Crimes Are Us

 

From the true crime department, come some recent interesting stories of note:

The New York Times reported on how internet attacks are becoming more potent. They singled out distributed denial of service (D.D.O.S) attacks, routinely used during political and military conflicts such as in Estonia in 2007 during a political fight with Russia, and in the Georgian-Russian war last summer. Such attacks are also being used in blackmail schemes and political conflicts, as well as for general malicious mischief.

DNA is now being used to assist in solving property crimes. Once reserved mostly for violent cases such as rape and murder, genetic testing is now much cheaper and faster than when the technology was new. The evidence can include almost any biological material left at a crime scene: saliva taken from food, skin cells from the steering wheel of a stolen car, drops of blood from a thief who got cut on a window pane.

The Washington Post profiled David R. Fowler, Maryland's chief medical examiner, whose lab is one of the busiest in the country with more than 4,000 autopsies conducted annually. Fowler said he is amused at the public perception fueled by the 6 o'clock news. "They always say,'The body has been sent to the medical examiner to determine the exact cause of death.'"  Some cases are obvious -- gunshot and stab wounds, for example -- but more often pathologists must call on their experience and their 13 years of medical training, consult with police and peers, and then make what is essentially a judgment call. And they must do so with the expectation that they'll have to defend it in court.

This year, the Supreme Court will tackle a DNA issue involving a convict seeking new tests he thinks could exonerate him, in a case pitting the administration of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin against a Republican-appointed judge. Some in law enforcement fear that federal courts could be flooded with lawsuits if the Supreme Court upheld April's appeals court ruling in the convict's case. "A blanket right to post-conviction DNA testing would be a dangerous prospect," said Chris Asplen, former director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence and a former prosecutor. He said any Supreme Court ruling should be limited and "highly qualified."