"
Bruce Godschalk, freed after spending 15 years in prison for rapes he did not commit; Jeffrey Deskovic, wrongly convicted for murder and released after spending nearly half his life behind bars; Kirk Bloodsworth, the Marylander who spent years on death row for murder before the true killer was identified.
They are among more than 200 people nationwide who were freed because DNA tests performed after their convictions showed they could not have committed the crimes.
And they now have joined civil rights groups, some current and former prosecutors,
and a convicted Alaskan rapist to urge the Supreme Court to apply constitutional protections for the first time to what the prisoners' lawyers call
"arguably the most important development in the history of forensic science: the advent of DNA testing."
The increasingly accurate nature of biological testing has revolutionized criminal forensics, become a staple of television crime shows and, according to the
Innocence Project, whose lawyers are representing convicted Alaskan rapist William G. Osborne,
exonerated 232 prisoners, 17 of whom had been sentenced to death.
Osborne was convicted of the brutal rape and assault of a prostitute in a secluded area near the Anchorage International Airport in 1993.
Days later, police stopped Dexter Jackson on a driving infraction and found in his car a gun and knife belonging to the prostitute.
Jackson implicated Osborne as his accomplice and the rapist. The woman later identified Osborne from a photo lineup as the "most likely" and "most familiar" suspect in the group.
She said he had used a blue condom, which police found at the scene. Testing on the semen was consistent with Osborne's DNA -- but also with
14.7 to 16 percent of all African Americans'. Osborne's lawyer, basing his defense on Osborne's claim of an alibi, did not seek a more discriminating test that could clear him -- or link him more conclusively to the crime.
He was found guilty and sentenced to 25 years in prison, with five years suspended.
Osborne wants to pay for a
more exacting test of the DNA evidence that was introduced at his trial -- one
so precise that
even the state concedes it would probably prove his guilt or innocence -- but has been
denied access by prosecutors.
Alaska is one of six states that do not have statutes allowing post-conviction access to DNA evidencehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...02/21/AR2009022101704.html?hpid=moreheadlines, and although courts there have agreed to testing in a handful of cases, the testing has not taken place."
