The Jackson County Model of Cold Case Review
Background
In Jackson County, Missouri, cold case investigation and prosecution with DNA technology has been ongoing since 2000. This endeavor was largely facilitated by the implementation of STR DNA technology by the Kansas City Police Crime Laboratory that same year. In December 2002, partially in response to this incipient technology, the Kansas City Police Department created a Cold Case Squad to investigate unsolved homicides. To date, this squad has submitted a total of 23 homicide cases to the Jackson County Prosecutor's Office that have come to judicial disposition. The prosecutor's office won convictions in 22 of these cases. The lone acquittal was a case in which the defendant was convicted of 6 other cold case murders at the conclusion of the same trial.
In 2002, the crime lab was awarded the NIJ Backlog Reduction Grant. Work on this grant began in March 2003. From 2003 to 2008, an informal partnership existed between the crime lab, the police department, and the Jackson County Prosecutor's Office on cold case investigations and prosecutions. This partnership produced a great deal of success. To date, there have been a total of 81 dispositions of cold sex crimes cases in Jackson County, Missouri. Seventy-four of these cases have resulted in conviction, 4 have been acquittals, and 3 cases were dismissed after charges were filed. The most notable accomplishments during this period were the investigation, arrest, and conviction of 4 serial rapists who had been active in Kansas City between 1977 and 2003. These men are known to have collectively victimized over 50 women. The overall cold case conviction rate stands at 95%.
On January 1, 2008, the Kansas City Police Department created a dedicated unit to investigate unsolved cold sex crimes cases. This was made possible through the Solving Cold Cases with DNA grant awarded by the National Institute of Justice. With the inception of this unit, the partnership between the participating agencies became more formalized. Among the formalizing factors were the following: the creation of a shared investigative database; weekly collaborative meetings held and attended by the KCPD Cold Case Sex Crimes Unit, representatives from the crime lab and the Jackson County prosecutor's office, and DNA testing pre-approval by both the Cold Case Sex Crimes Unit and prosecutor's office.
In 2008, the Jackson County Prosecutor's Office applied for and received a $400,000 grant award from the National Institute of Justice to form a DNA Cold Case Unit in the office. The grant is for a period of eighteen months. Work began on June 1, 2009. The grant funds 2 assistant prosecutors who bear the title, "Cold Case Analyst," 1 investigator, and 1 paralegal.
Lab Evidence Inventory
Since 2003, two contract analysts employed at the Kansas City Police Crime Lab by the NIJ Backlog Reduction grant have worked to identify unsolved cases with potential to be solved through DNA technology. These cold cases include homicides, sex crimes, and assaults. All cases that meet these criteria have been entered into the lab's Cold Case Database. This review process entailed a multi-faceted inventory and examination of evidence retained in the lab from cases dating from 1972 until 2005.
To date, this database consists of approximately 5,500 unsolved cases with potential DNA screening. The two lab analysts reviewed laboratory log books to identify all cases in which evidence was received into the lab over those years. Next, the lab analysts conducted a complete inventory of the long term evidence storage freezer to determine which cases had evidence stored in the lab. They also began an inventory of the lab's microscopic slide archive. By late September 2008, the slide inventory was about 20% complete. Finally, they requested that the KCPD Property and Evidence Section perform a computer query to determine what evidence may have been retained in the property room under the case numbers of interest.
When the members of the Jackson County Prosecutor's Office DNA Cold Case Unit began work on June 1, 2009, they were first assigned to the crime lab to complete the ongoing cold case evidence inventory. This work consisted of finishing the microscopic slide archive inventory. Their task was to determine what, if any, evidence existed on the slides and what information could be gleaned from the writing on the slides themselves. After examining each slide, data from the slides was entered into a laptop computer in Excel spreadsheet format. Out of a total of 137 drawers of microscopic slides inventoried, the Prosecutor's Office DNA Cold Case Unit reviewed and entered data from slides consisting of 67 drawers.
When this task was completed, unit members began a complete review of the laboratory notebooks prepared by the analysts who had originally worked on the cases being examined. Relevant data from these notebooks was then correlated with the information gleaned from the slide inventory and was entered into the same spreadsheet. Unit members reviewed a total of 89 analyst notebooks during this process. In the one-month period ending July 2009, the unit had conducted microscopic slide inventory and data entry of 2,551 cases ranging from the years 1972 to 1992. At the conclusion of this inventory, it was determined that between the years 1979 and 1992 alone, there are exactly 1,835 cases with potential evidence amenable to DNA testing to be reviewed.
The Jackson County model of cold case review is committed to the principles of both efficiency and effectiveness. This model attempts to firmly place the "cart behind the horse". There exists an active and ongoing interagency partnership on cold case review and investigation between the Kansas City Police Department, the Kansas City Police Crime Lab, and the Jackson County Prosecutor's Office. The police department and the prosecutor's office conduct a "dual" review of each case that has been determined to have biological evidence amenable to DNA testing.
As of July 6, 2009, the prosecutor's office DNA Cold Case Unit is reviewing police case files with offense dates beginning January 1, 1979 (the earliest potential date inside the applicable statute of limitations) going forward in time. The Kansas City Police Department's Sex Crimes Cold Case Unit is simultaneously reviewing cases from the 2000's going back in time. The goal is to eventually meet in the middle likely at an as yet unknown date in the early 1990's.
KCPD and the prosecutor's office separately review cases and determine whether each one should be approved or disapproved for DNA testing. Cases approved for testing by the prosecutor's office are tested by the lab. Cases disapproved for testing, for either legal or factual reasons, will not be tested. Cases approved by the police for testing but disapproved by the prosecutor's office, will not be tested. If a case is disapproved for testing by the police department but subsequently approved by the prosecutor's office, testing will be conducted. Under this model, the prosecutor's office has the final word on whether DNA testing will be conducted or not.
This approach makes sense, as the prosecutor and only the prosecutor has the final word as to whether charges will be filed. The "pre-approval" authorization for testing is the equivalent of a conditional commitment that charges will be filed in the event that a database match is obtained. With this case review model, scarce investigative and laboratory resources are not wasted or misdirected on cases that have not received and may never receive the prosecutor's approval. As a result, collective investigative and laboratory resources are more focused and efficiently directed. Time, money, and effort are not wasted, and morale is raised. Investigators and lab analysts know that they are working on cases that will ultimately result in the arrest and prosecution of the suspect who is the focus of the investigation.
The good news is that in cold cases, contrary to the typical case, time is often on the side of investigators. The review and investigation of cold cases presents unique partnership opportunities between police, lab personnel, and prosecutors. Under this cooperative model, prosecutors provisionally decide which cases they will ultimately file before DNA testing ever takes place, while simultaneously directing and shaping the issues they will litigate at trial. At the same time, investigators and lab personnel can most efficiently and effectively focus their limited resources, while gaining greater insight into the issues that will ultimately be tried in the courtroom. Accordingly, cold cases can be investigated in a more trial-focused and strategically thoughtful manner.