Nassau lab's not typical of forensic field

In his opinion piece "Nassau isn't alone in crime lab issues" [Opinion, Dec. 20], the author's wholesale indictment of forensic science throughout the nation is unsubstantiated and unwarranted.

The National Academy of Sciences report to which he refers, "Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward," unquestionably recognizes that advances in forensic science over the past two decades have solved many cases that formerly would have been left unsolved. The dangers that the report speaks of can be minimized by better educating prosecutors and defense attorneys in the proper use of forensic evidence.

Understanding the limitations of a forensic discipline and presenting the evidence in its proper context are the touchstones to the effective use of any scientific evidence. Reliability of the evidence is also a key component. This is accomplished in New York by licensing of crime laboratories by the New York State Health Department and accreditation by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors.

Proficiency testing of analysts and on-site inspections are key components of this process - an oversight process that, in fact, revealed the deficiencies at the Nassau County Police Department Crime Laboratory.

Furthermore, there is empirical evidence that less than 11 percent of the first 200 DNA exonerations reported by the Innocence Project involved forensic science malpractice.

Like all components of the criminal justice system, the forensic science community has a responsibility to continuously improve itself. However, the indiscriminate condemnation of the profession is an injustice.

Robert Biancavilla

Eaton's Neck

Editor's note: The writer is a prosecutor in the Suffolk County district attorney's office, and a former prosecutor with the Nassau County district attorney.