For the last 20 years, Barry Scheck has devoted his time to using DNA to reform the justice system.

Scheck, an attorney, DNA expert and co-founder of the Innocence Project, has set standards for the reforming of national policies in the criminal justice system. He works specifically to free the wrongfully convicted through DNA testing. Scheck spoke at Hendricks Chapel on Tuesday as the final speaker of the semester for the University Lecture Series.

Started in 1992, the Innocence Project focuses on changing the current state of the justice system when it comes to innocent people. The project consists of attorneys who look at cases of convicted criminals who may have been wrongfully accused. They use DNA testing to build a case for those individuals.

“Our goal is to protect the innocent and enhance the capability to find and convict the guilty,” Scheck said.

When deciding which cases to take on, “the Innocence Project chooses cases where we are able to use DNA to prove innocence,” Scheck said. “And then we build on the case using other evidence.”

Prior to this, the use of DNA testing was not allowed to prove innocence of past convictions, he said. Reform was a long process that worked its way from state to state.

“When bad things happen in a complex system, the problem is rarely a single cause, but is caused by complex errors,” Scheck said. “(The Innocence Project) works to reduce errors in the system through the use of scientifically reliable evidence,” he added.

Since 1989, 312 wrongfully accused individuals were released from prison due to proof provided by DNA tests, Scheck said. To minimize the issues and number of individuals that are in prison for crimes they haven’t committed, the Innocence Project works to create reforms and practices that can be applied to the justice system.

Scheck said 75 percent of incorrect arrests are made because of misidentification. In order to reduce this, the Innocence Project suggests that police make clear to the individual identifying the criminal that they should not make a decision unless they are sure. In addition, police and forensic teams should use blind identification when looking at evidence to ensure there is no bias. Currently eight states have adopted this reform, he said.

Invalidated forensic evidence is also a leading cause for wrongful accusations. Fifty percent of individuals are locked away because of these errors, Scheck said.

“Forensic science professionals have yet to establish either their approach or the accuracy of their conclusions, so the Department of Justice and the National Science Foundation work to set standards that are used nationwide,” he added.

In the past, forensic scientists have used fingerprints to identify a criminal, but even that isn’t full proof. As seen in the Brandon Mayfield case, partial fingerprints and print matching can be wrong. Mayfield was put into jail immediately after his fingerprint matched most closely to a partial print found on the remains of an Al-Qaeda bomb that blew up a train in Spain, Scheck said, but he was later found innocent.

After this case, the FBI implemented new reforms to prevent this from happening again, he said.

Tatiana Del-Solar, a graduate student in the bio-medical forensic science department, said Scheck delivered an interesting lecture.

Said Del-Solar: “I think the most impactful part of his lecture is how many years they were in prison and the statistics that he gave.”

Published on November 11, 2014 at 11:22 pm

Contact Ali: Ali Linan