The COmbined DNA Index System (CODIS) is a computer software program that is operated and maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, which allows law enforcement agencies to search and exchange DNA information. It was originally created in 1990 as a pilot software project that would allow 14 State and Local laboratories to communicate and share biological evidence data to aid in criminal case closure. Following the DNA Identification Act of 1994, the FBI established the National DNA Index System (NDIS) that currently serves over 25 countries in their own DNA Data banking initiatives (Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2010). NDIS, populated by many State DNA Index Systems (SDIS) and local DNA Index Systems (LDIS) provide a mechanism for cross checking previously disparate legal and judicial entities for serial criminal offenders (USA.gov, 2010).
The National DNA Index (NDIS) contains over 8,483,906 offender profiles and 324,318 forensic profiles as of June 2010 (Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2010). It has been suggested by Froomkin, a Senior Washington Correspondent, that the FBI is “shifting its resources from forensics to feeding the database” (Froomkin, 2010). This dramatic shift curtails some of the benefits of the CODIS application to the criminal justice system, as the backlogs of DNA samples increase and the statutes of limitations grow nearer and nearer on unsolved crimes.
Benefits/Detriments of CODIS use in the Criminal Justice System
According to the FBI’s NDIS Statistics, CODIS has produced over 120,300 hits assisting in more than 117,800 investigations as of June 2010 (Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2010). All states collect DNA from convicted felony offenders, but many have passed bills t...
... middle of paper ...
.../billtext.xpd?bill=h111-4614
Kravets, D. (2010). Wired. Retrieved from Obama Supports DNA Sampling Upon Arrest: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/obama-supports-dna-sampling-upon-arrest/
Office of the Inspector General. (2010). Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Laboratory’s Forensic DNA Case Backlog. U.S. Department of Justice.
Sepich, J. (n.d.). State's DNA Law. Retrieved from Katies Law: http://www.katieslaw.org/states.html
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science. (2009). DNA Forensics. Retrieved from Human Genome Project Information: http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/forensics.shtml
USA.gov. (2010). Levels of the Database. Retrieved from DNA Initiative: http://www.dna.gov/dna-databases/levels/
Wikipedia. (2010). Precautionary Principle. Retrieved from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
As we learned this week, DNA databases are used by various governmental agencies for several different purposes. We all have seen new magazine shows such as, 20/20 or Dateline, that show the collection of DNA samples from suspects in a case that is compared to those collected at the scene of the crime. But what happens when the sample is an incomplete match, compromised, or contaminated? The answer is the wrongful conviction of innocent citizens. The case that I have decided to highlight, is the wrongful conviction of Herman Atkins. In 1986, Atkins was convicted of two counts of forcible rape, two counts of oral copulation, and robbery in the state of California. It was alleged that Herman entered a shoe store, and raped, beat, and robbed a
“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,
Familial DNA searching works by using the combined DNA index system (CODIS) to compare DNA samples taken from crime scenes to DNA profiles already recorded in the local, state, or national criminal DNA database. There are many indexes in the database; two of the largest are the offender index, a catalogue of DNA profiles from previously convicted felons, and the forensic index, a catalogue of DNA from crime-scenes. A DNA sample is run through the database by CODIS’ matching algorithm that searches the indexes against one another to generate matches according to how often base pairs, or “markers,” repeat in th...
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
DNA is a vital tool in forensic medicine, when it comes to tracking down that killer or finding that liar in the courtroom. However, DNA fingerprinting for example is also used to identify what a person did based off of their remains. “The U.S. military takes blood and saliva samples from every recruit so it can identify victims of mass disasters such as airplane crashes.” (Marieb, 2009, p.459). After the 9/11 attacks,
Billings, Paul R. DNA on Trial: Genetic Identification and Criminal Justice. California: Cold Spring Laboratory Press, 1992.
I believe the physical evidence was adequately presented given Michael Mosley’s conviction. I also believe that an expanded DNA database could lead law enforcement to criminals i...
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
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.
The enactment of state post-conviction DNA testing statutes has not been uniform. Some state laws include statutes of limitations beyond which petitioners may no longer file claims. Some states appoint counsel, some do not. They still have to determine if the evidence to be tested is material and reliable (whether there has been a documented chain of custody). If the evidence is too small, or degraded, or otherwise fails to comply with the statutory requirements, the petitioner has no recourse. These advancements are taking place because attorneys are fighting for the right of DNA profiling to save the innocent who have been falsely accused.
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 rapid implementation and continuing expansion of forensic DNA databases around the world has been supported by claims about their effectiveness in criminal investigations and challenged by assertions of the resulting intrusiveness into individual privacy” (p545).
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).
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.