True Crime Thursday – Mishandled DNA Affects Hundreds of Colorado Cases

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons, CCA-SA 3.0

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

In September 2023, reports were made that “star” forensic scientist Yvonne “Missy” Woods mishandled DNA evidence. In October 2023, she was placed on administrative leave. In November, 2023, after almost 30 years with the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Woods retired to avoid termination.

CBI launched an internal affairs investigation into Woods’s conduct and the results were released on June 5. 2024. 

Some of their findings included:

“In 2014, a coworker questioned Woods’ testing of evidence in a case and reported concerns to a Technical Leader.

In 2018, Woods was accused of data manipulation. In response, she was removed from casework and given other duties pending a review of the accusation.

After the review, Woods was later reinstated.

The results of the 2018 review were not escalated to the former CBI Director or CDPS leadership.

CBI has initiated additional investigations into the circumstances surrounding the 2018 process.”

 

As of the date of the report, 654 cases had been identified as affected by Woods’s data manipulation. The report goes on to say:

“[The investigation] revealed that Woods manipulated data in the DNA testing process, leading to incomplete test results in certain cases. It also found she concealed her activities from the technical review process. She engaged in the deletion and alteration of data, and she failed to provide thorough documentation in case records related to certain tests performed.

While the review did not find evidence of Woods falsifying DNA matches or fabricating DNA profiles, Woods deviated from standard testing protocols and cut corners, raising concerns about the reliability of her testing.”

The investigation continues, with Woods’s cases back to 1994 being reviewed. CBI said they would not release further information because of an ongoing criminal investigation.

Parts of a November interview between Woods and investigators were played by 9News.com in July 2024. Initially, Woods’s answers were: “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember.” When asked why she altered or omitted test results, she answered, “I think I’m burned out.”

Later in the interview, her answers were more revealing:

“The implications were not even a thought and I think that for that stuff it, it was like click done, move on, click done, move on and not even, not even an additional thought…I don’t know any of these people. I don’t have any reason to pick this one and not the next one that I took forward all the way through whatever.”

[Investigator] Hassenstab asked her how she felt about what she was doing and if she felt bad about it. 

Woods said, “I didn’t even think about it. I didn’t even think about it until five weeks ago.”

Five weeks ago refers to when she was removed from her position and retired shortly afterward.

According to CNN, a week after Woods’s resignation, a federal lawsuit was filed alleging James Hunter was wrongly convicted of burglary and sexual assault in 2002 based on “fabricated and false [hair] evidence” examined and tested by Woods.

Westword.com reports a lab worker recounted an incident in 2014 or 2015 when “Woods allegedly threw away fingernail clippings that were assumed to be evidence.”

Woods came in, brushed the fingernail clippings in her hand, and threw them in the biohazard or garbage bin,” the worker said, telling investigators she was “99 percent” sure the clippings were evidence.

James Karbach, director of legislative policy and external communications for Office of the State Public Defender says, “This has become about more than just one longstanding analyst tampering with evidence and deleting data, but it also is about the systemic failures of an accredited state crime lab, the people, and the processes that should have stopped this from happening over and over for years…there have likely been hundreds of public defender clients who were given intentionally manipulated data and who were prosecuted with unreliable evidence.”

Misconduct raises concerns not only of wrongful conviction, but also that guilty parties may walk free. If courts rule DNA evidence was mishandled, cases can be thrown out.  

~~~

TKZers: Have you heard of other crime labs where evidence can’t be considered reliable? Does this scenario inspire story ideas? An innocent person wrongly imprisoned? A killer skates because mishandled evidence is thrown out?

~~~

Cover by Brian Hoffman

 

 

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree is a legal doctrine that says if evidence is illegally obtained, it’s not admissible in court. It’s also the title of Debbie Burke’s new thriller.

Preorder sales link. 

True Crime Thursday – DNA Solves Cold Cases

by

Debbie Burke

@burke_writer 

Memo to Criminals: If the statute of limitations hasn’t expired, don’t send your DNA to 23andMe.

wikimedia.org

The combined tools of genealogy and DNA databases are solving old murder cases.

Until recent years, a DNA sample from a crime scene meant little unless it matched an already existing profile in a law enforcement database. But the popularity of DIY home DNA tests adds a new wrinkle.

People seeking their ethnic roots send cheek swabbings to genetic genealogy databases like GEDmatch.com. There, DNA samples are used to build family trees reaching generations back in history.

While you may find it interesting that Mary Queen of Scots or Jesse James is a distant relative, what happens if your DNA also shows you’re related to a criminal?

Most famously, the Golden State Killer was linked to decades of murders and rapes based on DNA information from Parabon Labs.  Parabon claims to have helped solve 30 cold cases. According to their website:

“Genetic genealogy has traditionally been used to discover new relatives and build a full family tree. However, it can also be used to discover the identity of an unknown individual by using DNA to identify relatives and then using genealogy research to build family trees and deduce who the unknown individual could be. These techniques…apply equally as well to forensic applications. Genetic genealogy has been used to identify victims’ remains, as well as suspects, in a number of high-profile cases. Most recently, genetic genealogy was used to zero in on a suspect in the Golden State Killer case.”

Law enforcement can request information from consumer DNA databanks to trace suspects in unsolved crimes. But ethics concerns are on the rise after the founder of GEDmatch allowed access in an assault case in Utah without first informing its customers.

Surveys indicate most people believe consumer DNA databases should be used in cases of violent crimes. But what about offenses like credit card fraud or unpaid child support?

TKZers, have you sent your DNA to a database like 23andMe, Ancestry.com, Family Tree, My Heritage, etc.?

Are you concerned about the privacy of your genetic profile?

Where would you draw the line for law enforcement uses? Violent crimes? Non-violent felonies? Misdemeanors?

At the beck and call of…

By John Ramsey Miller

In the early fifties William Faulkner once answered the question as to why he didn’t have a telephone by saying, “I won’t be at the beck and call of any son of a bitch with a nickel.” Calls were cheaper then, and people who couldn’t get a private line often used public phones. I know Bill did have a telephone because there’s one on the kitchen wall at his home, Rowan Oak, in Oxford, Mississippi, with his friends names and numbers penciled on the wall by his and his wife’s hand. Well, he may have said that before his wife decided she wanted everybody with a telephone to be at her beck and call. While there was bourbon in his writing room, there was no telephone.

Recently when I wrote a phone booth into a manuscript and my editor told me there were no such things in New York City any more, just kiosks, which are becoming rarer these days due to cell phones in every pocket––even those pockets without the price of a public phone kiosk call in them. We can communicate with anybody any time, and even pre-tens have cell phones. One crisp winter morning while I was sitting in a stand in the woods in Mississippi deer hunting I got a call from my agent telling me that the first draft of SIDE BY SIDE had been accepted as written. Ten minutes after hanging up, I shot a deer. After I pulled the trigger, I got a second call, this one from a friend on another part of the property asking if that had been my shot he’d heard. Not long ago I was on a panel in New York at Thrillerfest when my son decided to call me to see what I was doing. I covered the phone with my hand to mute it until it fell silent, then I took it out and turned it off. Holy Moto interruption, Batman.

A couple of years back I saw someone using their cell phone to take a picture and I commented to them, “I have a camera that does that.” Today’s cell phones do everything but mix drinks. I’ve been told that mine has games in it, a 5 megapixel camera, a video camera, texting capabilities, a calculator, access to the internet, an audio recording feature, a choice of ring tones, an alarm clock, a clock-clock, and more, but I merely use mine for phone calls. My kids laugh at me because I don’t know what I can accomplish with the tiny privacy invader. And nothing bugs me more than getting a pocket call from someone who sat on the phone and I have to listen to their conversation with someone else, or background noise, while I’m hollering into my phone at them trying to get their attention to complain. Evidently sound enters a pocket easily, but doesn’t travel from one worth a damn.

I am old enough to remember when Dick Tracy wore a wrist watch with a radio in it and how ridiculous and futuristic that seemed at the time. I remember how badly I wanted one, and now for less than $200.00 I can have my choice of several. They make one that also plays music. Check it out: http://www.lightinthebox.com/wholesale-Watch-Style-Cell-Phone_c1298/All-3?gclid=CKGh-uaCu5YCFRKAxgodSSfkmg

The worst thing about writing modern fiction is the problem of instant communication. You can write a technology that doesn’t exist and nobody bats an eye. In one book recently I devised a test (not yet accepted by courts, but in a beta existence) that gave my protagonist DNA results in hours instead of a couple of weeks, and nobody said anything. Because everybody who watches CSI “anywhere” thinks that instant DNA results and access to everybody’s DNA in that city is in a fancy computer database along with fingerprints. If you watch any fictional cop show you see technology at use that (if it existed) would cost cash strapped departments millions of dollars. On TV they do autopsies using holographic images they can view from any angle. In one thriller two men exchanged their actual physical features like they’d exchange two-dollar masks. This is despite the fact that the actors had totally different voices, body types and facial bone structure, and they totally fooled people who’d known them for years. How many cops and criminals are that good an actor.

I use modern technology in my plots because––in a world of nanny cams available for a few dollars–– you can’t ignore it, but I have to admit a burning desire to write a book set in the time of scarce phone booths, mobsters who have to be found by their bosses, villains who can’t listen in on the good guys by merely aiming a laser at a window, can’t use GPS to monitor people’s movements from a distance, fire a rifle and kill someone 1500 yards away, make a bomb that can fit into a tube of lipstick, move around the country in private jets, hack into computers, and all the things that make life easier for all of us. I wanted to set a thriller in 1917 a while back––against the backdrop of a famous murder trial––but was informed that period thrillers didn’t sell. Truth is, I’d love to be able to set a thriller during the War Between the States one of these days.

For a long time we have been living in a world catering to instant gratification, and nothing proves that like our need for immediate communication. I have seen people out in the middle of nowhere take out a cell phone and freak out when they can’t get a signal. I have to admit, it’s odd not to be able to get a signal anywhere these days, and it’s getting to where the absence of a signal is very unusual even out here in the middle of nowhere. I only get irritated when I’m doing something important to me and I am interrupted by someone who basically just wants to break up their day by chit-chatting. I don’t mind being called by someone with something to say––especially when I want to hear what they have to say, but sometimes I, like old Bill Faulkner, resent being at the beck and call of…. Well you know.