Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
effectiveness of DNA profiling
effectiveness of DNA profiling
effectiveness of DNA profiling
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: effectiveness of DNA profiling
DNA Profiling Used in Courts
DNA profiling is a technique often used to identify criminals or the
biological parents of a child through the analysis of their
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The technique is very successful as it is
based on the fact that every person possesses their own individual set
of DNA, which is unique to them with the exception of identical twins.
DNA found in materials such as blood, semen, bone and hair is
extracted for analysis. There are issues involved in its application
as it can be seen as an invasion of ones privacy through the use of
DNA banks. Recently there has been some speculation about the accuracy
of DNA profiling leading to concerns regarding the potential for
criminals to have been falsely convicted. The cost of DNA profiling is
very expensive making it inaccessible to some people. There is also
potential for the misuse of DNA profiling.
There are several different techniques of DNA profiling currently used
today. I have chosen to investigate the most common type of DNA
profiling, restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP). The first
part of the process is called restriction digest. Firstly the DNA is
broken into pieces using an enzyme called Hinfl. This enzyme, which
comes from the bacteria Haemophilus influenza, is able to recognise
and break DNA whenever a sequence of GANTC appears. GANTC stands for
the bases that are found in DNA (Guanine, Adenine, Cytosine and
Thymine). The N stands for any nucleotide (phosphorus and sugar). The
pieces of DNA are then sorted by size using electrophoresis. DNA
particles are placed into an agarose gel and an electrical charge is
applied to gel. A positive charge is applied to the bottom and a
negative charge to the top of the gel, which is able to conduct
electricity. The negatively charged DNA particles are attracted to the
bottom of the gel. The smaller fragments of DNA move quicker so they
will be found at the very bottom of the gel. Heat or chemicals are
used to break the DNA into single strands, which involves breaking the
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.
It is the way of life in this age, to search the internet for leisure, research and general amusement. When you are not able to communicate with someone face to face, you pick up the phone. When you venture out of your house for any reason and into populated areas, you are recorded by businesses, photographed by red light cameras, and recorded by traffic cameras. The government has the capacity to watch all of this use. Last year, Edward Snowden’s leaked documents proved it that Big Brother is indeed watching. (Orwell 1)
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.
Privacy is becoming rare as our society continues to become more industrialized and move towards a society hyper-focused on technology. Nicholas Carr explains this obsession with technology in his essay “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty.” He identifies three dangers that are present in today’s internet society that are: personal data can fall into the wrong hands easily, personal information may be used to influence our behavior, and personal privacy is eroding and may lead us as a society to devalue the concept of privacy. These dangers are not only possible but they are seen in our world today.
In Maryland law enforcement officers are authorizes to collect DNA samples when someone is arrested through the Maryland DNA Collection Act (MDCA) even if they are not convicted of the crime of they commit which include, violent crimes, burglary, or attempted burglary. In 2009, Alonzo Jay King, Jr. was arrested on first and second degree assault charges. While he was under arrest King’s DNA was collected and logged into the Maryland DNA database, before he was ever convicted. The database matched the sample of King’s DNA to a sample of DNA from an unsolved rape case. The sample was the only evidence that linked King to the rape case. King sought to suppress the evidence but the trial judge denied his motion. The DNA evidence was used to help convict him of first-degree rape and he was sentenced to life in prison. King then appealed his conviction, arguing that the Maryland DNA Collect Act was an unconstitutional
States. The FBI performs testing for free to all police agencies to help keep costs down
Before the late 1800’s, DNA was never used in court cases. We did not have the equipment readily available. Then, in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, DNA testing started to become very popular. This is when cases started getting overturned from wrongful court convictions. Which meant that the criminal that had actually committed the crime was on the loose in the community still able to do harm. In today’s generation, we still have many wrongful court convictions. Either due to their being little to no DNA evidence in the beginning of their case or the DNA evidence was tested incorrectly or possibly tampered with and that is what lead to the conviction of the wrong person. With the high level of technology we have today and the highly skilled experts in the labs we shouldn’t have any wrongful convictions. While we
Since 2000,the television show called CSI: Criminal Scene Investigation has given the expectation that all cases are easy and fast to solve, as portrayed in the show. This notion has lead to the glorification of DNA profiling and the problem of cases being solely based DNA evidence and ruling out other factors. According to FBI- National DNA Index (NDI), in North Carolina alone over 2,967 cases have been "helped" using the DNA database (Federal Bureau Investigation,2016). DNA is something that should be a supplement to a case. It is not meant to be the only thing between innocence and guilty. DNA analysis is important to the criminal investigation process, but in recent research, it has been shown that cases are being victim to unfair DNA
In 1893, Francis Galton introduced a remarkable new way to identify people ("Fingerprinting" pg 1 par 3). His observation that each individual has a unique set of fingerprints revolutionized the world of forensics. Soon, all investigators had adapted the idea to use fingerprints as a form of identification. Unfortunately, over the course of the past century, criminals have adapted to this technique and seldom leave their incriminating marks at the crime scene. Forensics specialists were in need of a new way to identify criminals, and DNA provided the answer. When it comes to genetic material, it is virtually impossible for a criminal to leave a crime scene "clean." Whether it is a hair, flakes of skin, or a fragment of fingernail, if it contains genetic material then it has potential to incriminate. However, there are still concerns regarding DNA fingerprinting. What are the implications of using these tests in a courtroom scenario? What happens when DNA tests go awry? It is debatable whether or not DNA fingerprinting has a place in America's court systems.
Forensics has been greatly enhanced by technology. DNA profiling is one of the technologies that has influenced efficiency and credibility of forensic evidence. The FBI first started using DNA in one of its cases in 1988. In Europe, the United Kingdom opened a DNA database in 1955 (Milena, 2006). The main use of the DNA is to compare the evidence collected at crime scene with the suspects. In addition, it helps to establish a connection between the evidence and the criminals. The investigations have been simplified through the use of technology and DNA has been one of the most effective methods in investigations.
This paper explores deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) collection and its relationship to solving crimes. The collection of DNA is one of the most important steps in identifying a suspect in a crime. DNA evidence can either convict or exonerate an individual of a crime. Furthermore, the accuracy of forensic identification of evidence has the possibility of leaving biased effects on a juror (Carrell, Krauss, Liberman, Miethe, 2008). This paper examines Carrells et al’s research along with three other research articles to review how DNA is collected, the effects that is has on a juror and the pros and cons of DNA collection in the Forensic Science and Criminal Justice community.
DNA—the Forensic Tool of the '90s. ( 2008). In Britannica Book of the Year, 2000. Retrieved January 21, 2008, from Encyclopedia Britannica Online; http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9342341
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).
taken from the suspect has often been enough to charge a person with the offense
The Innocence Project, using DNA evidence, has gone back to past cases and exonerated innocent people when they were wrongly convicted. There may be many reasons that several people are wrongly convicted every year. However, there are 6 reasons deemed as the most important regarding wrongful convictions. These reasons are eyewitness misidentification, unvalidated or improper forensic science, false confessions or admissions, government misconduct, informants or snitches, and bad lawyering (understand the causes).