Four people have been exonerated by DNA evidence in Connecticut since the technology became reliable for investigations.
One of those people is James Tillman who was wrongly accused, charged and convicted of a rape and kidnapping in 1988.
“It came back that I wasn’t the person. Without that, I wouldn’t be here talking to you guys right now", Tillman said during a press conference pushing legislation that would expand when DNA could be collected during criminal investigations.
Current law allows the DNA to be taken following some violent crimes like rapes and homicides as long as the person has been convicted of a prior crime but State Rep. Ernest Hewett wants to expand that to include burglary and aggravated assault.
“This one is just first arrests for violent crimes not just any arrest" said Hewett, a Democrat representing New London.
Civil rights groups are wary of any expansion of when investigators could take DNA from suspects. Attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union say the current law provides enough leeway for law enforcement.
David McGuire with the ACLU says taking anything more than a fingerprint is far too intrusive for someone with a clean criminal record even in cases of violent crime.
Local
"A fingerprint is two dimensional. It’s not a medical procedure, whereas DNA is the very fabric of who someone is. It’s very sensitive information. It’s medical history. It goes well beyond a fingerprint and you should be found guilty before that’s taken," McGuire said.
He added that it's common sense for the law to provide restraint when taking DNA samples.
"We’re all about vindicating and making the criminal justice system work but reality is, the cornerstone of our justice system is innocent until proven guilty," McGuire said.
Tillman, who was released from a state prison in 2006, says he wouldn't have the common comforts of life without DNA testing.
"I mean without that I wouldn’t have my wife. I wouldn’t have my grandkids. I think, through DNA, it really saved my life," he said.
Editor's note: This article was edited to correct an error in identifying the source of a quotation. We regret the error.
