Innocence Project by Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld - Essay Sample

Introduction

Introduced by Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, the innocence project is a non-profit legal organization that seeks justice for offenders that have been convicted wrongfully. The group uses DNA testing to get justice and prevent further injustice. According to Innocence Projects, 2.3 %- 5% of people in prisons in the United States are convicted wrongfully. So far, the group has successfully enabled 362 convicts to get their freedom, while 158 real perpetrators were found. The DNA results identify the person at the site of crime. Among the biggest contributors of wrongful convictions is mistaken identification by eyewitnesses. Eyewitnesses often mistake the perpetrators of crime due to tension or malice. Providing DNA evidence thus serves to solve such mistakes. One of the recent cases the organization has solved is that of Lamar Johnson, who was exonerated after being in prison for 13 years for the murder of Baltimore lawyer Carlos Sawyer, as recorded by West & Meterko (2015).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In this organization, ethics must govern all practice since all cases are handled by law experts. While it is exciting to work on proving someone's innocence, science and law must be on par. Every scientific argument that the organization puts up in a court must be reasonable and within the law. To ensure their work does not go down the drain due to simple mistakes, Innocence Projects have a code of ethics that govern them. The most paramount of them is honesty (Roberts, 2018). Even in the absence of a supervisor, every procedure must be done as outlined without taking short cuts. Innocence project picks students to serve in the group in different capacities, be it in the laboratory or the courts. The contract is exclusively between the student and the group, and the institution of learning is not held accountable for any damages. The students must, therefore, read and understand their terms and conditions.

Students are expected to be very honest while at the Innocent Project. The group deals with setting free people, so it is under great scrutiny. It has even been accused that it is a cartel that sets criminals free (Smith, 2010). Every step in the process must be carefully done. DNA is easy to contaminate, yet its extraction and profiling process are quite tedious. However, there should be no shortcuts to achieve the correct results. It may be tempting to switch off the centrifuge before the stipulated time is up. The long hours in the laboratory may tempt a student attached to the laboratory to skip some sterilization steps to finish up fast. However, honesty demands otherwise.

Taking shortcuts, especially for students, may seem easy and ordinary. However, those small mistakes or skipped procedures could cost the firm the whole court case. DNA could be contaminated by air particles, bacterial DNA, DNA from the person handling it, to germs from the benches. Once the wrong type of DNA mixes with the sample, the separation and identification will also be different. DNA is identified as strips. The strips that the Innocence Project is looking for will be mixed up, which corrupts evidence. Diligence and honesty are thus key in these projects to ensure the evidence presented in court meets legal requirements. No matter the length of the procedure, patience and consistency are key.

About honest is the privacy of convicts. DNA contains sensitive information that can be used to frame an individual for another crime. The convicts give the organization their DNA samples voluntarily since there is no binding agreement between the two. The dealings are based on trust. It is therefore expected that the organization protects the privacy of its clients during and after the case. The information must not be used for any other purpose other than to prove the innocence of the concerned parties (Vincent, 2018). Whether they find the client guilty or innocent, they are bound by law to keep their word.

Students working with the Innocence Project find it exciting to structure evidence that sets others free. They, however, must understand the weight of the matter they are working with. Overturning a court ruling can be a tall task. To protect the privacy of its clients, labels could be used to refer to the clients instead of their names. Since information stored in software can be hacked or hard copies land in the wrong hands, it would be better to omit the names. Serial numbers known to the lawyer interacting with them directly will identify the clients. Staff, clients, and students working for the Innocence Project must also be trained in coding to protect client privacy (Suni, 2012). Besides science, all parties involved must know the constitutional consequences of leaking DNA information. In cases where the information is supposed to be shared online, the files must be encrypted as a security measure, and the owner must be made aware through writing. According to Clow & Leach (2015), those who are tested and not convicted also have the freedom to ask that their sample be destroyed and their DNA profile removed from the database.

The law does also not protect scientists from the consequences of negligence. Failure to follow the right laboratory procedures is termed as negligence, and the manufacturers of instruments and reagents are innocent. Product liability under tort law exempts traders from being held liable for any damages (Kirkpatrick, 2009). As long as the instructions on use are indicated and the product was not expired, the scientist is bound to face the consequences of the law. Failure to follow the right procedure in the laboratory due to the desire to achieve quick results or because no one is watching them may land students in trouble.

The yielding of wrong results that could compromise the reputation of another person is a criminal offense. For instance, client x has volunteered to offer his DNA for manipulation (extraction, purification, and identification) to prove his innocence in a case of armed robbery. While handling his sample, the student mixes up the DNA with that of another client Y due to failure to sterilize instruments properly or perform the number of centrifugations provided in the procedure. Suppose client Y was facing petty cash theft. After the identification of the DNA, Y is found guilty of a crime they did not commit. This is an illustration of how little details of honesty can cost the student their whole career and destroy the reputation of the organization. It could face accusations of framing innocent people or acquitting criminals.

Honesty is a major virtue for Innocent Projects. They must deal transparently with both clients and the authorities to protect the client, yet not block investigations by security enforcers. While they must protect the data of their clients as bound by their promise, they must allow security forces to assess the authenticity of data. A balance is thus essential as their client relies on their honesty. The same case applies to laboratory procedures. Staff in the laboratory must be honest with themselves as slight mistakes create a big difference in DNA profiling. Although protected by the law, the same law binds them to ensure their practices remain lawful. The organization works towards ensuring the innocent are set free, and the guilty put behind bars.

References

Clow, K. A., & Leach, A. M. (2015). After innocence: Perceptions of individuals who have been wrongfully convicted. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 20(1), 147-164.

Kirkpartrick J (2009) Product Liability Law: From Negligence to Strict Liability in the US. Business Law review. 4-12

Lawyer's Growing Anxiety About Innocence Projects. Georgetown University Law Center,8-15

Roberts, J., (2018). The Innocence Movement and Misdemeanors. BUL, Rev., 98, 779.

Smith, A. (2010). In Praise Of The Guilty Project: A Criminal Defense

Suni, E. (2012). Ethical Issues for Innocence Projects: An Initial Prime. HeinOnline 1-6

Vincent J. (2018) 23andMe and other DNA-testing firms promise not to share data without consent. The verge 1-3. Retrieved from https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/1/17638680/genetic-data-privacy-consumer-rights-guidelines-23andme-ancestry

West, E., & Meterko, V. (2015). Innocence Project: DNA Exonerations, 1989-2014: Review of Data and Findings from the First 25 Years. Alb. L. Rev., 79, 717.