Katies Law

Below is the final product. It got in the top two in the class - we don't vote on an overall winner but I got some good remarks and got to read it in front of the class... Only thing left is to write my representive.

Thanks again for those that commented.

Greg Buchanan
English Composition 101
Prof. Terry Heath
February 14, 2011
Katie’s Law
Katie Sepich was a 22 year old Grad Student who was brutally raped and murdered outside her home in August of 2003. During the struggle for her life Katie was able to scratch the killer enough for a DNA sample to be taken; because of this her parents and law enforcement were hopeful that they’d eventually be able to find Katie’s killer. What her parents learned though is at the time DNA testing was only done on convicted felons. So although Katie’s killer ended up with a felony arrest just 3 months after the murder, her parents spent over three years not knowing who her killer was and if he’d ever be caught. Because of their experience, Katie’s parents have worked tirelessly to pass Katie’s Law which would require that DNA be taken from any suspect that is arrested for a felony. Katie’s Law is now coming before Washington State law makers. We must pass Katie’s Law to allow the DNA sampling of those arrested for felonies.
Our current state law is similar to almost every state before Katie’s Law; we require the DNA sampling of those convicted of felonies. In five years since Katie’s parents, Dave and Jayann Sepich, helped pass this law in New Mexico it has been passed in 23 States Nationwide. This is the second time this law has come before our Legislature. It has more support this time around but it still needs a lot of help to get it on the books as law. Just this month Katie’s Mom, Jayann, came to Olympia and made a plea before the legislators telling them, “What we can do is solve crimes, save lives and absolve the innocent” (Mikkelsen). If this law is passed “Every adult lawfully arrested for or charged with the commission of any criminal offense constituting a violent offense or a sex offense” would be required to give a DNA sample at the time of their arrest (Washington State).
DNA sampling has many benefits, and one of those is to solve cold cases. If DNA is recovered from a crime scene police are able to test the sample and run its findings over a nationwide data base called CODIS, the Combined DNA Index System. If there is a match, police and prosecutors have a better chance at a conviction for crimes the individual committed. In the case of Katie’s killer, he committed a crime just three months after killing her. Had this law been in effect at the time her parents would have known immediately who the killer was. They would not have had to wait three years for him to be convicted of the other crime.
On the flip side, DNA can also be used to rule out guilt. If a person has been arrested for a crime and DNA is taken at the time of that arrest it can absolve him or her from the crime when it’s ran against the DNA at the scene. If a person is found innocent of the crime, according to the House and Senate Bill, their record can be expunged and their sample removed (Washington State).
DNA prevents bias when policing. It is common for people’s history and bias to effect their way of thinking. Police, although very good at their job, are sometimes influenced by this bias. When DNA is used it doesn’t see color or background. It only looks at the information that was left behind. Furthermore, the information sent to CODIS is a numeric file. There is no link to personal information or criminal background (Sepich). This will help to prevent a bias of any kind from occurring.
The most important point that the Sepich’s make is that DNA can potentially save lives and reduce further crimes. If DNA is taken from a crime scene such a murder and then a person is arrested later DNA can make that match quickly. This would take that murderer off the street and not allow them to commit any other crimes. Without this law they would continue to be out among us until they were actually convicted of a crime. The City of Chicago did a study in 2005. They took a close look at eight convicted felons and determined that if this law was in effect it would have prevented 60 crimes including 22 murders and 30 rapes (Sepich).
Criminal Defense Lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are arguing against the passage of this law. They say that it goes against our constitutional right of innocent until proven guilty. The ACLU said, “DNA is more than a fingerprint. DNA contains your entire code; DNA is you: This is your entire genetic information that they are seizing from people, many of whom are presumably innocent” (Reichback). They say that this is a search and should require a warrant. A search warrant would only be granted in a particular case to match with that single crime. Although unpopular the defense lawyers argue that it is, “Incompatible with Washington’s constitutional provisions” (Mikkelsen). Both groups have threatened that if passed they will bring their issue before the court. The argument has worked before and they are hoping it will work again.
It is important that we let our legislators know that we don’t want the Defense Lawyers to win again. We want to protect ourselves and the memories of those like Katie Sepich. This law is about timing. It moves DNA testing from a conviction to being arrested and charged with a serious crime. By taking samples then we will solve cold cases sooner and potentially save lives; all while protecting those accused by minimizing racial bias and absolving the innocent if the DNA does not match. The Sepich’s have set up a website, www.katieslaw.org that can help you know who to contact and what to say. I urge you to contact your local representative and let them know that you support this law. Do not let Katie’s murder be in vain.


Works Cited
Mikkelsen, Drew. “Murder victim’s mother wants DNA samples taken during arrests.” King5.com. Belo Corp, 1 Feb. 2011. Web. 2 Feb. 2011
Reichback, Matthew. “Katie’s Law expansion has bipartisan support but faces court challenges.” Newmexicoindependent.com. The American Independent News Network, 2 Feb. 2011. Web. 13 Feb. 2011.
Sepich, Dave and Jayann. DNA Saves. Sepich, Dave and Jayann. 2009. Web. 11 February 2011.
Washington State. Legislature. House Bill 1369 and Senate Bill 5240. Access Washington, 13 Feb. 2011. Web. 13 Feb. 2011.