This story is free to read because readers choose to support LAist. If you find value in independent local reporting, make a donation to power our newsroom today.
This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.
This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.
Desperately Seeking DNA: D.A. Wants Review Of Collection Ban
District Attorney Steve Cooley announced today that he sent a letter to CA Attorney General Kamala Harris urging her to seek a state Supreme Court review of the appellate ruling earlier this month that prohibits officials from collecting arrestee DNA samples, according to a news release.
Calling the state Court of Appeal decision “result-oriented,” Cooley said in a letter to Attorney General Kamala D. Harris that the ruling “cries out for an objective and well reasoned analysis by the High Court.”
Cooley was a supporter of Proposition 69, the “DNA Fingerprint, Unsolved Crime and Innocence Protection Act”, that passed in 2004 requiring felony arrestees to provide samples of DNA. If not charged or if acquitted, arrestees could have their sample removed from the database.
“Justice Anthony Kline, who wrote the decision, went out of his way to condemn police, insinuating that they use the law to arrest people falsely to illegally obtain evidence,” the District Attorney said. “Nothing could be further from the truth.”
Cooley, making an example of the Grim Sleeper case, said police do not need to make arrests to legally get a DNA sample, noting that detectives obtained Lonnie Franklin Jr.'s DNA evidence from a piece of pizza he threw away at a restaurant.
“This ruling does a disservice to the victims and survivors of crimes including rape and murder,” Cooley said. “The current law is just and contains adequate safeguards to prevent abuse of an individual’s rights.
You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our connected community. We are free to tell the full truth, to hold power to account without fear or favor, and to follow facts wherever they lead. Our only loyalty is to our audiences and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen our community.
Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive from readers like you will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.
If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive from readers like you will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.
If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.
Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief
