Over the years technologies used in the criminal justice system have continued to become more advance and more difficult for the average person to understand. One of these relatively new and advanced ways investigators are getting evidence is deoxyribonucleic acid also know simply as DNA. DNA is the building block to life; everything that has ever lived has had DNA. DNA is a blueprint for your body that determines everything about you. This is good because DNA is unique to every person for the exception of identical twins. The certainty that all DNA is unique is very high. DNA is found in all types of body fluids such as blood, skin, sweat, tears, semen, vaginal secretions, salvia, urine and hair. These are often left behind at different crime scene’s depending on the type of crime. For instance if you were investigating a homicide you could look for blood at the crime scene. Another example would be if you were investigating a rape, you could try and get a sample of semen or vaginal secretion. DNA can be found just about anywhere, the hard part is finding and collecting it. (Deoxyribonucleic Acid, 2014) …show more content…
There are rules that have to be followed in order for DNA to be used. First and most importantly the integrity of the crime scene must be protected this means that only people permitted to see the crime scene should see the crime scene, evidence should not be moved around until documented and photographed, a description of how the evidence was found should be included for example weather the evidence was wet or dry. Small things like this may seem trivial but they can play a role in weather or not the evidence can be used for the prosecution or the defense. (Smith,
DNA evidence should not be collected from suspects as a matter of routine unless the information is relevant to a specific crime in question. For example, it would appropriate to obtain a DNA sample from a suspect where DNA evidence is left at the scene of a crime and the suspect's DNA in needed to prove the suspect's involvement.
DNA is the blueprint of life. It stores our genetic information which is what is in charge of how our physical appearance will look like. 99.9% of human DNA is the same in every person yet the remaining .1% is what distinguishes each person (Noble Prize). This small percentage is enough to make each person different and it makes identifying people a lot easier when its necessary. DNA not only serves to test relationships between people it also helps in criminal cases. DNA testing in criminal cases has not been around for many years if fact it was not until the early 1990s when the use of DNA testing for criminal cases was approved and made available. By comparing the DNA of a suspect and that found in the crime scene a person can either be convicted of a crime or they can be exonerated. This method of testing gained more publicity in the 1984 case of Kirk Noble Bloodsworth a man who had been convicted of the rape and first degree murder of a nine year old girl in Maryland. His case was a milestone in the criminal justice system since it involved the use of new technology and it also raised the question of how many people had been wrongly incarcerated for a crime they did not commit.
. 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, there has been a large number of individuals released or convicted of crimes based on DNA left at the crime scene. DNA is the abbreviation for deoxyribonucleic acid.
The origins of DNA were first discovered during 1857 by Gregor Mendel the "Father of Genetics”, whom was performing an experiment of genetics with pea plants, and would provide a basic foundation towards DNA and Genetics. Friedrich Miescher and Richard Altmann in 1869 were also part of the first people to discover DNA. While testing some sperm of a salmon, they discover a strange substance that they would name as "nuclein", which is known as DNA. This new form of "nuclein" (DNA) would be found to only exist in chromosomes. Frederick Griffith, a researcher, found the basis on DNA, from a molecule inheritance experiment involving mice and two types of pneumonia. His findings were that, when virulent disease is heated up (to kill) and is injected into a mouse, the mouse survives. Unlike the second mouse that has been injected with non-virulent disease and virulent disease (that had been heated and killed) is killed. This would be caused by an inheritance of molecule (transformation) of virulent bacteria passing on a characteristic to the non-virulent. DNA findings would continue to be tested and tried to better understand how DNA works.
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).
The most important type of evidence is DNA. When DNA testing takes place, the samples are collected from the suspect and the crime scene. These evidences include hair, fingerprint, human secretions, blood, semen and other bodily fluids, are collected and sent to the lab for further investigation.
On March 7th of 2008 a moot court was held addressing racial preferences in higher education. The case, set in 2013, involves the University of Kentucky using mandatory DNA testing as a major factor in determining aid from affirmative action. The plaintiff, an African American, does not receive preference because through the test he discovers he is a quarter European. On the opposing side, the defendant is a Caucasian female who discovers she is part African American and is eligible for the preference pool. This document will address the idea of using DNA testing as an admission requirement and the issues this case presents.
DNA in forensic science has been around for a long time. DNA has had help in solving almost every crime committed. There have been a lot of crimes where people are raped or murdered and the person who did it runs free. Scientists can collect the littlest item they see at the scene, such as a cigarette butt or coffee cup and check it for DNA. People have spent years in jail for a crime they didn’t commit till DNA testing came into effect. People are getting out of jail after 20 years for a crime they didn’t commit, cause of the DNA testing. DNA has helped medical researchers develop vaccines for disease causing microbe. DNA has become a standard tool of forensics in many murders and rapes.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic exists in all living organisms, is self-replicating and gives a person their unique characteristics. No two people have the same matching DNA. There are many different forms of DNA that are tested for situations such as criminal. Bodily fluids, hair follicles and bone tissues are some of the most common types of DNA that is tested in crime labs today. Although the discovery of DNA dates back to 1866 when Gregor Mendel proved the inheritance of factors in pea plants, DNA testing is relatively new and have been the prime factor when solving crimes in general. In 1966, scientists discovered a genetic code that made it possible to predict characteristics by studying DNA. This lead to genetic engineering and genetic counseling. In 1980, Organ was the first to have a conviction based off DNA fingerprinting and DNA testing in forensics cases became famous in 1995 during the O.J. Simpson trial (SMC History , 2011).
The criminal justice system has changed a lot since the good old days of the Wild West when pretty much anything was legal. Criminals were dealt with in any fashion the law enforcement saw fit. The science of catching criminals has evolved since these days. We are better at catching criminals than ever and we owe this advancement to forensic science. The development of forensic science has given us the important techniques of fingerprinting and DNA analysis. We can use these techniques to catch criminals, prove people's innocence, and keep track of inmates after they have been paroled. There are many different ways of solving crimes using forensic evidence. One of these ways is using blood spatter analysis; this is where the distribution and pattern of bloodstains is studied to find the nature of the event that caused the blood spatter. Many things go into the determination of the cause including: the effects of various types of physical forces on blood, the interaction between blood and the surfaces on which it falls, the location of the person shedding the blood, the location and actions of the assailant, and the movement of them both during the incident. Another common type of forensic evidence is trace evidence. This is commonly recovered from any number of items at a crime scene. These items can include carpet fibers, clothing fibers, or hair found in or around the crime scene. Hairs recovered from crime scenes can be used as an important source of DNA. Examination of material recovered from a victim's or suspect's clothing can allow association to be made between the victim and other people, places, or things involved in the investigation. DNA analysis is the most important part of forensic science. DNA evidence can come in many forms at the crime scene. Some of these forms include hair; bodily fluids recovered at the crime scene or on the victim's body, skin under the victim's fingernails, blood, and many others. This DNA can be the basis of someone's guilt or innocence; it has decided many cases in the twentieth century. As the times continue to change and the criminals get smarter we will always need to find new ways to catch them. Forensic science is the most advanced method yet, but is only the beginning. As the field of science grows so will the abilities of the
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...
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 ...
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is an acclaimed extraordinary discovery that has contributed great benefits in several fields throughout the world. DNA evidence is accounted for in the majority of cases presented in the criminal justice system. It is known as our very own unique genetic fingerprint; “a chromosome molecule which carries genetic coding unique to each person with the only exception of identical twins (that is why it is also called 'DNA fingerprinting ')” (Duhaime, n.d.). DNA is found in the nuclei of cells of nearly all living things.
"Using DNA to Solve Crimes." U.S. Department of Justice: National Institute of Justice. (September 9, 2014). Web. 29 May 2015.
The process of gathering evidence largely depends on the role of discretion by the police. Once police have decided to pursue a reported crime, they then begin the process of gathering evidence. To ensure that the process of gathering evidence is lawful, the police must follow the procedure outlined in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), which describes the manner in which evidence can be collected. This act imposes certain limits on the way police can gather evidence and the types of evidence that can be used. The Act is able to protect the rights of citizens by making it a requirement for the police to gain necessary legal documentation, such as search warrants, in order to obtain some types of evidence and thus, protects the rights of ordinary systems. In more recent times, the use of technology has come to play a major role in the gathering of evidence and with this comes complications in the law. New technologies in relation to the criminal investigation process are mainly in reference to DNA evidence, genetic material that can place a suspect at the scene of a crime. The introduction of DNA evidence into the criminal investigation process has been extremely effective in achieving justice, as it is able to secure convictions. Initially, there were some setbacks to the use of DNA evidence