March 19, 2002
DNA, and then what? ...
Some months ago, I commented enthusiastically about the DNA databases springing up across the nation, cross-referencing convicted felons and unsolved crimes. While some inmates have been blessedly released, others have been linked to crimes thought forgotten long ago.
A case in point is James Earl Patterson. Already in prison for over a decade, he was scheduled for release in 2004 -- that is, until a DNA database fingered him for the 1987 rape and stabbing death of Joyce S. Aldridge.
Shortly thereafter, Mr. Patterson made a total confession, describing exactly what he did and how he did it. He pled guilty to the charges brought against him.
And now we get to the part the story where I start having problems.
--
When earlier I wrote about the promise of DNA databases, and the fact that criminals could never again be sure if they entirely get away with anything, I was imagining this technology as a deterrent. And for some, this may prove true.
But James Earl Patterson was driven by his craving for drugs. Considering his crazed and brutal treatment of Joyce Aldridge, the idea that anything whatsoever could act as a deterrent in this crime is laughable.
While Mr. Patterson expressed deep regret and apologies to Ms. Aldridge's family, this was obviously not enough. Reviewing his horrific actions, and considering the laws of the state of Virginia, it should come as no surprise that Mr. Patterson was sentenced to death.
But be sure to make a note in technology history here. While a number of people have been unexpectedly identified from these aptly-named "cold hits" from DNA databases, on March 14th, 2002, James Earl Patterson became the first person to be executed as a result.
--
I was bothered when I read this story, and I've been bothered ever since.
With all the strides we've made as a society, why must we continue to execute people? Why can't we just put them away for the remainder of their natural lives?
Similarly, can't prisoners be made to perform profitable work? Can't some of these economic results go to their own maintenance and those they have harmed? And can't we come up with some creative ideas whereby the incarcerated can directly contribute to society?
I don't know if I've become cynical, or simply more clear, but for those criminals who are incapable of empathy, remorse or taking responsibility for their actions, I simply don't believe they can ever be responsible members of society. There's no internal motivation that will prevent them from acting on anything but their own desires.
And for those who are capable of such emotions - their incarceration means spending the rest of their lives feeling them ... and that's as it should be.
While we continue to reap the benefits of technology, we must continue to examine our opinions, goals and values. And we must be prepared for these to evolve.
I'm still a strong supporter of these DNA databases, but I would say that my enthusiasm has been tempered a bit. After reading about the execution of Mr. Patterson, I was reminded of that old saw: "Be careful what you ask for. You just may get it."
I'm Moira Gunn. This is Five Minutes.
