DNA Testing

649 Words2 Pages

DNA testing
Without DNA testing, an innocent person may go to prison for a crime they did not commit and a bad person walk free. DNA is the main part of an individual’s genetic makeup. DNA can be determined by saliva, blood, bones, and even teeth. DNA technology helps the criminal justice system put the right person in prison in a fair matter with proof.
THESIS
Forensic DNA analysis has proven to be very essential in criminal cases. Donald Shelton stated in his “DNA evidence is now universily admitted by courts in the United States because of its realibility and the fact that, absent fraud or an error in labeling or handling, the probabilities of a false positive are miniscule” (28). Before DNA evidence was used in courts, eye witness testimony was more heavily relied upon and this brought many dangers of misidentifications. The Innocence Project shows a statistic eyewitness misidentifications were a factor in more than 70% of the initial 239 DNA exoneration cases. The U.S. congress stated that “DNA analysis can also be seen to be valid as it provides a scientific basis which allows for a physical link to be made between a criminal and a crime scene in order to secure a conviction” (503). DNA provided the truth and can prove what the criminal did in the crime scene and how he was involved in the scene. Forensic DNA analysis has been proven very reliable in cases because without DNA there has been a high percentage of eyewitness misidentifications that changed the outcome of the trial.

DNA has played a huge part in exoneration cases. The first DNA exoneration case dated back in 1986 involving a suspect named Colin Pitchfork who was acused of raping and murdering of two young girls in Leicestershire in 1983. Alan Gunn expressed “T...

... middle of paper ...

...Project has made a big difference in exonerees and has saved their lives.
DNA evidence is the biggest deciding factor for guilty verdicts in jury trials because without factual proof, the suspect cant be proven to be the bad guy. There are 2 well known syndromes the jury faces in trial: “White Coat Syndrome” and the “CSI Effect”. The “White Coat Syndrome” is described that the jurors believe “science does not lie” (Benjamin R. Newell). There is an example of this syndrome that happened in Australia. “They tend to regard it as infallible and so once it comes in, the very fact that the judge has admitted the evidence is often construed as an indication that it must be reliable, and therefore rely on it without questioning it very thoroughly” (Professor Jane-Goodman Delahunty). The prosecutor in the trial confused the jury and it worked in his favor. The “CSI Effect”

Open Document