2.1 DNA profiling and the law in South Africa by S de Wet; H Oosthuizen and J Visser (2011)
This source is a journal written in 2011 from the Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal. This source provides detailed explanations about what DNA profiling is; how it is tested in labs during criminal investigations and how the South African criminal justice system views it as evidence. The journal accounts for the different methods used when analysing DNA profiles in a criminal investigation and the many shortcomings of some of these methods.
This source is very useful and is applicable to the topic as the journal covers all aspects concerning DNA profiling in great detail. Further, this journal clearly supports the use of DNA profiling as evidence. I did not find any limitations as the article was written fairly recently (2011) and the authors have also acknowledged the fact that technology is constantly advancing.
2.2 DNA fingerprinting: The Castro Case by Stephen M. Patton (1990)
This is a journal written by Patton who was a part of Harvard Law School, class of 1991 and was published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Technology. Owing to the credibility of the author and institution, this source contains valuable information relating to the topic.
It provides a detailed analysis of one of the first criminal cases where DNA fingerprinting was used as evidence to convict the suspect, Jose Castro. It is also the first case where the DNA evidence was not accepted by the court due to scientists failing to comply with certain scientific procedures. It thus questions the reliability of DNA fingerprinting being used as evidence. However, this source was written in 1990 and is therefore very outdated. There have been significant advancements ...
... middle of paper ...
...ve.php?pdfid=129 (1-65) [Retrieved March 18, 2014]
Easteal, P. W. (1990). no. 26. The Forensic Use of DNA Profiling, Available at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/1/2/8/%7B12877982-624A-4136-80D4-ACF694FD1144%7Dti26.pdf (1-8) [Retrieved March 4, 2014]
Patton, S. M. (1990). DNA Fingerprinting: The Castro Case. Volume 3, Spring issue, Available at: http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v03/03HarvJLTech223.pdf (224-240) [Retrieved February 20, 2014]
Roberts, H., & Raymond, J. T. (n.d.).The role of DNA profiling in criminal investigation. Available at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/conferences/medicine/raymond.pdf [Retrieved February 15, 2014]
Wet, S. d., & Visser, H. O. (2011). DNA profiling and the law in South Africa. P.E.R 2011 v14(4) (171-200), Available at: http://www.ajol.info/index.php/pelj/article/viewFile/68749/56819 [Retrieved February 15, 2014]
Office of the Inspector General. (2010). Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory’s Forensic DNA Case Backlog. U.S. Department of Justice.
“DNA samples of semen retrieved from the crime scene matched blood drawn from Andrews. At that time, no state had a DNA databank. However, after witnessing the power of DNA evidence, state courts and state legislatures would soon grapple with the issue of whether DNA evidence should be admitted at trial as identity evidence and whether establishing state DNA databanks would be feasible and of value to law enforcement. A review of current law reveals that almost every state has embraced and institutionalized the utilization of DNA fingerprinting for crime fighting purposes” (Hibbert,
The analysis of the samples should be used only to confirm or negate match between the sample taken from the crime scene fgand the sample taken from the suspect. That is, it should sdfremain as an identifgication tool only. There should be no further analysis of the DNA to suggest psychological characteristics that would make the suspect more likely to have cdfommitted the crime. This rule should apply also to samples taken from convicted dfdoffenders for a data vor dagta bank.
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.
In 1989 the National Research Council Committee on DNA Technology in Forensic Science was developed due to numerous scientific and legal issues (The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence). The National Research Council’s key role was to analyze statistical and population genetic issues in the use of DNA evidence and review major alternative approaches to statistical evaluation of DNA evidence (The Evaluation of Forensic DNA, 50). Over the past fifteen years DNA profiling has made tremendous advancements and continuous improvements in the fight against violent
Abstract; This paper explors the effects DNA fingerprinting has had on the trial courts and legal institutions. Judge Joseph Harris states that it is the "single greatest advance in the search for truth since the advent of the cross examination (Gest, 1988)." And I tend to agree with Judge Joseph's assertion, but with the invention and implementation of DNA profiling and technology has come numerous problems. This paper will explore: how DNA evidence was introduced into the trial courts, the effects of DNA evidence on the jury system and the future of DNA evidence in the trial courts.
First and foremost is the Michael Mosley case. Michael Mosley was convicted murdering a couple ten years ago (Wurtman, 2011). Two other men were cleared when Mosley’s DNA was found at the scene of the murder (Crowe II, 2012). Also, there was a palm print on the wall and further DNA on the sheets in the bedroom (Wurtman, 2011). In contrast to all the evidence, Mosley’s attorney offered an alternative reason and painted a picture of different events to explain Mosley’s DNA’s presence (Wurtman, 2011). However, the jury didn’t buy the defense’s story, and Michael Mosley’s conviction led to a call for the DNA database to be worked on with the most interesting fact being that Michael Mosley had no DNA in the system until seven years later than the crime (Crowe II, 2012).
InnocenceProject.org, “The Fact Sheet”. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University. 13 July 2011. http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Facts_on_PostConviction_DNA_Exonerations.php.
Since DNA technology has been used there has been a high number of individuals convicted, linked or found innocent of a crimes. This technology has helped law enforcement catch suspects that may have never been found without the use of this technology. However, the research reflected that there is a need for clearer interpretations of the DNA results, better equality provided for all regardless of race or class and that errors should be reduced to prevent having cases that need to be exonerated.
The collection of DNA in an investigation is used most often to determine who the perpetrator(s) might be in a crime. There has been a rapid growth since its inception and legal and ethical issues have arisen. In the Double –Helix Double-Edged ...
...data from law enforcement databases” for those who receive acquittals or whose convictions are overturned; there is no reference to physical DNA samples (Lwin, 2010, p21). Historically, legislative proposals purpose indefinite retention of evidentiary DNA samples, however the US, unlike England and Wales, does not refer to retention periods for genetic information post sentence completion. Individuals may find concern for personal genetic identifiers if the physical sample is retained post sentence completion, acquittal or if found innocent (Congressional Research Service, 2010, pp13-14; Beiber, 2002, p14). Studies assert the method of sample collection, accreditation of agencies collecting samples, legislative limits on retention periods for biometric information and a focus on balancing privacy and crime deterrence will structure a successful DNA database model.
"Using DNA to Solve Crimes." U.S. Department of Justice: National Institute of Justice. (September 9, 2014). Web. 29 May 2015.
Crime is a common public issue for people living in the inner city, but is not limited to only urban or highly populated cities as it can undoubtedly happen in small community and rural areas as well. In The Real CSI, the documentary exemplified many way in which experts used forensic science as evidence in trial cases to argue and to prove whether a person is innocent or guilty. In this paper, I explained the difference in fingerprinting technology depicted between television shows and in reality, how DNA technology change the way forensics evidence is used in the court proceedings, and how forensic evidence can be misused in the United States adversarial legal system.
Singer, Julie A. "The Impact Of Dna And Other Technology On The Criminal Justice System: Improvements And Complications."Albany Law Journal Of Science & Technology 17.(2007): 87. LexisNexis Academic: Law Reviews. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
...igators a lot about a perpetrator it can not tell them his name, where he lives or if he has a previous criminal record. While DNA profiling is not the only forensic tool available, DNA testing technology and improved databases are inspiring investigators and law enforcement agencies to re-open cases that were previously considered unsolvable.