READING, Pa.- Over the decades, the way crimes are solved and the way they are perpetrated has changed.
“I think solving crimes is a lot like solving puzzles,” says Carla Abodalo, a criminology professor at Albright College.
“It’s easier to do when you have all the pieces.”
Abodalo has studied crimes and how they’re solved for decades. She says in the late 1990s, DNA technology was still evolving but in the past two decades, it’s changed rapidly.
With modern advancements, investigators are able to test smaller DNA samples. They also have databases like CODIS and others to store and compare information on a wider scale.
“As techniques in law enforcement advance, so do criminals,” says Abodalo. “They’re very much aware of the fact that, ‘Oh, I don’t want to leave DNA at the scene,’ or that, ‘I could be filmed from some cell phone.'”
DNA technology has helped close some notable cold cases in Berks County, like identifying the killer of Myrtle Rupp, a woman who was killed inside her Muhlenberg Township home in 1979. It also helped give names to two Jane Does who were murdered and buried in Potters Field in Cumru Township.
Genetic genealogy also recently named Joseph Zarelli as the boy in the box after 65 years.
But Abodalo says you have to proceed with caution because DNA evidence is more likely to eliminate a suspect than pinpoint blame.
“Suspect A may have committed the crime, whereas suspect B definitely could not have. That’s a very stark difference,” says Abodalo.
She’s hopeful modern crime-solving techniques will help to close more decades-old cold cases but describes it as a double-edged sword and says DNA shouldn’t be the only tool for investigators.
“You want to use a variety of tools in your arsenal, every tool at your disposal so that you can have the best possible outcome to avoid a miscarriage of justice,” says Abodalo. “That’s all we can hope for at the end of the day.”
