Justice demands that the law keep pace with advancing technology, and a ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court last week helps ensure that it will.

In a case that dates back to two violent rapes in 1991, the court found that a defendant who was identified only by his DNA profile at the time of a grand jury indictment can be prosecuted – even if the statute of limitations on the crime ran out before that profile was linked to him by name.

It wasn’t until 2006 that physical evidence in the ’91 rape cases was used to create a genetic profile for the unidentified defendant, and a so-called “John Doe” indictment that included the DNA profile was issued days before time ran out. Because of unrelated crimes, defendant Jerry Dixon submitted a required DNA sample in 2008 that turned out to be an exact match. Prosecutors amended the indictment to include Dixon’s name.

He challenged the prosecution, but the court concluded that a DNA profile is an “indelible ‘bar code’ that labels an individual’s identity with nearly irrefutable precision,” and because the indictment was issued within the time limit, the prosecution can proceed.

There should be no legislative “fix” for this one.