
Dec. 31, 2003, 1:37PM
DNA analyst fired from crime lab
Faulty work cited in teen's conviction in rape case
By ROMA KHANNA
Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle
The DNA analyst whose faulty laboratory work helped send a
teenager to prison for rape has been fired, nine months after the
defendant was released because new tests excluded him as a suspect in
the crime.
Christy Kim, a 21-year Houston Police Department veteran, is
the only analyst from the department's troubled crime lab who has been
fired since DNA testing was suspended last year.
|
CHRISTY KIM
TIMELINE
|
|
1982: Joins the Houston Police Department
1999: Tells jurors during Josiah Sutton's trial that
evidence from a rape is an exact DNA match for the defendant.
March 2003: New tests exclude Sutton as a suspect in
the case. He is released from prison on bond and seeks a pardon.
September 2003: Kim is suspended with pay.
December 2003: Suspended indefinitely and
appeals.
|
Two high-ranking department supervisors resigned to avoid
being
fired in June, but no analyst has received more than a seven-day
suspension.
Kim was indefinitely suspended Monday for her work in the case
against Josiah Sutton, who was a 17-year-old former high school
football player when he was convicted of a 1998 rape largely on the
weight of DNA evidence that has since been discredited.
"It is about time," said William Thompson, a University of
California-Irvine professor who helped expose some of HPD's lab errors.
"Slap-on-the-wrist suspensions are not going to solve problems at that
lab."
But Kim has maintained that problems with DNA testing at the
HPD crime lab are the products of poor management and institutional
flaws that left analysts unaware of the latest technology in their
field. She filed an appeal of her discipline Tuesday.
"Ms. Kim is just a bench worker who could not have controlled
any of the things she is charged with," said Fred Keys, her lawyer.
"They were begging for help, and they didn't get it."
During Sutton's trial, Kim's testimony suggested that evidence
from the crime scene was an exact match for Sutton's DNA. But retests
of the evidence, conducted by a private lab in March, excluded Sutton
as a contributor to the samples, discrediting Kim's work.
A review of her analysis found that she could have excluded
Sutton as a suspect at the time of the trial and that the match she
presented to jurors as unique could, in fact, have been found in any
one in 16 black men, according to Thompson.
Sutton's case is one of nearly 400 receiving new DNA testing
after HPD shut down the DNA division of its crime lab last year. To
date, private labs have analyzed evidence from about 120 cases, with
problems such as insufficient samples or statistical discrepancies
arising in 23 cases. Sutton is the only defendant who has been released
from prison.
Kim was cited for numerous errors in the Sutton case,
including failing "to use sound judgment" when she used the wrong
calculations to assess the strength of the match between the evidence
and Sutton's DNA, according to the Monday letter notifying her of her
punishment. She also violated department policy when she tested DNA
though she knew she did not meet the FBI's standards for education and
training for analysts, the letter says.
An HPD spokesman confirmed that Kim has been fired but
declined to comment. Mayor Lee Brown, who signed the letter dismissing
her, did not return a call for comment.
Keys said he believes Kim has strong grounds for appeal.
"The way DNA was analyzed at the time is different than the
type
of tests they use now, and the way she did those calculations, that was
lab policy at the time," said Keys, adding that Kim labored under
outdated lab protocols. "It would be like trying to get a carpenter to
build you a house and telling him he couldn't have a hammer or nails."
Keys notes that Kim was among six crime lab employees who
approached former Police Chief C.O. Bradford about problems at the lab
in 1999.
"They took their concerns to the highest level," he said.
"What more could they have done?"
Keys used these arguments successfully to fight a 14-day
suspension that Bradford recommended for Kim in June after an internal
police investigation found errors in her work on several other criminal
cases. She was cited for misrepresenting the statistical strength of
DNA matches, failing to analyze all available evidence in one capital
murder case and compiling sloppy paperwork, according to city records.
Kim argued she was merely following department guidelines,
saying the lab's problems were the result of systemic problems and poor
management, and a review panel reduced her suspension to a written
reprimand in September.
Thompson, who has reviewed Kim's work, agreed that DNA
technology has improved since Sutton's case was analyzed but said those
changes in no way account for the faulty results.
"It has nothing to do with the technology," he said. "She was
simply using the wrong calculations, and it is apparent just from
looking at her lab work, without even conducting new tests. To suggest
that changes in technology account for her errors is simply wrong."
Thompson also noted concerns about Kim's other work, including
statistical errors similar to those in the Sutton case that have been
exposed in four other cases.
Bob Wicoff, the lawyer who handled Sutton's case when the DNA
was retested, said firing Kim is a necessary step if HPD wants to
restore faith in its lab.
"I am sorry for Ms. Kim, but it is probably best that she not
be around anymore," he said. "The way this whole mess should go is with
a clean sweep."
|