[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 14, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S289-S293]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Specter, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs.
Clinton, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Carper, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Durbin,
Mr. Leahy, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Craig, Mr. Warner, Mrs. Murray,
Mr. Edwards, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Allen, Ms. Landrieu,
Mr. Kohl, and Ms. Stabenow):
S. 152. A bill to assess the extent of the backlog in DNA analysis of
rape kit samples, and to improve investigation and prosecution of
sexual assault cases with DNA evidence; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise along with the distinguished Senior
Senator from Pennsylvania, Senator Specter, to introduce the DNA Sexual
Assault Justice Act of 2003, a bill that guarantees prompt justice to
victims of sexual assault crimes through DNA technology. This bill is
not new to my colleagues. Last session, I introduced the DNA Sexual
Assault Justice Act with Senators Specter, Cantwell, Clinton, and
Schumer. The bill was voted favorably out of the Judiciary Committee
with the key support of my good friend across the aisle, Senator
Specter. And in September, with twenty co-sponsors, Republicans and
Democrats, the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act unanimously passed the
Senate. Regrettably, our House counterparts were not able to act so
quickly or decisively on a DNA bill, so I am back to re-introduce the
bill and to urge quick passage of the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of
2003. I am pleased that, once again, this bill has strong bipartisan
support and I look forward to working with my good friend from Utah,
the distinguished Senior Senator, Senator Hatch, in acting promptly in
marking up this bill when he assumes chairmanship of the Judiciary
Committee.
Promoting and supporting DNA technology as a crime-fighting tool is
not a new endeavor for me. A provision of my 1994 Crime Bill created
the Combined DNA Index System, called ``CODIS'', which is an electronic
database of DNA profiles, much like the FBI's fingerprint database.
CODIS includes two kinds of DNA information, convicted offender DNA
samples and DNA from crime scenes. CODIS uses the two indexes to
generate investigative leads in crimes where biological evidence is
recovered from the scene. In essence, CODIS facilitates the DNA match.
And once that match is made a crime is solved because of the incredible
accuracy and durability of DNA evidence.
99.9 percent--that is how accurate DNA evidence is. 1 in 30 billion,
those are the odds someone else committed a crime if a suspect's DNA
matches evidence at the crime scene. 20 or 30 years, that is how long
DNA evidence from a crime scene lasts.
Just ten years ago DNA analysis of evidence could have cost thousands
of dollars and taken months; now testing one sample costs $40 and can
take days. Ten years ago forensic scientists needed blood the size of a
bottle cap, now DNA testing can be done on a sample the size of a
pinhead. The changes in DNA technology are remarkable, and mark a sea
change in how we can fight crime, particularly sexual assault crimes.
The FBI reports that since 1998 the national DNA database has helped
put away violent criminals in 6,257 investigations in 40 States. How?
By matching the DNA crime evidence to the DNA profiles of offenders.
Individual success stories of DNA ``cold hits'' in sexual assault cases
make these numbers all too real.
Just last month, Alabama authorities charged a man in the rape of an
85-year-old woman almost ten years ago after he was linked to the case
by a DNA sample he was compelled to submit while in prison on unrelated
charges.
In Colorado Springs, CO, a trial will soon begin of a man accused of
at least fourteen rapes and sexual assaults. Due to the national DNA
database, prosecutors were able to trace the defendant to rapes and
assaults that occurred in Colorado, California, Arizona, Nevada and
Oklahoma between 1999 and 2002.
In Florida, Kellie Green was brutally attacked and raped in the
laundry room of her apartment complex. Because of lack of funds, her
rape kit sat on the shelf for three years until a persistent detective
had it analyzed. The evidence matched the profile of a man already
incarcerated for beating and raping a woman 6 weeks before Kellie.
Or take, for example, a 1996 case in St. Louis where two young girls
were abducted from bus stops and raped at opposite ends of the city.
The police were unable to identify a suspect. In 1999, the police
decided to re-run the DNA testing to develop new leads. In January
2000, the DNA database matched the case to a 1999 rape case, and police
were able to identify the perpetrator.
Last spring, the New York Police Department arrested a man linked to
the rape of a woman years ago. In 1997, a woman was horribly beaten,
robbed and raped, there were no suspects. Five years later, the
perpetrator submitted a DNA sample as a condition of probation after
serving time for burglary. The DNA sample matched the DNA from the 1997
rape. Crime solved, streets safer.
Undoubtedly, DNA matching by comparing evidence gathered at the crime
scene with offender samples entered on the national DNA database has
proven to be the deciding factor in solving stranger sexual assault
cases--it has revolutionized the criminal justice system, and brought
closure and justice for victims.
In light of the past successes and the future potential of DNA
evidence, the reports about the backlog of untested rape kits and other
crime scene evidence waiting in police warehouses are simply shocking.
It is a national problem, plaguing both urban and rural areas, that
deserves national attention and solutions. One woman, in particular,
has reminded State and Federal lawmakers that we cannot ignore even one
rape kit sitting on a shelf gathering dust, Debbie Smith. In 1989, Mrs.
Smith was brutally taken from her home and raped. There were no known
suspects and Mrs. Smith lived in fear of her attacker's return. Six
years later, the Virginia crime laboratory discovered a DNA match
between the rape scene evidence and a State prisoner's DNA sample. Mrs.
Smith had her first moment of real security and closure and since then,
she has traveled the country to advocate on behalf of assault victims
and champion the use of DNA to fight sexual assault. I am pleased that
the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2003 bears a provision entitled,
``The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grants.''
Today I am introducing legislation, ``The DNA Sexual Assault Justice
Act of 2003'', to strengthen the existing Federal DNA regime as an
effective crimefighting tool. My bill addresses five pressing issues.
First, exactly how bad is the backlog of untested rape kits
nationwide? A
[[Page S290]]
1999 government report found over 180,000 rape kits were sitting,
untested, on the storage shelves of police department and crime
laboratories all across the country.
While recent press reports estimate that the number today is
approaching 500,000 untested rape kits, I am told that there are no
current, accurate numbers of the backlog. Behind every single one of
those rape kits is a victim who deserves recognition and justice.
Accordingly, my legislation would require the Attorney General to
survey law enforcement agencies nationwide to assess the extent of the
backlog of rape kits waiting to undergo DNA testing. To combat the
problem of rape kit backlogs, it is imperative to know the real
numbers, and how best to utilize Federal resources.
Second, how can existing Federal law be strengthened to make sure
that State crime labs have the funds for the critical DNA analysis
needed to solve sex assault cases? To fight crime most effectively, we
must both test rape kits and enter convicted offender DNA samples into
the DNA database. There has been explosive growth in the use of
forensic sciences by law enforcement. A government survey found that in
2000 alone, crime labs received 31,000 cases--a 47 percent increase
from almost 21,000 cases in 1999. In addition, the labs received
177,000 convicted offender DNA samples, an almost 77 percent increase
from 100,242 samples in 1999.
The backlog in DNA testing is found all across the country. Last
month a Michigan newspaper reported that its State police forensic unit
is expected to have a 10-year backlog of items in need of DNA testing.
Similar news reports are elsewhere. The Florida crime lab system is
facing a backlog of more than 2,400 rape, murder and assault and
burglary cases with DNA evidence waiting for testing. In North
Carolina, up to 20,000 rape kit tests sit on evidence shelves because
the lab does not have the resources to conduct timely DNA testing.
Many crime laboratories report personnel shortages in the face of
this overwhelming work. According to a government survey, on average,
there are 6 employees in a State crime lab, a lab that must not only
conduct DNA testing for hundreds of cases, but also run forensic tests
on blood, footprints or ballistic evidence.
The bill I'm introducing would: 1. Increase current funding levels to
both test rape kits and to process and upload offender samples; and 2.
allow local governments to apply directly to the Justice Department for
these grants. I thank my colleagues Senators Kohl and DeWine who began
this effort with the DNA Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 and
acknowledge their ongoing interest in this area.
Third, what assistance does the FBI need to keep up with the crushing
number of DNA samples which need to be tested or stored in the national
database? I am told that the current national DNA database, ``CODIS'',
is nearing capacity of convicted offender DNA samples. My bill would
provide funds to the FBI to 1. Upgrade the national DNA computer
database to handle the huge projections of samples; and 2. process and
upload Federal convicted offender DNA samples into the database.
Efforts to include more Federal and State convicted offenders in our
database just makes plain sense to fight crime. We know that sexual
assault is a crime with one of the highest rates of recidivism, and
that many sexual assault crimes are committed by those with past
convictions for other kinds of crime. Their DNA samples from prior
convictions help law enforcement efforts enormously. We cannot wait;
the 2001 FBI crime records show that one forcible rape occurs every 5.8
minutes, and the most recent reports from the first six months of 2002
indicate a 1.8 percent increase in the number of rapes as compared to
2001 statistics.
Fourth, what additional tools are needed to help treat victims of
sexual assault? One group that understands the importance of gathering
credible DNA evidence are forensic sexual assault examiners, who are
sensitive to the trauma of this horrible crime and make sure that
patients are not revictimized in the aftermath. These programs should
be in each and every emergency room and play an integral role in police
departments to bridge the gap between the law and the medicine.
I first recognized the importance of sexual assault nurse examiners
in solving rape cases when I authored the Violence Against Women Act. A
key provision in the Violence Against Women Act requires the Attorney
General to evaluate and recommend standards for training and practice
for licensed health care professionals performing sexual assault
forensic exams. So I knew that any DNA bill aimed at ending sexual
assault must include resources for sexual forensic examiners, and not
just one type. My bill ensures that sexual forensic nurses, doctors,
and response teams are all eligible for assistance.
Tapping the power of DNA requires well-trained law enforcement who
know how to collect and preserve DNA evidence from the crime scene.
Training should be a matter of course for all law enforcement. No rape
kit evidence will lead to the perpetrator if the DNA evidence is
collected improperly.
The DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act would create a new grant program
to carry out sexual assault examiner programs and training. And it
would train law enforcement personnel and prosecutors in the handling
of sexual assault cases, including drug-facilitated assaults, and the
collection and use of DNA samples for use as forensic evidence at
trial.
Fifth, what can be done to ensure that sexual assault offenders who
cannot be identified by their victim are nevertheless brought to
justice?
Profound injustice is done to rape victims when delayed DNA testing
leads to a ``cold hit'' after the statute of limitations has expired.
For example, Jeri Elster was brutally raped in her California home, and
for years the police were unable to solve the crime. Seven years later,
DNA from the rape matched a man in jail for an unrelated crime. Yet the
rapist was never charged, convicted or sentenced because California's
statute of limitations had expired the previous year.
The DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2003 would change current law
to authorize Federal ``John Doe/DNA indictments'' that will permit
Federal prosecutors to issue an indictment identifying an unknown
defendant by his DNA profile within the five year statute of
limitations. Once outstanding, the DNA indictment would permit
prosecution at anytime once there was a DNA ``cold hit'' through the
national DNA database system.
John Doe/DNA indictments strike the right balance between encouraging
swift and efficient investigations, recognizing the durability and
credibility of DNA evidence and preventing an injustice if a cold hit
happens years after the crime. Criminal law must catch up with DNA
technology without the wholesale eradication of prevailing statutes of
limitations.
I started looking at the issue of improved prosecution of sexual
assault crimes almost two decades ago when I began drafting the
Violence Against Women Act. The DNA Sexual Justice Act of 2003 is the
next step, a way to connect the dots between the extraordinary strides
in DNA technology and my commitment to ending violence against women.
We must ensure that justice delayed is not justice denied.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 152
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``DNA Sexual Assault Justice
Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. ASSESSMENT OF BACKLOG IN DNA ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES.
(a) Assessment.--The Attorney General, acting through the
Director of the National Institute of Justice, shall survey
Federal, State, local, and tribal law enforcement
jurisdictions to assess the amount of DNA evidence contained
in rape kits and in other evidence from sexual assault crimes
that has not been subjected to testing and analysis.
(b) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit to
Congress a report on the assessment carried out under
subsection (a).
(2) Contents.--The report submitted under paragraph (1)
shall include--
(A) the results of the assessment carried out under
subsection (a);
(B) the number of rape kit samples and other evidence from
sexual assault crimes
[[Page S291]]
that have not been subjected to DNA testing and analysis; and
(C) a plan for carrying out additional assessments and
reports on the backlog in crime scene DNA testing and
analysis.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Department of Justice to carry out
this section $500,000 for fiscal year 2004.
SEC. 3. THE DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANT PROGRAM.
Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
(1) by striking the heading and inserting ``AUTHORIZATION
OF DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANTS.''; and
(2) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``including samples from
rape kits and samples from other sexual assault evidence,
including samples taken in cases with no identified suspect''
after ``crime scene''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) To ensure that DNA testing and analysis of samples
from rape kits and nonsuspect cases are carried out in a
timely manner.''.
SEC. 4. INCREASED GRANTS FOR ANALYSIS OF DNA SAMPLES FROM
CONVICTED OFFENDERS AND CRIME SCENES.
Section 2(j) of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135(j)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
``(D) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
``(E) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
``(F) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
``(G) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
Amounts made available to carry out the purposes specified in
subsection (a)(1) shall remain available until expended.'';
and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraphs (C) and (D)
and inserting the following:
``(C) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
``(D) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
``(E) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
``(F) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
``(G) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
Amounts made available to carry out the purposes specified in
paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (a) shall remain
available until expended.''.
SEC. 5. AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO APPLY FOR AND
RECEIVE DNA BACKLOG ELIMINATION GRANTS.
Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceeding paragraph (1)--
(i) by inserting ``, units of local government, or Indian
tribes'' after ``eligible States''; and
(ii) by inserting ``, unit of local government, or Indian
tribe'' after ``State''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``or by units of local
government'' and inserting ``, units of local government, or
Indian tribes'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting
``or unit of local government, or the head of the Indian
tribe'' after ``State'' each place that term appears;
(B) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'' the first time
that term appears;
(D) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State''; and
(E) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
(3) in subsection (c), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
(4) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or a unit of local
government'' and inserting ``, a unit of local government, or
an Indian tribe''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or a unit of local
government'' and inserting ``, a unit of local government, or
an Indian tribe''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``, units of local
government, and Indian tribes,'' after ``States'';
(5) in subsection (e)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or local government''
after ``State'' each place that term appears; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
(6) in subsection (f), in the matter preceeding paragraph
(1), by inserting ``, unit of local government, or Indian
tribe'' after ``State'';
(7) in subsection (g)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, units of local
government, or Indian tribes'' after ``States''; and
(8) in subsection (h), by inserting ``, unit of local
government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'' each place that
term appears.
SEC. 6. IMPROVING ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR BACKLOG GRANTS.
Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) if the applicant is a unit of local government,
certify that the applicant participates in a State laboratory
system;
``(7) provide assurances that, not later than 3 years after
the date on which the application is submitted, the State,
unit of local government, or Indian tribe will implement a
plan for forwarding, not later than 180 days after a DNA
evidence sample is obtained, all samples collected in cases
of sexual assault to a laboratory that meets the quality
assurance standards for testing under subsection (d); and
``(8) upon issuance of the regulations specified in section
10(d), certify that the State, unit of local government, or
Indian tribe is in compliance with those regulations.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(k) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the
Attorney General shall give priority to a State or unit of
local government that has a significant rape kit or
nonsuspect case backlog per capita as compared with other
applicants.''.
SEC. 7. QUALITY ASSURANCE STANDARDS FOR COLLECTION AND
HANDLING OF DNA EVIDENCE.
(a) National Protocol.--
(1) In general.--The Attorney General shall review
national, State, local, and tribal government protocols, that
exist on or before the date of enactment of this Act, on the
collection and processing of DNA evidence at crime scenes.
(2) Recommended protocol.--Based upon the review described
in paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall develop a
recommended national protocol for the collection of DNA
evidence at crime scenes, including crimes of rape and other
sexual assault.
(b) Standards, Practice, and Training for Sexual Assault
Forensic Examinations.--Section 1405(a) of the Victims of
Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
3796gg note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and emergency response
personnel'' after ``health care students''; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``and DNA evidence
collection'' after ``sexual assault forensic examinations''.
SEC. 8. SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC EXAM PROGRAM GRANTS.
(a) Authorization of Grants.--The Attorney General shall
make grants to eligible entities to--
(1) establish and maintain sexual assault examiner
programs;
(2) carry out sexual assault examiner training and
certification; and
(3) acquire or improve forensic equipment.
(b) Eligible Entity.--For purposes of this section, the
term ``eligible entity'' means--
(1) a State;
(2) a unit of local government;
(3) a college, university, or other institute of higher
learning;
(4) an Indian tribe;
(5) sexual assault examination programs, including sexual
assault nurse examiner (SANE) programs, sexual assault
forensic examiner (SAFE) programs, and sexual assault
response team (SART) programs; and
(6) a State sexual assault coalition.
(c) Application.--To receive a grant under this section--
(1) an eligible entity shall submit to the Attorney General
an application in such form and containing such information
as the Attorney General may require; and
(2) an existing or proposed sexual assault examination
program shall also--
(A) certify that the program complies with the standards
and recommended protocol developed by the Attorney General
pursuant to section 1405 of the Victims of Trafficking and
Violence Protection Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 3796gg note); and
(B) certify that the applicant is aware of, and utilizing,
uniform protocols and standards issued by the Department of
Justice on the collection and processing of DNA evidence at
crime scenes.
(d) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the
Attorney General shall give priority to proposed or existing
sexual assault examination programs that are serving, or will
serve, populations currently underserved by existing sexual
assault examination programs.
(e) Restrictions on Use of Funds.--
(1) Supplemental funds.--Funds made available under this
section shall not be used to supplant State funds, but shall
be used to increase the amount of funds that would, in the
absence of Federal funds, be made available from State
sources for the purposes of this section.
(2) Administrative costs.--An eligible entity may not use
more than 5 percent of the funds it receives under this
section for administrative expenses.
(3) Nonexclusivity.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to limit or restrict the ability of proposed or
existing sexual assault examination programs to apply for and
obtain Federal funding from any other agency or department or
any other Federal grant program.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Department of Justice, to remain
available until expended, $30,000,000 for each of
[[Page S292]]
fiscal years 2004 through 2008 to carry out this section.
SEC. 9. DNA EVIDENCE TRAINING GRANTS.
(a) Authorization of Grants.--The Attorney General shall
make grants to eligible entities to--
(1) train law enforcement personnel and all other first
responders at crime scenes, including investigators, in the
handling of sexual assault cases and the collection and use
of DNA samples for use as forensic evidence;
(2) train State and local prosecutors on the use of DNA
samples for use as forensic evidence; and
(3) train law enforcement personnel to recognize, detect,
report, and respond to drug-facilitated sexual assaults.
(b) Eligible Entity.--For purposes of this section, the
term ``eligible entity'' means--
(1) a State;
(2) a unit of local government;
(3) a college, university, or other institute of higher
learning; and
(4) an Indian tribe.
(c) Application.--To receive a grant under this section,
the chief executive officer of a State, unit of local
government, or university, or the head of a tribal government
that desires a grant under this section shall submit to the
Attorney General--
(1) an application in such form and containing such
information as the Attorney General may require;
(2) certification that the applicant is aware of, and
utilizing, uniform protocols and standards issued by the
Department of Justice on the collection and processing of DNA
evidence at crime scenes;
(3) certification that the applicant is aware of, and
utilizing, the national sexual assault forensic examination
training protocols developed under section 1405(a) of the
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000
(42 U.S.C. 3796gg note); and
(4) if the applicant is a unit of local government,
certification that the applicant participates in a State
laboratory system.
(d) Restrictions on Use of Funds.--
(1) Supplemental funds.--Funds made available under this
section shall not be used to supplant State funds, but shall
be used to increase the amount of funds that would, in the
absence of Federal funds, be made available from State
sources for the purposes of this section.
(2) Administrative costs.--An eligible entity may not use
more than 5 percent of the funds it receives under this
section for administrative expenses.
(3) Nonexclusivity.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to limit or restrict the ability of an eligible
entity to apply for and obtain Federal funding from any other
agency or department or any other Federal grant program.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Department of Justice $10,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008 to carry out this
section.
SEC. 10. AUTHORIZING JOHN DOE DNA INDICTMENTS.
(a) Limitations.--Section 3282 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``Except'' and inserting the following:
``(a) Limitation.--Except''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) DNA Profile Indictment.--
``(1) In general.--In any indictment found for an offense
under chapter 109A, if the identity of the accused is
unknown, it shall be sufficient to describe the accused as an
individual whose name is unknown, but who has a particular
DNA profile.
``(2) Exception.--Any indictment described in paragraph
(1), which is found within 5 years after the offense under
chapter 109A shall have been committed, shall not be subject
to--
``(A) the limitations period described in subsection (a);
and
``(B) the provisions of chapter 208 until the individual is
arrested or served with a summons in connection with the
charges contained in the indictment.
``(3) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, the
term `DNA profile' means a set of DNA identification
characteristics.''.
(b) Rules of Criminal Procedure.--Rule 7 of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure is amended in subdivision (c)(1)
by adding at the end the following: ``For purposes of an
indictment referred to in section 3282 of title 18, United
States Code, if the identity of the defendant is unknown, it
shall be sufficient to describe the defendant, in the
indictment, as an individual whose name is unknown, but who
has a particular DNA profile, as defined in that section
3282.''.
SEC. 11. INCREASED GRANTS FOR COMBINED DNA INDEX (CODIS)
SYSTEM.
Section 210306 of the DNA Identification Act of 1994 (42
U.S.C. 14134) is amended--
(1) by striking ``There'' and inserting the following:
``(a) In General.--There''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Increased Grants for CODIS.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to
carry out upgrades to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS)
$9,700,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.
SEC. 12. INCREASED GRANTS FOR FEDERAL CONVICTED OFFENDER
PROGRAM (FCOP).
Section 3 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135a) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to
carry out this section $500,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.
SEC. 13. PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING DNA EVIDENCE AND
DNA ANALYSES.
(a) Privacy Protection Standard.--Section 10(a) of the DNA
Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
14135e(a)) is amended by inserting before the period at the
end the following: ``or in section 3282(b) of title 18,
United States Code''.
(b) Limitation on Access to DNA Information.--Section 10 of
the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
14135e) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Limitation on Access to DNA Information.--
``(1) In general.--The Attorney General shall establish, by
regulation, procedures to limit access to, or use of, stored
DNA samples or DNA analyses.
``(2) Regulations.--The regulations established under
paragraph (1) shall establish conditions for using DNA
information to--
``(A) limit the use and dissemination of such information,
as provided under subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of section
210304(b)(3) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement
Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(b)(3));
``(B) limit the redissemination of such information;
``(C) ensure the accuracy, security, and confidentiality of
such information;
``(D) protect any privacy rights of individuals who are the
subject of such information; and
``(E) provide for the timely removal and destruction of
obsolete or inaccurate information, or information required
to be expunged.''.
(c) Criminal Penalty.--Section 10(c) of the DNA Analysis
Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135e) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``discloses a sample or
result'' and inserting ``discloses or uses a DNA sample or
DNA analysis''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``per offense'' after
``$100,000''.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor this important
legislation to address the shameful backlog of unanalyzed DNA evidence
in rape kits. Senator Biden, Senator Spector and I worked closely on
this issue last year and this bill is an excellent compromise that
combines aspects of bills introduced by myself and by Senator Biden.
This bill provides critical resources to State and Federal Governments
to ensure that all the DNA evidence sitting in storage rooms across the
country can be tested and perpetrators found and convicted. As more and
more states have moved to require DNA samples from all convicted
felons, the Federal resources that this bill provides to aid in the
building of convicted offender records has also become more critical.
The bill unanimously passed both the Judiciary Committee and the full
Senate last year. It once again has strong bipartisan support, and I
anticipate that we will work quickly to pass the bill in this new
Congress, so that the bill can also pass the House of Representatives
and become law. This bill reauthorizes a 2000 bill and time is of the
essence as those authorizations expire soon. The power of DNA to find
and convict rapists in cases where there have never even been an
identified suspect cannot be overstated. We must act now to help law
enforcement and prosecutors across the country be able to make full use
of the most valuable tool at their disposal.
One of the things that I am most pleased about is that the grant
program in this bill to fund DNA testing of existing rape kits
throughout the country will bear the name of Debbie Smith. In her
testimony before the Crime Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee last
June, she proved herself an extraordinary spokesperson on the power of
DNA evidence to bring not just justice but peace to victims of sexual
assault.
The heart of this bill is about getting DNA evidence from rape cases
that is currently sitting in police evidence rooms tested and checked
against the DNA profiles of convicted felons. We all know that DNA is a
tool that works and as more states begin building their felon data
bases, more and more cases of rape where police have no suspect are
being solved.
We owe every woman in this country who has had the courage to come
forward and undergo an invasive physical exam and evidence gathering
after the trauma of a sexual assault, at a minimum, the absolute
guarantee that the collected evidence is being checked against known
felons. That is what this bill does.
In my state of Washington alone, in the past five years at least
12,950 women have submitted to humiliating and traumatic exams for the
collection
[[Page S293]]
of evidence that has not been analyzed to help solve their rape. When
applied on a national scale, these findings would indicate a national
backlog of 615,000 cases of untested evidence. Washington State
University is currently in the process of conducting a national
assessment of the backlog of rape kits and I look forward to learning
those results but we simply must provide the resources to get this
evidence analyzed now.
We need to pass this bill and fund this bill to help police solve
more rapes and give women receive the peace of mind of knowing that
everything that can be done to catch their attacker is being done.
Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today in support of S. 152, the DNA
Sexual Justice Act of 2003. Building on the success of the Kohl-DeWine
DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act enacted during the 106th Congress,
this legislation will provide law enforcement and prosecutors with
critical physical evidence that will help put more criminals behind
bars. Currently, DNA evidence is languishing untested at laboratories
nationwide, simply for lack of funding. The DNA Sexual Justice Act will
assess the extent of the backlog and provide funding for its
elimination. Further, this legislation will ensure that DNA evidence
from cases involving sexual assault is handled properly by providing
training for emergency personnel, medical examiners, law enforcement,
forensic analysts and prosecutors.
Currently, all 50 States and the Federal Government require DNA
samples to be obtained from certain convicted offenders, and these
samples increasingly can be shared through a national DNA database
established by Federal law. This national database, part of the
Combined Database Index System, CODIS, enables law enforcement
officials to link DNA evidence found at a crime scene with any suspect
whose DNA is already on file. By identifying repeat offenders, this DNA
sharing can and does make a difference.
Before passage of the Kohl-DeWine Backlog Elimination Act in 2000,
law enforcement was in large part unable to take advantage of DNA
analysis as a crime-fighting technology. This was primarily due to the
fact that DNA sample collection was not required of all Federal
offenders, forensic labs did not have enough resources or equipment to
analyze collected samples, and State databases were not interoperable
with Federal databases. This bill will further address these issues by
directing the Attorney General to survey forensic laboratories across
the country to determine the scope of the backlog and authorizes the
funding necessary to eliminate the backlog over the next four years.
However this legislation goes even further, focusing new, targeted
grant programs toward DNA evidence collected from crimes of sexual
assault or violence. By authorizing funding for the training of
emergency personnel and medical examiners, this legislation ensures
that DNA evidence will be properly collected. With funding for forensic
equipment and the training of forensic examiners, it ensures that DNA
evidence will be accurately analyzed. And by providing funding for the
training of prosecutors, this legislation ensures that the evidence
will be used to its greatest possible effect in the courtroom.
This measure will ensure that women who have been victims of sexual
assault or violence will have the most reliable tools to bring their
assailants to justice. Most importantly, this legislation will help
police use modern technology to solve crimes and prevent repeat
offenders from committing new ones.
______