Position Essay

Many states and criminal justice systems convict hundreds of thousands of people every year. Although many people are being convicted for crimes they committed, many are also convicted for crimes they did not do. DNA should be used in criminal investigations to convict criminals, but it should not be used to convict people solely on their racial profile.

DNA should be used in evidence because it convicts criminals. Because the goal of any criminal justice system if to accurately identify those guilty of committing a crime, it is important to have methods to effectively do so. DNA testing is a critical and accurate tool in liking accused and even convicting criminals to crimes because it can identify someone’s unique genetic code. This allows investigators to determine the guilty party’s individual sequence of cells left at the crime scene. Everyone has a specific genetic code that is unlike anyone else’s. Due to this, these tests can eliminate all of the people who do not have that type of DNA and can narrow it down to a select few. This information can then lead to an arrest (Lee and Walter 2-4). This is good because they then can catch the real criminal. Furthermore, DNA can be used to prove a person innocent, and it is accurate most of the time. Even though they may convict someone who is innocent, they can later find out who the real criminal is because they had found their DNA samples somewhere at the crime scene. Although DNA is accurate, this is the only reason why DNA should ever be allowed to be used in evidence.

DNA testing should be widely used to assess the guilty or innocent before jail sentences. This is because more than 200 prisoners serving long sentences for serious crimes have been exonerated as a result of DNA tests conducted over a period of approximately fifteen years (Lee and Walter 2-4). Unfortunately, DNA in evidence has the potential to be abused to racially profile people. Darryl Hunt, a black man, who was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder stated that “I always said I was innocent; the question has always been was anybody listening” (pg 1.) Hunt knew that he was innocent, but no one could seem to figure out if he was or not. They did not release him because he is a black man and when they are incarcerated, the criminal justice system believes that they did it because of his race. They did not have any evidence to say that he was guilty. If the police were white, then they would believe more on the white man being innocent then the black. This is also not fair because they are being brought out among all others. They make a big difference out of blacks getting arrested more than anything else. Too often criminal justice systems use racial discrimination and convict people based on their racial profile. This is one example of many reasons why this is an important topic; because real people who are wrongfully convicted lose decades of their lives while sitting in prison (Smith and Hattery 1-8). right before here you are wordy, repetitive, and often times confusing. Previous research has indicated racial bias at all stages of the criminal justice system and explores the degree to which race also shapes wrongful convictions and exonerations (Smith and Hattery 1-8). This should not be how the criminal justice system is. They should be treating everyone fairly and not be biased. It just makes them look bad for what they are going. This treatment is unjust to African Americans because the criminal justice system automatically assumes their guilt.

Out of 250 exonerations, or being proving innocent, only three have been women; in all of these cases the women were just accessories to the crime, not the primary perpetrator (Smith and Hattery 1-8). Women may only make up about 10% or 24 exonerees to be female. The majority of women go to prison for drug offenses and non-violent property crimes, and there is seldom biological evidence available for analysis in drug or property crimes (Smith and Hattery 1-8). When women are in prison who are innocent, they are less likely to be identified and the cases pursued because women do not commit the crimes that reveal themselves to DNA testing. They are not as important in trials. They also don’t contain the types of evidence that can be used to convince a judge to revisit a conviction (Smith and Hattery 1-8). Many women are put into jail each year. The American criminal justice system is plagued by wrongful convictions more frequently than one may expect (Battaglia 1-2), and this is because of eyewitness identification and they do not fix the mistakes that they make, even if it is too late. The Casey Anthony trial generated a maelstrom of media which infected the public’s perception of justice is almost entirely shaped by media. When the media converts the public into an “armchair jury”, and such jury reaches a different verdict than the real jury because this shift in public perception has the potential to generate a negative stigma on the entire American criminal justice system (Battaglia 1-2). The public and media forcefully condemned Casey Anthony and were utterly flabbergasted when she was acquitted. This then created a “wrongfully exoneration” of the defendant because the jury had convicted her when the actual jury acquitted (Battaglia 1-2). Therefore, the wrongful exoneration created the perception that the criminal justice system is not working, it is too soft of a crime, and there are incompetent participants in our system such as judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and jurors (Battaglia 1-2). When they go to trial, they are not seen as important because of their gender. More men are dealt with than women because the criminal justice system seems to think that they are more important.

The example is the exact same way as with Blacks, and Hispanics. Criminal conviction rates in the United States differ dramatically across racial groups. Any person could realize this if they took the time to see the different in incarcerations and exonerations. The jail incarceration