Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

The arrest of the alleged serial killer dubbed the Grim Sleeper is making news this week after authorities took him into custody for a string of murders dating back to 1985, the L.A. Times reported.

Arrests involving DNA evidence in California are extremely complex cases and should always be handled by an experienced Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer. Murder charges are the most serious a defendant can face and the passage of time -- 25 years in this case -- can make such cases even more challenging.

This will be far from an open-and-shut case. In many cold cases, a significant amount of evidence has either been lost or compromised. Witnesses die, grow old or move away. Detectives retire. And DNA evidence itself is far from infallible. In fact, the biggest challenge in a case involving DNA is combating the likelihood that a jury will view it as proof positive of a defendant's guilt. A veteran defense lawyer must thoroughly investigate the case and build a solid defense out of the remaining facts and circumstances.

In this case, the defendant is believed to be involved in the deaths of 10 women dating back to 1985. The LAPD relied upon lab testing conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice to make the match. But the test results linked the killing to a young man recently arrested, who was not nearly old enough to be involved in killings dating back 25 years.

That's when authorities began targeting the man's father. After days of surveillance they gathered a napkin, fork and leftover food items after he ate at a local pizza parlor and used them to test for DNA.

Authorities believe the DNA matched evidence from some of the crime scenes and arrested and charged him with 10 counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.

While the media carries on as if it's a done deal, a L.A. defense attorney understands the real work has not yet begun. Convicting someone of a murder that happened last week is a complex and challenging process. Convicting someone of 10 murders dating back 25 years will prove all but impossible.

We suspect the District Attorney's office will be forced to deal in this case, either by agreeing to a reduced sentence in exchange for a confession, or by focusing on one or two of the crimes and seeking a conviction using the cases with the strongest available evidence.

The use of a relative's DNA to track a suspect is also a controversial practice. As the New York Times reported, only Colorado and California have laws allowing for so-called "familial search." The use of DNA from convicted criminals to track down relatives who may also have committed a crime is a policy that experts criticize as a threat to civil liberties.

This arrest is the first time the practice has been used to solve a homicide case in the United States. There is no case law in place to govern a judge's decision-making. Any court verdict will be ripe for appeal -- perhaps all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. That alone, could prompt the District Attorney's Office to seek a plea bargain.

The killer was dubbed the Grim Sleeper because of a 14-year hiatus in the killings, which did not occur from 1988 until 2002. Such long breaks are extremely rare unless a defendant is in prison for another crime. There is no evidence in this case that the suspect was ever arrested -- in fact he apparently worked as a police mechanic before retiring.

There are more than 200 murders in L.A. each year -- or more than 5,000 over the 25-year period authorities allege the Grim Reaper killed 10 women and one man. An L.A. defense lawyer may well argue that these killings are unrelated and that no serial killer even exists.

Continue reading "Grim Sleeper case will test limits of DNA evidence in Los Angeles criminal cases" »

Los Angeles police recently charged a 72-year-old insurance claims adjuster with the murder of two women in the 1970s and say he may have committed at least 30 rape/murders since the 1970s. Los Angeles' most prolific serial killer, Floyd Thomas, a twice-convicted sexual offender, was exposed when a sample of his DNA was taken as part of California's initiative to build a sex offender database. In and out of jail since the late-1950s for rape, sexual assault and burglary, Thomas preyed on elderly women, raping and strangling them to death.

Despite protests from privacy advocates, the FBI and 15 states -- including California -- collect DNA samples from people arrested or detained. Previously, DNA collection used to be limited to convicted felons, but there is a growing movement in law enforcement to collect DNA samples from anyone arrested, the innocent and guilty alike. Proponents argue that DNA sampling is no more invasive than fingerprinting. In fact, some law enforcement officials envision a day when a national database will hold the DNA of every citizen. They argue that DNA databases are already being used to solve crimes that have been in cold case files for years.

"DNA databases were built initially to deal with violent sexual crimes and homicides -- a very limited number of crimes," Harry Levine, City University of New York professor of sociology, recently told reporter Solomon Moore of the New York Times. "Over time, more and more crimes of decreasing severity have been added to the database."

Favoring the argument that criminal acts reduce individual rights, courts have generally upheld laws that authorize the compulsory collection of DNA. However, a congressional report warns that courts "have not fully considered the legal implications of recent extension of DNA collection." Opponents are concerned that DNA samples are being taken without relevance to the crime committed. Laws governing DNA collection vary from state to state and have allowed DNA collection for everything from serious felonies like murder and sexual assault to minor misdemeanors like shoplifting.

If you are questioned by police or arrested in Los Angeles, you need to hire a skilled and aggressive criminal defense attorney immediately to protect your rights. "The incriminating statements you make during a police investigation are powerful weapons in a prosecutor's hands," warns expert Los Angeles criminal defense attorney Stephen Rodriguez. His advice: "Do not give any statements to the police without an experienced Los Angeles criminal defense attorney at your side." Until your attorney is there to advise you, Rodriguez tells his clients, "The best strategy is to exercise your constitutional right to remain silent." Do not voluntarily submit to a DNA or any other test without your attorney's consent.