A new lawsuit accuses the Orange County DA's Office of illegally collecting DNA from thousands of people for its own private database.
The complaint alleges people accused of misdemeanor offenses - often indigent and without an attorney to advise them - are being coerced into giving up their DNA in exchange for leniency.
"People would be arrested for relatively minor things and they would be told "If you give us your DNA then we will just let you go.' And they are being charged for processing fees," says Paul Hoffman, the director of the Civil Rights Litigation Clinic at UC Irvine, which filed the suit on behalf of Orange County taxpayers.
"The DA's Office has created this very extensive DNA database which we think goes beyond what they are allowed to do under state law and which, really, is completely unregulated," he says.
Since the creation of this database was authorized by county supervisors in 2007, it's estimated roughly 200,000 people have had their DNA entered into the system. It was supposed to help solve crimes but the suit says it's resulted in few DNA hits with the "vast majority" of them related to non-violent property crimes.
The DA's Office had this statement: The OCDA DNA collection program has solved crimes that would have never been solved. Participation in this program is completely voluntary, is in no way coercive, and involves multiple layers of safeguards to ensure absolute voluntary participation.
This program helps to prevent mass incarceration in Orange County while having a significant positive impact on stopping future crime. Recidivism is reduced by 43 percent in the year after an individual submits their DNA, according to University of Virginia professor Jennifer Doleac’s 2017 study ‘The effects of DNA databases on the deterrence and detention of offenders.’ The OCDA DNA program protects the public, prevents additional victimization, and provides individuals with a path out of the criminal justice system.
The professor plaintiffs should know better and I had much higher expectations for the University of California, Irvine and their professors that their legal research would have been thorough and accurate. The outrageous allegation that these materials are not subject to the most stringent of controls is absurd.