OOPS, THEY DID IT AGAIN

Taken on its own, the inadvertent destruction of evidence by the
Indiana State Police's forensic lab could be easily viewed as an
inevitable error. No system is perfect.

But news of the state police crime lab's latest mishap, which led to
the dismissal of drug charges against an Adams County man, comes
within weeks of the Fort Wayne lab's report of mold growing on
biological evidence involving five cases -- a homicide and four
sexual assaults. Police officials say both cases are isolated
incidents. Undoubtedly so, but the cumulative effect of the problems
isn't building people's confidence in one of the most important
functions in the justice system.

There doesn't appear to be crisis of confidence coming from the state
lab commander, Maj. Ed Littlejohn. The entire state police forensic
lab system will begin a self-audit in January as part of its annual
certification requirements for the American Society of Crime
Laboratory Directors. Littlejohn, who has worked in the state lab for
27 years, says that certification requires the lab to list any
deficiencies in procedure, as well as to document the corrective
action taken. As an example, since the mold incident, there has been
an inspection of stored evidence at all four crime labs.

Despite the mishaps, there's at least one bit of good news for the
Indiana State Police: the backlog of cases declined by more than half
in less than a year. Littlejohn attributes the backlog decrease to
the drop in methamphetamine work due to new restrictions on
ingredients, the hiring of additional personnel and prosecutors
alerting officials about cases that have been adjudicated or dismissed.

The drop in the backlog is welcome news. Still, there are few things
more disconcerting for people inside or outside the justice system
than reading about troubles involving the state lab. The harshest
criticism came from Ed Blake, a California-based forensic consultant,
who questioned the Fort Wayne lab's competence after hearing about
the mold. And attorney Michelle Kraus' comments shouldn't be taken
lightly by the state police. Repeated mistakes "opens the door to
question the competency (of the lab)," Kraus told reporter Sara Eaton.

Although it doesn't have to, state police ought to share, in layman's
terms, the results of its certification study. This is the best way
to build public confidence, as well as educate people about the lab's
operations. But if problems persist, the state police should consider
an audit from outside experts to build public confidence and secure
an important part of the state's justice system.