DNA is known as a deoxyribonucleic acid. Every single cell contains DNA and every living organism contains DNA. DNA is in many things like people’s blood, saliva, skin tissue, hair, and bone. In that case DNA could play a big role in evidence of different cases like criminal cases. DNA could help convict people that are guilty or they could eliminate those who were wrongly accused. The most common form of DNA is called polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The process is when millions of copies of small amounts of the DNA is made and then can be compared with the DNA profile from a suspect. Investigators can collect DNA from many different numbers of sources. Almost anything can contain DNA. For example in a sexual assault case any evidence like hair, skin cells, semen, or blood that is left on a victim’s body could be collected and be compared with samples to place a suspect at the scene of the crime. Like in a sexual assault case for evidence a physician or sexual assault nurse examiner would test for sexually transmitted diseases and collect evidence like fingernail scrapings and hair. This can be collected as evidence to figure out the person who sexually assaulted the person. And possible evidence could be found at the scene that could possibly link it to the person’s DNA. Sweat and skin cells could as well be used as evidence. If none of that works out then a DNA profile can be put into the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) to identify a suspect anywhere in the U.S. DNA evidence could also be contaminated in the process of collecting the DNA. Because of this the investigators always wear disposable gloves and avoid touching other objects. With the right care of the evidence the DNA can be stored for years without degradatio...
... middle of paper ...
... the crime scenes contain many mixtures of more than one person’s DNA, which can lead to false accusations. Even if there is evidence of a DNA match at the crime scene doesn’t mean that they committed the crime it depends on the evidence towards the person. Again criminals could still mess with the DNA and evidence of a crime scene, which can lead to many suspects of a crime. For example someone who wanted to falsely accuse a certain person could have planted a cigarette. But just because DNA of a person was there doesn’t mean it was them. DNA shouldn’t be the final proof because there could be many other things to prove a person’s innocence or guilt like getting a video of something that could possibly connect to the crime. Witnesses could be a big part in a crime as well because they could document everything they saw or heard and be used against a person in court.
DNA evidence should not be colvcslected from suspects as a matter of routine. To do so will cause unnecessary privacy intrusion; in the vast majority of criminal cases DNA evidence will contribute nothing to the investigation. Thus, it would not be appropriate for Parliament to give blanket authority to collect DNA samples from all persons suspected of indictable offences. DNA should also not be collected from a suspect if investigators have no DNA evidence with which to compare the suspect's sample. Nor would a DNA sample be necessary if the suspect admitted guilt.
. 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.
... any of the DNA provided by the Vaninced victim support one report showed a piece of genetic material the penis of Steven branch but could not be linked to any victim.The penis of Steven branch that could not be linked to any victim or any defendant in the meantime our investigators were obtain DNA samples in the air cigarette butts world swabs from people who had some connection to the events is included samples from several people including Steven branches stepfather Terry Hobbs.The result of that analysis in May 2007 show that rope used to tie up Michael Moore could be associated with very hot provided a result the prosecution right after learning of it much more recent analysis by Mr. Fedora show that hair found on a tree root through Tree Stump at the crime scene could be associated with the DNA samples provided by Terry Hobbs.
The court must find more evidence and not to depend on eyewitness testimony and to look for the best people as possible. Besides, there more evidence that DNA testing. Eyewitness must be proven in order to arrest the right suspect and question the suspect to get more evidence in steady of keeping in prison for false witness. The police for tracking everywhere the suspect went and people the suspect contact with that time. It will solve the problem by asking the eyewitness question and the suspect questions to see if both things they said
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
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 analysis is a scientific process among the newest and most sophisicated of techniques used to test for genetic disorders, which involves direct examination of the DNA molecule itself (Lyman, 2014) . Today crime labs use mtDNA analysis. This type of analysis allows smaller degraded pieces of DNA to still be successfully tested (Lyman, 2014) . There are several steps taken when analyzing DNA in forensics. When testing scientists must first isolate the DNA so it is not contaminated and can't be used. Lab technicians the take small pieces of the DNA, conserving as much as they can encase they need to test again. Once testing is done the next step is determining the DNA test results and finally there is the comparison and interpretation of the test results from the unknown and known samples to determ...
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
Forensic genetics has other applications . The " fingerprint " DNA represents a valuable tool for forensic science . As is the case with an ordinary fingerprint genetic fingerprint is unique to each individual (except identical twins ) . The determination involves the observation of specific DNA sequences which can be obtained from extremely small tissue samples , hair, blood or eventually left at the scene . As Fifty microliters of blood, semen or five microliters of ten roots of hairs are enough , and nozzles secretions and cells from the fetus . In addition to its use in the capture of criminals , especially rapists , the genetic fingerprints can be used to establish family relationships . People involved in the conservation of species use them to be sure that captive breeding is among individuals who do not belong to the same family .
With all these possible flaws in the testimony of witnesses and victims why do they continue to use them as primary evidence in criminal cases? The answer is simple; until recently there was no other way to prove whether or not a person was actually at the scene of a crime unless someone saw them or they left some finger prints behind that the police were able to link back to someone, which may have not been left on the victim but in the general vicinity. Until recently, with the recent breakthrough in DNA testing which allows police and investigators to gain an exact match as to who committed the crime.
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...
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.
Whereas the real picture of forensic evidence is unlike what is represented in movies and television shows where a fingerprint or a trace of hair is found, then it’s game over for the criminal. Reality is not as straightforward. As more people are exposed to the unreal forensic world through television and media the likeliness for a wrong conviction increases with juries assuming the evidence involves more science than what it really does, this is known as the CSI Effect. Further education and training is needed for the people of the court, the forensic specialists, and so called experts. The people in courts do not question any of the ‘professionals’ and just trust in their expertise. The court could overcome this perception by requiring explanation of error rates in a forensic field. To do this, testing examiner error rates will be necessary which means further research. Forensic science has such a large effect on the prosecution of suspects, experts have been known to provide questionable and at times incorrect evidence. When a false conviction occurs the true perpetrator is set free. Once realized, the public doubts the justice system and the reliability of the forensic evidence even more. At this point in time, forensic is an inexact
As far back as 1832, James Marsh was the first to use forensics at trial to give evidence as a chemist in 1832. Since that time forensic science and evidence has come a long way in various ways and technology to help in determine if the suspect is guilt or not, through such things as DNA testing, blood, and fingerprints. The first forensic police crime lab was created in 1910. The contributions of Dr. Edmond Locard, a French scientist and criminologist, proposed that “everything leaves a trace”. This principle is still valid today as it was so many years ago. No matter how small, the specialized trained technicians and investigators can take these methods and go to a crime scene to get evidence. “Forensic science is the application of sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, computer science and engineering to matters of law.” (Office of Justice, 2017) These different sciences can help achieve and assist in solving a case. Forensic science has also the ability to prove that a crime was committed, it can find the elements of the crime, it can help place the suspect at the scene and whether the suspect had any contact with the victim. However, in the last several years the techniques and with the use of technology the evidence that forensic science uncovers can also exonerate an innocent individual who has been falsely accused of the
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