Entry 5:
Citation: Cale, Cynthia M. "Forensic DNA Is Not Infallible." ProQuest. ProQuest LLC, 29 Oct. 2015. Web. 10 Mar. 2017.
Summary: Concerns have been raised about the accuracy of the statistical interpretation of DNA evidence. When genetic profiles of suspects and offenders are generated in a laboratory from a few skin cells left at a crime scene, the accuracy of the data is called to question. This type of evidence—touch DNA—can be unreliable since; an innocent person’s DNA can be inadvertently transferred to surfaces that he or she has never come into contact with. It is difficult to know if DNA left behind was from direct contact or secondary contact with an object. Contamination can occur at different levels of the investigative process,
…show more content…
The future of forensic science includes new technology that can take away the unreliability of evidence that is seen today. The new technology would reduce contamination so that the evidence is accurate. Off-site equipment would be very helpful because the time it would take to transfer evidence from a crime scene to a laboratory would be diminished. Since forensic science grew rapidly the demand for more efficient technology came quickly as well. The journal’s strength is that it has a wide array of information and ideas that are supported by facts and examples. I think that including information on how forensic science will progress in my research paper is important because the relevancy of paper would be …show more content…
• “Given the constraints of the legal system and the complexity of forensic science, more work is needed before the communication of forensic science can be considered optimal”(Howes).
• “Clear communication about forensic science is essential to the effectiveness and perceived trustworthiness of the criminal justice system”(Howes).
• “…errors were introduced by prosecution lawyers in closing, and tended not to be challenged by defense lawyers who seldom had access to their own expert scientists”(Howes).
Evaluation: The fact the miscommunication or misunderstanding of forensic evidence can affect the outcome of a court case is very important. The unreliability of DNA evidence is not the only problem the justice is facing, and to avoid these types of situations there needs to be a universal model on how to interpret forensic evidence correctly as well as someone to make sure that evidence is used correctly in court. My research question does not specially address this problem, however, I think that forensic science has integrated completely yet due to problems in communication. It’s a work in progress. A strength that this journal has is that it uses examples to support ideas and explains to the reader the importance of communication in the justice system. The journal is credible because it has been peer-reviewed and the author provides
Since the airing of the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and the other televised series that followed have led jurors to compare fiction with reality. The shows have changed the view on the real world of forensic science as the series have a world of forensic science of their own. For this paper the televised series titled Bones by forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs will be used as an example for comparison. In the series Bones Dr. Temperance Brenan arrives at the scene of the crime to examine the skeletal remains found in the scene of the crime equipped with one or more forensic kits. Upon momentarily examining the skeletal remains Dr. Brenan is able to determine the gender, ethnicity, and age. When this type of scenario is compared to nonfictional
Nowadays, DNA is a crucial component of a crime scene investigation, used to both to identify perpetrators from crime scenes and to determine a suspect’s guilt or innocence (Butler, 2005). The method of constructing a distinctive “fingerprint” from an individual’s DNA was first described by Alec Jeffreys in 1985. He discovered regions of repetitions of nucleotides inherent in DNA strands that differed from person to person (now known as variable number of tandem repeats, or VNTRs), and developed a technique to adjust the length variation into a definitive identity marker (Butler, 2005). Since then, DNA fingerprinting has been refined to be an indispensible source of evidence, expanded into multiple methods befitting different types of DNA samples. One of the more controversial practices of DNA forensics is familial DNA searching, which takes partial, rather than exact, matches between crime scene DNA and DNA stored in a public database as possible leads for further examination and information about the suspect. Using familial DNA searching for investigative purposes is a reliable and advantageous method to convict criminals.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
Forensic psychology is a continually adapting sphere. It is hard to have one solid definition for the field, as there are so many aspects that interlock. Within each attribute of the forensic psychology has roles and responsibilities to sustain. The rapid growth and emerging importance of this field volumes of information will be developed in the next decade.
Once a crime has been committed the most important item to recover is any type of evidence left at the scene. If the suspect left any Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) at the crime scene, he could then be linked to the crime and eventually charged. A suspect’s DNA can be recovered if the suspect leaves a sample of his or her DNA at the crime scene. However, this method was not always used to track down a suspect. Not too long ago, detectives used to use bite marks, blood stain detection, blood grouping as the primary tool to identify a suspect. DNA can be left or collected from the hair, saliva, blood, mucus, semen, urine, fecal matter, and even the bones. DNA analysis has been the most recent technique employed by the forensic science community to identify a suspect or victim since the use of fingerprinting. Moreover, since the introduction of this new technique it has been a la...
Another problem in Crime scene investigation is lost evidence. Often wide spread trampling of evidence in a crime scene can show to be very damaging. Also, implicating practice in a crime scene office can be hurtful if the rules are not regulated. Also, showing examples of detectives showing positive good examples for other officers to follow (Byrd 2).
Office of the Inspector General. (2010). Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory’s Forensic DNA Case Backlog. U.S. Department of Justice.
The theory of DNA, simply stated, is that an individual’s genetic information is unique, with the exception of identical twins, and that it “definitively links biological evidence such as blood, semen, hair and tissue to a single individual” (Saferstein, 2013). This theory has been generally accepted since the mid-80s throughout the scientific community and hence, pursuant to the 1923 Frye ruling, also deemed admissible evidence throughout our justice system.
Before the 1980s, courts relied on testimony and eyewitness accounts as a main source of evidence. Notoriously unreliable, these techniques have since faded away to the stunning reliability of DNA forensics. In 1984, British geneticist Alec Jeffreys of the University of Leicester discovered an interesting new marker in the human genome. Most DNA information is the same in every human, but the junk code between genes is unique to every person. Junk DNA used for investigative purposes can be found in blood, saliva, perspiration, sexual fluid, skin tissue, bone marrow, dental pulp, and hair follicles (Butler, 2011). By analyzing this junk code, Jeffreys found certain sequences of 10 to 100 base pairs repeated multiple times. These tandem repeats are also the same for all people, but the number of repetitions is highly variable. Before this discovery, a drop of blood at a crime scene could only reveal a person’s blood type, plus a few proteins unique to certain people. Now DNA forensics can expose a person’s gender, race, susceptibility to diseases, and even propensity for high aggression or drug abuse (Butler, 2011). More importantly, the certainty of DNA evidence is extremely powerful in court. Astounded at this technology’s almost perfect accuracy, the FBI changed the name of its Serology Unit to the DNA Analysis Unit in 1988 when they began accepting requests for DNA comparisons (Using DNA to Solve Crimes, 2014).
Each laboratory has its own standard and guidelines rather than having uniformity across the industry. This allows one forensic labs results to be different to another’s based on their own individual practices. The standards and guidelines for the checking of forensic laboratories varies from state to state and the inspection is peer assessed. This is a problem as the auditing of the labs may be subject to bias rather than using an independent authority. Lab test guidelines might not result in all evidence having to be reported. For example, the Waring case in Western Australia, where a young man was charged with rape because the lab failed to report that more than Waring’s DNA was found in the victim’s rape kit. According to this lab’s approved guidelines – low levels of DNA below a certain point found, do not have to be reported (7). The issue of what standard was being used was not evident in this case. If the guidelines had required the forensic scientist to reveal even the very low samples of a second male’s DNA, the jury may not have convicted an innocent person (8). When the professionals get it wrong, and they do, their authority and their power alters the lives of innocent people. Pressure can be placed on forensic scientists and technicians. So when something doesn’t fit with what has been predicted, it has been known that tampering of evidence can occur. Forensic science requires
This is a highly important topic to any type of forensic specialist as it can
Forensic Science, recognized as Forensics, is the solicitation of science to law to understand evidences for crime investigation. Forensic scientists are investigators that collect evidences at the crime scene and analyse it uses technology to reveal scientific evidence in a range of fields. Physical evidence are included things that can be seen, whether with the naked eye or through the use of magnification or other analytical tools. Some of this evidence is categorized as impression evidence2.In this report I’ll determine the areas of forensic science that are relevant to particular investigation and setting out in what method the forensic science procedures I have recognized that would be useful for the particular crime scene.
The transitional growth in the forensic science sector has not been without challenges. Though the world has experienced increased capabilities and scientific knowledge, which has led to faster investigations and results, many forensic experts have argued that forensic laboratory testing, in the light of 21st century technological advancements, is yet to meet the expected rate in quick available testing and analysis (Mennell & Shaw, 2006). This is with respect to the growing rate of crime and the high demand of quick crime scene testing and analysis. In the science of crime scene, analysis and interpretation of evidence is majorly dependent on forensic science, highlighting the change in the role of forensic sciences (Tjin-A-Tsoi, 2013). In the business of forensic science, time is beginning to play important role in the evidence testing and analysis which is becoming crucial in reducing ...
Forensic science has now been recognized as an important part of the law enforcement team to help solve crimes and cold cases. The advances in technology are being used each day and we must continue to strive to develop better advances in this field. The recent discovery of using DNA in criminal cases has helped not only positively identify the suspect, but it has helped exonerate hundreds of innocent individuals. “With new advances in police technology and computer science, crime scene investigation and forensic science will only become more precise as we head into the future.” (Roufa, 2017) Forensic science and evidence helps law enforcement officials solve crimes through the collection, preservation and analysis of evidence. By having a mobile crime laboratory, the scene gets processed quicker and more efficiently. Forensic science will only grow in the future to be a benefit for the criminal justice
“The word ‘forensics’ means “connected with the courtroom”; so forensic science is, therefore, concerned with gathering hard evidence that can be presented in a trial” (Innes 9). Forensic science is a science that is applied specifically to legal matters, whether criminal or civil. “Few areas in the realm of science are as widespread and important as forensic science” (Hunter 12). Forensics is the one science that is most commonly used in everyday life. It is also a branch of science that incorporates other branches of science such as biology, chemistry, and etc. Since it is used almost every day “No one can dispute the importance of the contributions to society made by forensic science; the ability to solve crime is undeniably important” (Hunter 13). Forensic science has given criminal investigation a new edge. “Advances in science have opened the door for more effective evidence discovery, howev...