Keith's older brother, Bruce, believes DNA can solve this case and prevent killers from striking again. His faith is so profound that the developer and attorney has poured $1.9 million of his own money into Proposition 69, an initiative requiring those arrested on any felony charge to submit DNA samples to a statewide database. The proposition goes beyond existing state law by testing regardless of proven guilt and including all felony offenses instead of just serious felonies.

Critics call the initiative a threat to privacy.

Like Bruce Harrington, some of its supporters are driven by a powerful desire to act on behalf of a murdered family member. Linda Thompson's younger sister, Karen, was raped and stabbed to death 25 years ago. DNA evidence led to charges against Willie B. Thomas two years ago. He has yet to be convicted for the murder.

"I know in my heart it's what she would want me to do," said Thompson, referring to her support for the proposition. "Things happen for a reason, you know."

Bereaved family members or victims often lobby for changes in the law designed to prevent similar tragedies. In recent years, notable examples include Megan's Law, which provides local communities with detailed information about registered sex offenders, and Laci and Connor's Law, which creates a separate criminal offense if an unborn child is injured or killed when an injury or death occurs to the child's mother.

The California version of Megan's Law was created in 1996, two years after the death of 7-year-old Megan Kanka. The New Jersey girl was killed by a convicted child molester living across the street. Since Kanka's murder, all states have passed some form of the law. Laci and Connor's Law was prompted by the death of Laci Peterson, who was pregnant when she vanished. Months later, the woman's remains washed up on the East Bay shoreline near Richmond.

California's unique initiative process allows the wealthy or well-financed to bypass the legislature and take their suggested reforms straight to the public. Lawyer and columnis Stuart Taylor says, when Californians vote on an initiative that strikes an emotional chord, it can often mean a choice between solid public policy and sympathy for a victim.

Henry Brady, a University of California Berkeley professor of political science and an expert on public opinion, said that during elections, urgency is a key element of voter decision-making and that "emotions can be powerful motivators."

Brady said the Three Strikes debate is an interesting example since there is a strong majority opinion ten years later that it should be revised. Looking back, he said, "A compelling personal story trumps everything and it's going to be hard for the opponents to come up with an argument."

The Three Strikes initiative, passed in 1994 with overwhelming public support, is likely the most famous example of infusing policy reform with a personal story. When Mike Reynolds' daughter, Kimber, was killed by a violent repeat offender, Reynolds took his pain and suffering to the ballot. The killer had a long rap sheet and at least one prior felony conviction.

Reynolds' initiative, Proposition 184, sent repeat offenders to jail for life after a third felony. Critics called the reform draconian and dangerous when Reynolds proposed it in 1993. Later that year, the kidnapping and murder of Polly Klaas by a repeat offender on parole galvanized enough public support to place 184 on the November 1994 ballot. It won with 72 percent of the vote.

"People are voting for a symbol instead of a carefully crafted piece of legislation," said Taylor, who wrote about the issue in 1994. "It's a fairly familiar phenomenon: when somebody has a great loss, they want the world to do something for them."

In December 2003, when Bruce Harrington announced his intent to place Proposition 69 on the ballot, he said that the Democratic leadership in the California legislature had stymied attempts to cast a wider net for DNA samples and was preventing killers from being caught.

Harrington hopes that wider testing will ensnare the killer who entered the couple's home at night and raped his sister-in-law. The newlyweds were bludgeoned to death.

According to Prop. 69 campaign director Beth Pendexter, Harrington viewed the ballot initiative as a back-up in case similar legislation sponsored this year by Senator Jackie Speier failed.

Since the creation in 1998 of a DNA databank for keeping and testing samples of serious felons, the legislature has twice voted to expand the pool of those tested. At the outset, the list of those tested included felons convicted of murder, spousal abuse, sexual assault and kidnapping. In 2001 AB 673 passed unanimously in the Assembly and the Senate, and added convictions for burglary, arson and carjacking, among other felony offenses.

Senator Speier's legislation would have required testing for a person convicted of any felony offense. The proposal died this summer in a committee, but Senator Speier is a statewide co-chair of the campaign for Proposition 69.

Tracy Fairchild, Communications Director for Senator Speier, said, "She believed her bill was a better bill than the initiative, but it's better to move forward and solve more crimes."

Under Speier's legislation, only individuals convicted for a felony offense would be tested. If voters approve it, Prop. 69 will require testing an individual arrested on the suspicion of a felony.

While the legislature debates a bill in session, an initiative campaign calls on more emotional arguments. "There are so many families that have crimes like these that deserve answers and there are so many roadblocks," said Thompson in an argument that's typical of the initiative. "How long do you stop for?"

Former Congressman Bob Barr said Thompson has a "legitimate point," but opposes the proposition because it goes too far. "This should be viewed not in the light of emotion but in the light of the Constitution," Barr said, referring to the Fourth Amendment right to privacy.

"Some things we need to get right instead of rushing to them."