Overview
MSPCL did not review 3,084 (47%) of the 6,502 previously untested investigatory sexual assault evidence collection kits (SAECKs) within 90 days of July 1, 2021. The time to complete the quantity-limited evidence (QLIM) review ranged from 41 days to 161 days, with an average of 89 days.
MSPCL did not notify the assigned district attorneys’ (DAs’) offices of the results of its QLIM review within the 90-day timeframe for 1,641 (79%) of the 2,090 previously untested investigatory SAECKs that contained QLIM.
Prolonged reviews of QLIM can result in delays in DNA testing and subsequent delays in DNA profiles being entered into the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) database, which can prolong the process to identify potential perpetrators, prevent them from committing other crimes in the future, and hold them accountable for their actions.
Authoritative Guidance
Section 2(a) of Chapter 35 of the Acts of 2021 states,
Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, all previously untested investigatory sexual assault evidence kits which contain quantity limited evidence . . . shall be identified by the state police crime laboratory within 90 days of the effective date of this act. Within said 90-day period, the state police crime laboratory shall notify the relevant prosecuting district attorney’s office and each district attorney’s office shall notify individuals who submitted to a sexual assault evidence kit if: (i) their kits contain quantity limited evidence; and (ii) the district attorney’s office has not authorized the state police crime laboratory to proceed with testing.
Reasons for Issue
EOPSS did not have sufficient controls over QLIM reviews during the audit period that would have ensured the statutory deadline was met. (For example, EOPSS could have performed a statistical analysis of the data to determine the required time to complete a QLIM review and used this information for a benchmark.) EOPSS management told us that they had difficulties completing reviews concurrently with their normal workload because of staffing levels at the time of their review. According to MSPCL, a QLIM review must be performed by a forensic scientist, and compliance with federal DNA analyst requirements and lab protocols require a 10-to-12-month training period for newly hired forensic scientists.
Recommendation
EOPSS should ensure that MSPCL enhances controls to meet the regulated deadlines for SAECKs and QLIM reviews.
Auditee’s Response
Pursuant to Section 2(a) of Chapter 35 of the Acts of 2021, the MSPCL completed its review of all 6,502 previously untested SAECKs by December 13, 2021, within three months of the statutory deadline of September 29, 2021. The statutory deadline was a one-time deadline that is no longer applicable to any other SAECK kits.
Given that the law was enacted on August 3, 2021, EOPSS and MSPCL are proud that they were able to complete the review of such a large number of previously untested SAECK in such a short period of time. EOPSS had stated publicly, at the time of the enactment that the statutory deadline would be impossible to meet and doing so would be forensically impracticable given MSPCL’s obligation to comply with its ordinary testing obligations. Nonetheless, to come as close as possible to meeting the deadline, EOPSS and the MSPCL implemented overtime incentives and provided grant funding for each DA’s office to complete its obligations under the law.
We respectfully disagree with the conclusion that EOPSS did not have sufficient controls in place over QLIM reviews during the audit period. The law required MSPCL to go back twenty years to investigate existing kits that needed testing and protocols were in place to manage that process. The QLIM status was determined consistent with these protocols. For example, controls for the evaluation of the QLIM status of evidence, are reflected in the following protocols:
- Examination of Submitted Evidence
- Recovery and Initial Classification of Trace Evidence
Auditor’s Reply
While we can appreciate the volume of reviews, EOPSS did not satisfy the statutory deadline for all previously untested SAECKs.
EOPSS states that it had controls over the QLIM reviews during the audit period, but these controls did not specifically address the statutory deadline of 90 days. We strongly encourage EOPSS to implement our recommendation.
| Date published: | August 8, 2024 |
|---|