After an audit last week recommended the Firearms Examination Unit (FEU) at the D.C. Department of Forensic Sciences (DFS) immediately cease casework, the ANSI National Accreditation Board (ANAB) temporarily suspended the lab’s accreditation as of April 2, 2021.
The suspension applies to the laboratory as a whole, not just the firearms unit. An official with the office of Mayor Muriel E. Bowser told The Washington Post that the suspension is in place for 30 days and the city will appeal the finding.
In the meantime, D.C. will need to contract with outside laboratories in order to process evidence in new cases. It is unclear what will happen to current DFS cases, but those will most likely also be transferred to third-party laboratories. Logistically, it’s possible, but certainly not preferable, and timing delays are now expected. The situation also creates a possible legal loophole for those cases with evidence being analyzed at the time of suspension.
ANAB is the same accreditation board that deemed the lab’s DNA procedures to be “inadequate” in 2015, leading to a 9-month suspension of DNA casework, the firing of two senior officials, the chief scientist and the senior manager for DNA testing, and the resignation of Max Houck, the lab’s director.
Jenifer Smith took over as lab director after Houck and all appeared to be going well. By 2018, the lab had two clean audits and was being heralded for improved communication with D.C. police and prosecutors.
The following year, however, the agency was once again embroiled in controversy. In October 2019, the Justice Department asked the laboratory to turn over documents and communications dealing with firearm evidence examination policies, as well as any reviews or indications of errors. The request called for material dating to 2015. Analysis of these documents led the inspector general’s office to initiate a criminal investigation, inclusive of an audit beginning January 2020.
Court documents obtained last week revealed partial results of that audit. The auditors—from the District of Columbia Office of the Attorney General—questioned the technical competence of all analysts in the laboratory, concluding on the need for all examiners to be evaluated before any additional casework be performed. The auditors also found “serious problems” with the DFS management team, saying, “management has cast doubt on the reliability of the work product of the entire DFS laboratory.”
The audit ties back to ballistics work performed on evidence from two homicides in August and November 2015. Firearms analysts at DFS originally determined cartridge casings recovered from the August homicide matched cartridge casings recovered from the November homicide. However, when prosecutors hired outside analysts to retest the shell casings before the trial, analysts determined the casings were not fired from the same gun. Once prosecutors informed the lab of the potential error, retesting was performed.
Ballistics supervisor Jonathan Fried and another analyst retested the casings and reached a conclusion of elimination, agreeing with the outside analysts who cast doubt on the initial results. According to court documents submitted by the auditors, Fried says he presented the new elimination results to superiors Wayne Arendse and Jonathan Pope, but they expressed concerns that the conclusion would show DFS made a mistake. The evidence was subsequently presented to two other analysts, who reached a conclusion of identification. However, Fried says there was insufficient time for the analysts to conduct a full examination.
Ultimately, Arendse and Pope submitted the official report with a conclusion of “inconclusive” due to the conflicting findings of various analysts. These results were also communicated to the SAB and ANAB on May 6, 2020. Pope then asked Fried to do a reexamination, to which Fried suggested an outside examiner as he felt he was inherently biased. Fried’s request was denied, with Pope claiming the reexamination order came directly from DFS Director Smith, which was untrue.
“Though never directly told to reach a finding of inconclusive, Fried believes he was manipulated by management into conducting an examination when he had a bias,” reads the court document.
The court documents were filed on March 22—11 days before ANAB announced the lab’s temporary suspension.