More than 25,000 DNA samples that could prove an accused person?s innocence or guilt were not analyzed by the Maryland State Police or entered into the DNA database over a three-year period, a new audit of the agency revealed Monday.
“The collection of DNA samples is critical,” said state Sen. Nathaniel McFadden, D-District 45, who co-chairs the state legislature?s Joint Audit Committee. “It?s extremely important. You get a number of people who are convicted who say, ?It wasn?t me.? DNA can establish your guilt or your innocence.”
The lack of analysis of critical DNA data was one of several negative findings in a Maryland General Assembly Office of Legislative Audits report released Monday.
The report found that between May 16, 2003, and April 30, 2006, Maryland State Police failed to maintain procedures to ensure that all civil child support warrants, protective orders and reports on missing children were entered into necessary databases.
The state police also failed to ensure the accuracy of crime data submitted by local agencies to the FBI?s Uniform Crime Report and did not sufficiently monitor firearms sales, the audit found.
“Our audit also disclosed that procedures for monitoring firearm sales were not adequate to ensure that background checks were performed for all gun sales or that guns sold contained the required safety devices,” Legislative Auditor Bruce Myers wrote.
McFadden, who represents Baltimore City, said he was very concerned by the audit?s findings on gun control, especially in his district.
“We have to make sure people who purchase the guns are who they say they are,” he said.
The audit also found that state police failed to adequately monitor the school-bus safety enforcement grant program to ensure the grant funds were being used as intended.
Maryland State Police spokesman First Sgt. Russell Newell said the department plans to correct its shortcomings quickly.
“The department works to correct the deficiencies as quickly as possible to ensure we?re back in compliance with the prescribed standards,” he said.
In a written response to the audit, Secretary of the Maryland State Police Thomas Hutchins said his agency?s DNA backlog was created by lack of resources.
“The backlog remains due to the fact that new offenders are constantly entering the system,” he wrote.
Hutchins also said he disagreed with the audit?s findings about his agency?s monitoring of gun sales, child support warrants, protective ordersor the accuracy of data in its Uniform Crime Reports.
“There is no state law or requirement for the department to conduct audits of UCR data at submitting agencies,” he wrote.
Even though he authored a critical audit of the state police, Myers wrote that the department has made improvement since a critical 2004 audit.
The agency has made “significant progress,” he wrote.
STATE POLICE AUDIT
Between May 16, 2003, and April 30, 2006, Maryland State Police failed to do the following:
» Analyze or enter into a DNA database approximately 25,100 DNA samples collected from individuals as required by law
» Collect DNA samples from certain individuals as required by law
» Maintain procedures to ensure that all civil child support warrants, protective orders and reports on missing children were entered into certain databases as required by law
» Control for sufficient monitoring of firearms sales
» Ensure the accuracy of crime data submitted by local agencies for inclusion in the FBI?s Uniform Crime Report
» Monitor adequately the school-bus safety enforcement grant program to ensure the grant funds were being used as intended
? Source: General Assembly Maryland State Police, February 2007 Audit Report
