recommendations to overhaul the field, including the creation of a powerful, independent federal agency that could provide oversight.
Instead, the report led to the creation of the National Commission on Forensic Science – which was dismantled within months of President Trump taking office in 2017 – and OSAC, the Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science, a federal program tasked with establishing and implementing national standards for forensic science.
OSAC has developed hundreds of standards for everything from how crime labs should be run to how scientists should describe evidence in court.
John Paul "JP" Jones of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, said more than 800 experts in nearly two dozen disciplines helped over a decade to develop the standards.
Most forensic science work is done at the local level, which means the federal government’s power to impose the standards is almost nonexistent. Adopting them is entirely voluntary, and only half of the 423 largest crime labs say they have implemented some of OSAC’s standards, Jones said.