Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on DNA testing
Essay on DNA testing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on DNA testing
Is DNA testing worth all the money and effort we put into it? Sometimes it is not and this is why. Analyst Kathryn Troyer did some tests on Arizona's DNA database. She stumbled across two different felons with incredibly similar DNA profiles. Both men DNA surprisingly matched at nine of the thirteen loci. The FBI approximated that the odds of unrelated people sharing those genetic markers are about 1 in 113 billion. The two men were in no way related, they were not even of the same race. The FBI desperately tried to hide this.
First, according to the Innocence Project, by 2016, roughly 337 people from the U.S. had been absolved after being convicted solely based on DNA evidence, including some individuals who were even on death row. Homogeneous DNA profiles between two or even more people, even some individuals who are non-related, have many scientists and legal specialist doubting how accurate some of the FBI statistics really are. A
…show more content…
crime lab’s findings raised many doubts about how trustworthy genetic profiling was. In 2001, several similar matches occurred. Next, the DNA Identification Act of 1994 allowed the FBI to establish a national genetic profile index.
It stores DNA identification records of many people convicted of crimes. Secondly, it also contains analyses retrieved from unknown human remains. Finally, it kept analyses of genetic samples retrieved from a crime scene.
Deterioration breaks DNA up into pieces too tiny to possibly work with, fundamentally destroying the evidence entirely. Extreme caution must be taken to assure the chain of custody is secure during every process, from the crime scene to the lab. Along with being prone to deterioration, DNA can also be easily contaminated with immaterial DNA from either the somewhere at the crime scene or by someone's skin accidentally touching the DNA sample without taking the right precautions.
Is DNA testing really worth the money and effort everyone puts into it? Sometimes it's hard to tell. Many times it seems like everything's going fine, then people look further into it to see it’s not going as well as everybody
thought.
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
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.
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.
I will begin by clearing up some misconceptions and explaining some of the current shortcomings of DNA testing. It is not possible to completely genotype a person "instantly" as in the movie. We are only able to discern the markers of some diseases that are genetically linked. This takes time, is labor intensive, and easy to contaminate. Studies to make the process quicker and cleaner...
Keiper L. More states use familial DNA as powerful forensic search tool. Reuters [Internet]. 2011 [cited May 16 2012]; N. page. Available from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-crime-dna-familial-idUSTRE72T2QS20110330.
Gest, Ted. " DNA "Fingerprinting " is Facing a Major Legal Challenge from Defense Attorneys and Civil Libertarians."
being the same is as low as one in a trillion. Critics of DNA say that the FBI has falsely
Every time an innocent person is exonerated based on DNA testing, law enforcement agencies look at what caused the wrongful convictions. There are many issues that contribute to putting guiltless lives behind bars including: eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, imperfect forensic science, and more (Gould and Leo 18). When a witness is taken into a police station to identify a suspect, it is easy for their memories to be blurred and their judgment influenced. This can lead the witness to identify a suspect who is actually innocent. Flawed forensic science practice also contributes to wrongful imprisonments. In the past, analysts have been inaccurate due to carelessness, testified in court presenting evidence that was not based on science, and participated in misconduct. False confessions have also been known to cause unlawful convictions. In some instances, police departments took part in transgression and interviewed their suspects in such an intense manner that a false confession was used cease the interrogation. To imagine that there are innocent people rotting in prison is appalling and something must be done. To prevent wrongful convictions, legislatures should form commissions and policies to reform flawed procedures.
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 ...
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).
Most studies have shown that popular opinion holds that without a doubt national DNA databases have proved useful in criminal investigations (Wallace, 2006, pS27). The concept of a national DNA database has raised concern about privacy and human rights as seen through the scope of public safety. All of these concerns are elevated with databases include convicted, arrestee, innocent, and “rehabilitated” offenders (Suter, 2010, p339). Robin Williams of University of Duham (2006) asserts that:
For example, if a person was given a life sentence, they would be able to be released, if found innocent. If they were given the death penalty, although it takes years, odds are they will be dead before they could be found innocent. The Innocence Project was established in order to vindicate individuals who were wrongfully convicted due to DNA calamity or misidentification with witnesses. Since the Innocent project has been established, an uncountable number of individuals have received freedom for crimes they were wrongfully accused of committing. For most individuals who received a life sentence, and not the death penalty, they were granted a release. According to the Innocence Project out of 300 people exonerated, 25% were convicted of murder, and 18 had death sentences. The innocence project also states, “We have also worked on cases of people who were executed before DNA testing could be conducted to corroborate guilt or prove innocence, and we are aware of several non-DNA cases where evidence of innocence surfaced after people were executed”(Innocenceproject.org/aboutpage). Disparate from the individuals facing a life sentence, those that received a death sentence are less likely to survive to prove their
"The Innocence Projectan." The Innocence Project - About Us: FAQs:How Many People Have Been Exonerated through DNA Testing? Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Genetic testing has become very popular as technology has improved, and has opened many doors in the scientific community. Genetic testing first started in 1866 by a scientist known as, Gregor Mendel, when he published his work on pea plants. The rest was history after his eyes opening experiments on pea plants. However, like any other scientific discovery, it bought conflicts which caused major controversies and a large population disagreed with the concept of playing with the genetic codes of human beings. Playing God was the main argument that people argument that people had against genetics. genetic testing became one of the major conflicts conflicts to talk about, due to the fact that parents could now have the option of deciding if they