Romney to sign DNA bill today

The legislation, which will expand the state's DNA database from 20,000 samples to nearly 100,000, has enjoyed bipartisan support on Beacon Hill and has been lauded by law enforcement authorities and the relatives of crime victims. John and Magdalen Bish, whose 16-year-old daughter was abducted from her Warren lifeguard post and murdered in June 2000, will be on hand for the signing ceremony today in Sudbury, home of the State Police crime laboratory, where the forensic data and samples are kept.

But even as Romney tells those gathered today that "the long arm of the law just got a little longer," detractors fear that the new law represents a serious encroachment on privacy rights, mostly because several of the hundreds of felonies on the books are low-level offenses. A felony is any crime for which those convicted can be sent to a state prison.

Romney, who campaigned in part on promises to upgrade the state's crime lab, says it's simply a matter of empowering police to solve new crimes and to match data samples to solve old ones.

"I want to make sure that our law enforcement officials have the best possible tools at their disposal to do their jobs and keep our neighborhoods safe," says the text of remarks Romney is expected to deliver today. "The state's DNA database is one of the most important tools they have."

The Massachusetts legislation is similar to laws in 27 other states, and it considerably expands the state's efforts to use DNA to fight crime. The expansion will cost about $3 million a year, though lawmakers say the state will probably qualify for federal aid that will defray some of the cost.

Currently, the state's five-year-old database holds approximately 20,000 DNA samples collected by swabbing the cheeks of those convicted of any of 33 serious or violent felonies. Included on the list of offenses are murder, rape, armed robbery, indecent assault on a child, and manslaughter. State officials share the DNA data with the federal government, which maintains a database that holds samples from all states compiling such information.

Under the new law -- which was championed by Senator Cheryl A. Jacques, Democrat of Needham, and labeled a top priority by House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, Democrat of Mattapan -- the database will expand to nearly 100,000 records in a year's time, officials say. The samples will only be collected from those who are currently behind bars, on parole, or on probation. Felony convicts have a year to submit the samples, under the new law, and they can appeal to have the samples removed from the database if their conviction is subsequently overturned.

Senator Andrea F. Nuciforo Jr., Democrat of Pittsfield, a vociferous opponent of the law, attempted to amend the legislation to exempt certain felonies from the database bill, but his colleagues thwarted that proposal. Now, he says, those convicted of, for example, failure to return library books will be forced to forfeit a piece of their freedom. "The argument for this is, give more information to the government and we will be safer," Nuciforo said yesterday. "I don't buy that. We are safest when we're free."

But Angus McQuilken, Jacques's chief of staff and a Democrat running to fill her seat in a special election next year, says such arguments are not based in reality. "We looked back at criminal records going back to the 1870s, as far back as they go, and we found not a single conviction for crimes like poultry theft," McQuilken said. "If there are crimes that ought not to be felonies, that should be considered as a separate piece of legislation."

State law enforcement authorities have called the law the most significant piece of crime-fighting legislation in decades.

But James Alan Fox, a professor of criminal justice at Northeastern University, said the investment may not be worth it, given that most low-level criminals do not become repeat offenders. "Most low-level criminals will not do it again, so we may be spending lots of resources on collecting and storing a large amount of genetic data for nothing," Fox said.

More problematic, he said, is the possibility that such a large database can quickly become unwieldy and overwhelm law enforcement authorities. If not properly funded and staffed, Fox said, the Massachusetts DNA database could experience problems similar to those recently encountered in Florida and Texas, where officials have been forced to retest thousands of data samples because of problems with labeling and recording information.

"There's a recent, rich history in which overburdened labs have made errors," Fox said.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, which failed to block the collection of inmate DNA in 1998, is considering a lawsuit to stop the new law.

"The ACLU continues to have serious concerns about this databank and this expansion, and we will look at it carefully to consider what we will do in the future," said Sarah Wunsch, an ACLU lawyer.

The Bishes, whose daughter's remains were recently identified through DNA analysis, say the privacy concerns of felony convicts pale in comparison to the concerns of parents who are desperate for authorities to find the killers of their children.

But the Bishes, interviewed yesterday by telephone, also take consolation in the fact that the larger database will help police quickly exonerate innocent suspects of heinous crimes.

"We all get concerned that this is Orwellian, but you're fingerprinted even with a misdemeanor," John Bish said. "No one wants anyone falsely prosecuted, so the science of it makes it that much more precise. We're hoping for the best for this."