LOCAL CRIME LABS PURSUED

Intent Is To Speed Up Drug Testing And Other Processes But Cost Is
Steep, Credibility An Issue

Local law enforcement agencies frustrated by long waits to get test
results from SLED are setting up, and expanding, their own crime
laboratories. SLED Chief Robert Stewart admits SLED can't process
evidence fast enough and is encouraging local agencies to open the
labs.

"We are overwhelmed, especially our drug lab" Stewart said. "We don't
have a timely turnaround on drug cases and it affects the courts."

But as local labs open, some wonder if they can keep up with the
operating expenses.

And even if they can, defense lawyers are worried about the quality
of the testing, claiming innocent people might be sent jail because
of faulty analysis.

Stewart said SLED is looking to local labs to take some of the
approximately 18,000 drug cases SLED analyzes every year, by far the
most typical analysis the agency does.

Seven local crime labs operate in South Carolina, including ones with
the Columbia Police Department and the Richland County Sheriff's
Department.

Most are limited to testing fingerprints and drug evidence. Some,
like Columbia's, hope to start testing ballistics. At least three
other counties plan on opening labs soon.

Stewart hopes the local labs can handle more routine cases so his
agency can focus more energy on rapidly developing technologies such
as DNA analysis.

Prosecutors also are pushing for more labs so cases can be processed
faster. Now, it can take a year or more for some prosecutors to get
drug evidence analyzed through SLED, said Tommy Pope, York County
prosecutor and president of the S.C. Solicitors Association.

Pope said technicians at York County's lab can analyze drug evidence
and be ready to testify at a trial in weeks, not months.

"It works out because you get one person who isn't being tugged all
over the state to testify," he said.

Federal Help

The federal government doles out more than $11 million per year to
help local law enforcement crime labs. A bill passed by the U.S.
Senate in September would add another $25 million to the pot for 2002.

Counties and cities also can take money seized during drug busts and
funnel it into their labs, said Jeff Moore, director of the South
Carolina Sheriff's Association.

But whether smaller labs will be able to shoulder the long-term costs
associated with running a forensic lab is yet to be seen, Moore said.

"Hiring people to run the lab is more problematic for them than
buying the equipment. Law enforcement is notorious for not paying
personnel what they should," Moore said.

The Aiken County Sheriff's Office plans to open a drug testing lab
next year thanks to a three-year, $227,000 federal grant.

Chief Deputy Jody Rowland said although law enforcement may not be
able to pay as much as the private sector, they've hired a chemist
who wants to be a sworn law enforcement officer.

"We offer a competitive salary, but none of us are going to get
rich," he said. "Having (the chemist) be an officer gives them a
sense of duty. They're also going to understand what's happening in
the street."

In an effort to improve its chances of getting the grant, the Aiken
Sheriff's Office promised to make its new lab open to neighboring
counties that don't have them, Rowland said.

They will not charge the other agencies for use of the lab, he said.

Although he doesn't foresee the drug cases piling up, as they have at
SLED, Rowland said "time will tell."

Credibility Worries

A larger potential problem for local labs could be challenges to
their credibility. Only two labs in the state are accredited with a
national association. They are the SLED lab and the Charleston County
crime lab.

Labs accredited with the American Association of Crime Laboratory
Directors, the largest accreditation agency in the world, are
inspected and must abide by a strict documentation process.

Only one state, New York, makes it mandatory for its labs to gain
accreditation.

Accreditation is time consuming and can cost thousands of dollars.
Some local labs say as long as they follow strict standards
accreditation is unnecessary.

"We simply can't afford national accreditation," Rowland said. "It's
a very expensive venture."

Dee Anne Johnson, chief chemist for the Columbia Police Department,
said many local lab personnel started out working at SLED. "You get
all the same training they get," she said.

But Bill Nettles, a Columbia attorney and past president of the South
Carolina Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said defense
attorneys have an easier time questioning the validity of evidence
tested in unaccredited labs.

"There's a big difference between a lab that's accredited and one
that sends someone with a white coat and a briefcase," he said.

Nettles said evidence can be contaminated if it's not properly
handled as it passes from officers to the lab. Once the lab gets it,
it must have a strict protocol to ensure the evidence is preserved,
he said.

"An unaccredited lab is fodder for cross-examination because they're
more likely to convict innocent people."

Pope disputes the claim that local labs can't do a good job.

"The truth of the matter is that potential exists no matter who's
doing (the testing). You just don't do it haphazardly."