4 - The Michigan Daily - Monday, April 3, 1995 G7be L'rbiWan ?tilg 420 Maynard Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan MICHAEL ROSENBERG Editor in Chief JULIE BECKER JAMEs NASH Editorial Page Editors JAmEs R. Co . BENEATH THE PALIMPSEST Simpson, serial rapists and the new world of DNA 0 0 Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of a majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters, and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. Women health 'U' deserves praise for increased awareness This week marks an important point in the acknowledgment of women's health is- sues on campus. Today University Students Against Cancer are sponsoring "Breast Health Awareness Day," and on Wednesday the Women's Health Initiative sponsors a day dedicated to women's health. In addition, last month the University opened its Women's Health Resource and Education Center on the Medical campus. These events signify an across-the-board increase in involvement in women's health on campus. From student activism to University Medical Center re- search, this involvement deserves praise. For the women of both the University and the Ann Arbor community, the Health Center is the first real clinic to provide a confidential care center on issues ranging from cancer to pregnancy issues to general wellness. Mod- eled after other successful clinics on many other medical campuses nationwide, the cen- ter at long last provides an open environment for women to address their health concerns without the infimidation and waiting com- monly associated with a large hospital. The opening ofthe center and other women's health events on campus demonstrate a long- overdue recognition that women deserve the opportunity for easy access to specialized health care. Problems such as breast cancer, cervical cancer and pregnancy complications can often be avoided or detected much earlier with pri- mary obstetric-gynecological care, breast self- examination education and prenatal care. For far too long, the medical community - at the University and elsewhere-has ignored these issues. In the 1980s, while funds were in- creased for the treatment of women's dis- eases in their later stages, money for preven- tion and early detection of these same dis- eases was neglected. Fortunately, the medical community has begun to realize that research in the areas of initial primary care can offset major health problems down the road. Eventually, the eco- nomic benefits of this new look at medical care will be realized when the number of diseases caught too late to be cured decreases, and the number caught in the early stages increases.- Most important, increased awareness of women's health on campus is beneficial to women themselves, in creating an accepting and supportive atmosphere for health issues. The Women's Health and Resource Educa- tion Center not only provides the advantages of primary and preventative care to the com- munity, but also creates a comfortable atmo- sphere for its patients. The pressures of large hospitals and impersonal doctors can too often deter people needing only birth control or pregnancy information. Far too often, ignorance leads to a cycle of self-neglect. The University's faculty, staff and students are to be commended and encour- aged for supporting the trend toward women's health awareness. A nn Arbor assistant public defender David Lankford is no Johnnie Cochran Jr. or F. Lee Bailey, but like O.J. Simpson, the fate of Lankford's client rests on a key strand of evidence - DNA fingerprinting. Lankford represents the accused Ann Arbor serial rapist, Ervin Dewain Mitchell Jr. Mitchell has been charged with one count of murder and four counts of rape. Judge Ann Matson of the 15th District Court or- dered Mitchell last Thursday to stand trial on all the charges, concluding a preliminary hearing that included nearly 20 hours of testimony by 27 witnesses and by DNA experts from the Michigan State Police Crime Lab. The DNA evidence that could land Mitchell in prison for the rest of his life is the same evidence that exonerated him last week of the rapes of six Black prosti- tutes in Inkster, Mich. Like the Simpson trial, the Ann Arbor case involves a bloody glove found on Mitchell at the time of his arrest, circum- stantial evidence and DNA. The prosecu- tion has neither eyewitnesses nor incrimi- nating physical evidence linking Mitchell to the crimes. None of the surviving victims could identify her assailant. The linchpin in the prosecution's case is DNA evidence present at all the crimes that fingers Mitchell. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the basic genetic material contained in all living cells that determines a person's personal traits. It's what allowed scientists to create dinosaurs in the hit movie "Jurassic Park". (They really didn't create dinosaurs.) DNA fingerprinting describes a nascent technique used by forensic scientists to identify indi- viduals using only small samples of body fluids such as blood, semen or hair. In both the Simpson and the Mitchell cases, the prosecution's argument is based, in part, on the similarity of the defendant's DNA pro- file to that obtained at the crime scene. In theMitchell case, Dr. Stephen Milligan of the state police crime lab testified in reference to a 1992 rape that the likelihood the DNA found on the victim matches an- other person is one in 7.8 trillion among the white population and one in one trillion in the Black population. DNA fingerprinting is on trial in both cases. As evidence, it should be used cau- tiously, as there is much potential for mis- use. First, DNA fingerprinting, while very persuasive in the courtroom, should not be the sole criterion in convicting a suspect. Innocent people can be convicted if labs that conduct these tests make a mistake. In both cases, we see defense attorneys questioning the manner in which blood samples were collected and handled and the accuracy of the DNA analysis. Second, samples recovered at a crime scene are not immediately useful without a suspect in custody. The Ann Arbor Police Department has been accused of strong- arming and manhandling local African Americans, as well as violating their indi- vidual rights, in the search for the Ann Arbor serial rapist. Kinesiology sophomore Marshelle Brooks said, "I'm pretty upset with the way the police randomly picked up Afri- can American men who may have fit the description of the serial rapist, and tested their DNA. They would never have picked up white men off the street." Finally, genetic experts are called to court at the request of the prosecution or defense. Any lawyer defending a client who has been charged in a crime in which DNA evidence is introduced wants to find scien- tists who will refute the evidence. An attor- ney for the prosecution wants to find scien- tists who will corroborate the evidence. Because opinions vary widely in science, it is possible to find an expert with any given opinion who will testify. Experts - who average $250 per hour - testify for a variety of purposes. Some are commendable - the advancement of science or protecting individual rights. Oth- ers are not - easy money, television ap- pearances and frequent flyer mileage. In any case, expert testimony is inher- ently biased. Jurors may know this and thus ignore the testimony, but why should a legal system encourage testimony that ought to be discounted? As the same experts testify in case after case, they become advocates- for or against a technology. Objectivity disappears. For O.J. Simpson, who's paying for the expert testimony of the scientist who in- vented the DNA test used in forensic sci- ence - the PCR test - as well as an entourage of investigators and lawyers work- ing for him 'round the clock, justice, it seems, is based on how many millions you have. Will Mitchellwith his court-appointed attorney, receive justice and a "fair" trial? Well, you get what you pay for. . Jim LASSER SHARP AS TOAST ar4dZn4str HER~E YOVAKE SONNY, ARE YOU SAVIN C-c UP WHAT FO R Lift the ban Court rightly axes 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' (4 - e (J' on't Ask, Don't Tell." A confusing term with a confused history. When President Clinton made a campaign issue out of allowing homosexuals to serve in the mili- tary, hope was given to all with an interest in civil rights that the military's ban on gay men and lesbians might finally come to an end. Unfortunately, Clinton's lofty goals disinte- grated after the election into a political brawl - and the president caved in to conservative pressure. The result was the ridiculous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, a sly compromise that represented real little change for homosexuals serving in the military. As expected, the policy was struck down last week in federal court as unconstitutional. The judge ruled that it violates the equal- protection clause of the 14th Amendment. He correctly noted that the military cannot ban people for simply "acknowledging who they are" and criticized the military for offering gay man and lesbians "inducements to lie." The Justice Department refuses to acknowl- edge the sense in this ruling. Government attorneys have vowed to take the issue to the Supreme Court if necessary. However, this would be a grave mistake, as it would continue a protracted court battle that would likely reaffirm the ruling. In the interestofjustice and prudence, the Clinton administration - as well as Congressional proponents of the policy - should give in and lift the ban. The Justice Department argued in court that allowing homosexuals into the military will harm morale, because "heterosexual ser- vice members will be so upset by a coworker's mere statement of homosexuality as not to work cooperatively in a unit." The fact that the government argued this incourt is shameful- the very same argument was used to prevent the racial desegregation of the military back in the 1940s. In addition to being outdated and How TO CONTACT THEM bigoted, the argument is inherently illogical. The military has extremely strict codes of social behavior on and off duty. It is illegal for any serviceperson to display affection to a coworker, show preference for one sex over the other, or to encourage or invite sexual activity with another serviceperson. As any heterosexual can easily be discharged from the military for sexual misconduct, so can homo- sexuals. Banning homosexuals from the military assumes that they already will engage in sexual misconduct, by the very virtue of their sexual orientation. However, homosexuals have been secretly serving in the military since its incep- tion, with no less acclaim than heterosexual service members.Of the six military personnel named in Friday's court ruling, four were cited for outstanding service records and none was discharged for specific sexual misconduct. They were thrown out solely due to their admission of homosexuality. The military lifestyle is rigorous and ap- peals only to a small proportion of people, heterosexual or homosexual. Lifting the ban will not engulf the military in "flamers" wait- ing for every opportunity to tempt other ser- vicemen into sexual trysts, as many in the military brass fear. Rather, it will simply allow a small group to acknowledge who they are - and then go back to the job they have had all along: serving their country. As Barry Goldwater once put it, "You don't have to be straight, just shoot straight." True enough. The ban on homosexuals in the mili- tary is wrong and should be lifted. As the most recent court ruling demonstrates, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a fraudulent attempt at tolerance that loosens the old ban in name only. Con- gress and the Clinton administration should recognize this, heed the judge's words and lift the ban in its entirety. 'M C-oNNvA RUCN FOR~ PRESIDVENT IN LEMONADE NOTABLE QUOTABLE "The police officers on campus will arrest you for smoking marijuana and we gotta change that. ..We gotta vote the regents the hell out of this University and vote some new ones inl" - Hash Bash organizer Adam Brook 0 I._ LETTERS Letter writer misrepresents 'Contract' protest To the Daily: This letter is in response to the misrepresentation perpe- trated against our march to pro- test the Contract on' America by Mr. Mark Fletcher ("Anti- Contract march a farce," 3/28/ 95). The first of many misrepre- sentations Mr. Fletcher uses in an attempt to discredit the march is that it is simply a "Democratic trick" organized by party "lack- eys". Although many Democrats surely oppose some elements of the Contract, they are not re- sponsible for organizing the march at the University. What Mr. Fletcher refers to as the "uniquely" named coalition is so called because it is exceed- ingly appropriate. The march is endorsed and organized by over 30 student groups who have put aside personal differences due to the Contract's extensively det- rimental proposals. The second misrepresenta- tion which Mr. Fletcherengages in is nothing more than a vicious exaggeration, "If the best the Dems can do against the Con- tract is pit Beavis and Butt-head against Newt Gingrich, I say that's pretty pathetic."Although in my involvement with the Coalition I have never heard any such proposal, I feel it is grate our efforts by criticizing what may have been one satirical comment. In addition, unfortu- nately this would not even be a very effective skit considering the fact that Newt Gingrich's ig- norance far surpasses that of any fictional character. The third misrepresentation which Mr. Fletcher details is a supposed flyer describing the genocidal Prop. 187 as a com- ponent of the Coptract. To be- gin, this is not what the flyer states. The flyer does compare Prop. 187 to measures in the Contract, such as portions of the Personal Responsibilities Act. This scapegoating act de- nies benefits to legal immigrants despite their tax dollars and other contributions to our society. In addition, Prop. 187 and the anti- immigrant measures of the Con- tract are a part of the same po- litical attitude which takes ad-* vantage of less-empowered groups such as immigrants, women, people of color, low- income groups and students for the sake of spend-thrift political appearances. Mr. Fletcher's fourth misrep- resentation states that the "Con- tract has nothing to do with gay rights." Although there are no specific measures against lesbi- ~nc oavc or hisexualk in the Contract, Mr. Fletcher surely does not mean to imply that the authors and supporters of the Contract are in favor of the civil rights which those groups are entitled to as Americans. In ad- dition, the supporters and au- thors of the Contract have al- ready made proposals to cut fed- eral funding from activities that "directly or indirectly" condone or accept homosexuality. In conclusion Mr. Fletcher only builds on his malignant dishonesty. Fletcher concludes his letter with, "The important thing is that the Republicans will soon have been able to ac- complish more ... How many honest Americans are going to protest that?." It is obvious that Mr. Fletcher does not understand the mission of the U.S. Congress, which is not to pass some enor- mous number of scapegoating bills creating an equally enor- mous amount of harm to our so- ciety. The point is to accomplish real progress on the American values of liberty, equality and justice. Nora Lynn Salas Member, Coalition Against the Contract 'on' America Co-chair of Public Opinion- elect, Alianza Pr1 cnrnr'irmrP Editorial unfair to candidate To the Daily: During the recent MSA elec- tion, some extremely unprofes- sional behavior was brought to my attention. Prior to the elec- tion, the Daily printed an ex- tremely offensive editorial that personally attacked the now LSA Student Government president- elect Rick Bernstein (LSA-SG: Vote Students', 3/21/95). The Daily has a right to ex- press any political opposition to a student's campaign. However, the editorial barely focused on Mr. Bernstein's platform. In- stead, personal epithets were strewn about in an attempt to weaken his campaign. It is diffi- cult to believe that such a self- proclaimed "liberal" newspaper would so blatantly and harmfully attack a student. Hidden agendas and personal vendettas do not belong in this publication. The Daily has a responsibility to in- form students, not intimidate them. This editorial crossed the line of professionalism, legiti- macy and basic human dignity. Fortunately, the majority of the student body supported Mr. Bernstein's ideas, abilities and visions. I only wish the Daily wasn't so limited in that respect. Office of the Ombudsman Interim Ombudsman Jennifer Walters 3000 Michigan Union T 13 F1CAr. Ruth A. Rott I I i