Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Scholarly review article on the importance of DNA and fingerprinting in criminal investigations
The advantages and disadvantages of DNA profiling
The advantages and disadvantages of DNA profiling
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Scholarly review article on the importance of DNA and fingerprinting in criminal investigations
DNA : Criminal Identification
Validity and Doubts
DNA, although controversial on accuracy, has provided a new means of
identifying criminals where there is little physical evidence. This allows you to take a
piece of hair, a spot of blood, or skin tissue and make a positive identification on a
suspect. Since it's first use by the FBI in December 1988 it has grown to become a major
factor in criminal investigation. This new key gives them help when the crime scene
lacks evidence. DNA evidence also allows detectives to narrow down suspects and keep
innocent people from being prosecuted.
In 1990 the FBI began development of a national DNA identification
index. The FBI has received over 10,000 submissions of DNA evidence from police
agencies and DNA evidence has been used in over 500 cases throughout the United
States. The FBI performs testing for free to all police agencies to help keep costs down
in prosecuting criminals. More than 50 laboratories perform DNA analysis around the
US. The chances of two people having the same DNA profile is 1 in 50,000 all the way
to 1 in 5 million according to scientists estimates.
DNA controls all our inheritable information like eye color, hair color,
skin color, etc. DNA differs in all people except for identical twins. All cellular matter
contains DNA: this includes white blood cells, bone cells, tissue cells, spermatozoa, and
hair root cells. Adenine, thymine, guanine, and cytosine are the building blocks of DNA
strands which make up the letters of a genetic code. In certain regions of a DNA strand
the sequence of genetic code is unique which allows scientists to identify an individual
and exclude others.
The FBI, Cellmark, and Lifecodes are the 3 major laboratories that courts
accept DNA profiles from. As estimated by the FBI, the chances of two DNA samples
being the same is as low as one in a trillion. Critics of DNA say that the FBI has falsely
applied theories of population biology behind it's calculations, so courtrooms make DNA
seem inaccurate. More than half the states have a mandatory DNA testing of all people
convicted of sexual charges and violent offenses, to help in future criminal investigations.
Although some people say that this is an invasion of privacy, it's a good way to prosecute
repeat offenders and find suspects when only DNA evidence is available.
As accurate as DNA profiling is, there are still many questions about the
This variation has no substantial ties to skin color, but does show genetic variation from different geographical locations in the world. These variations are not categorized in groups of what people call race, but rather ethnicity. Ethnicity, defined by Stephen Cornell, is a sense of common ancestry based on cultural attachments, past linguistic heritage, religious affiliations, claimed kinship, or some physical traits. Race, as most people catoragize it, encompuses many ethnicitys. Ethnicities are local populations, this makes sense that they would tend to have less genetic variation compared to each other then the rest of the world as they would share genetic adaptations resulting from the environment they live in. This can include skin color, but can also
79%, were heterozygous. We concluded that it is possible to examine small amounts of DNA by
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...
...lgram, Jeff. "In Jefferson-Hemings DNA test, media found failing: Research director sees 'biggest science story' as widely misinterpreted." Packet Online. 29 Apr. 2000
In parentage testing, genetic markers from a child are identified and compared to the alleged parent or parents. According to Ostrowski (2003) every person has a series of genetic systems, or loci. Within each genetic system there is a pair of alleles. Half of the alleles come from the mother and half from the father. Once these alleles are extracted, amplified, and identified, they are used in a set of equations to identify three parentage indices. These indices are the paternity index, probability of paternity, and the probability of exclusion. Harmening (2005) suggests that the calculations are only valid if the tested man is compared to a “random man” that is not biologically related to him. Also, the equations must be based off of accurate gene frequencies for each genetic system and the population must be of similar ethnic background.
The blood of the unknown person became apparent through comparing the blood type found at the crime scene with the contrasting blood types of the suspects. The blood identified at the crime scene could have possibly belonged to Anna Garcia or Erica Piedmont. This observation was based on the information that the blood type found at the crime scene was type A and these two individuals are the only ones that carry that specific type. In similarity, a microscopic photography was taken of the unknown hair follicle found at the crime scene. Then hair samples were taken from the potential suspects, and the victim. These findings were then compared. This was done by looking at each individuals hair follicles and comparing it with the unknown one. By looking at the similarities and differences in medulla diameter, the discovery of the unknown hair follicle became established that it belonged to Anna Garcia. Further examination resulted in the analyzation of a shoe print found at the crime scene. Shoe patterns and sizes were taken from each suspect, including the victims. They were then identified and compared to the one found at the crime scene. By looking at the distinct pattern, size, and the fact that both shoes were a Columbia brand sneaker it became obvious that the shoe print was extremely similar to Anna’s shoe design. Through this found evidence it became
Saltus, Richard. "DNA Fingerprinting: Its A Chance Of Probabilties." The Boston Globe 22 August 1994: 25.
...eloped research that displays that as many as four percent of DNA matches in forensic laboratories have been in fault (legal-dictionary).
Excluding your immediate family members, are you more likely to be genetically like someone who looks like you or someone who does not?
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 .
In conclusion, I feel that my opinion is justified because I can not believe that our society would falsely convict innocent people. Every human being is unique and does not have DNA like any other person. Forensic scientists use DNA profiling to help find criminals. If no two people have DNA alike, I feel that this is one of the most accurate ways to convict a criminal beyond a reasonable doubt.
the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. National Institute of Justice, 10, 15. Retrieved from, https://www.ncjrs.gov/
Criminal profilers are primarily employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most commonly known as the FBI. (Walker) The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID), and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) are a few other agencies that also employ criminal profilers. Although there are other employers that hire criminal profilers, the FBI is the most prominent. In order to be considered as a potential member of these programs, having an advanced degree in behavioral or forensic science is recommended. However, the most important qualification is an agent’s overall experience as an investigator of violent crimes. John Douglas, a famous FBI profiler, believes that “degrees and academic knowledge [are not] nearly as important as experience and certain subjective qualities” (Muller 250). Since a specific degree program has yet to be created for criminal profiling, extra training and classes must be taken in order to be a profiler for the FBI. The FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit was formed to investigate serial rape and homicide cases in 1974. From 1976 to 1979, several FBI agents, most famously John Douglas and Robert Ressler, interviewed 36 serial killers to help develop theories and categorize different types of offende...
DNA profiles can be used to identify individuals, allowing evidence to be used both as a means of convicting the guilty and as a means of exonerating the innocent. People can leave traces of their DNA at a crime scene because it is inside every cell of their body. DNA can be extracted from blood, semen, saliva or hair roots left at a crime scene using a chemical process. Tiny amounts of DNA can be extracted from a single cell – such as cells shed from someone’s skin when they touch an object. Police can also collect biological samples from suspects, usually by scraping some cells from inside their cheek. If the DNA profile from an individual matches the DNA profile from a crime scene it is therefore highly likely that the blood, semen or saliva left at the crime scene came from them. Also, in a paternity test, the mother’s DNA profile is compared with the child’s to find which half was passed on by the mother. The other half of the child’s DNA is then compared with the alleged father’s DNA profile. If they don’t match, the ‘father’ is excluded, which means he isn’t the father of that child. If the DNA profiles match, the ‘father’ is not excluded - which means there is a high probability that he is the father. In both of these cases, the DNA profile is much like a “genetic fingerprint”, and if there are records kept such as birth certificates and social security numbers, then DNA profiles make just as much sense to keep.
Proponents of expanding the use of DNA tests in the legal arena like to point out that these tests will exonerate truly innocent individuals. DNA tests have exonerated some wrongly imprisoned people but it is disingenuous to think this is the real reason for growing use of DNA tests. The real reason for all of this is, of course, to help prosecutors obtain more convictions. It is thus worth keeping in mind that the criminal justice system currently reflects deep class and race biases. Journalist and attorney David Cole argues persuasively in his recently published book No Equal Justice that this is no accident. Rather law enforcement, the legal system, and the prison system operate in a way that insures the disproportionate imprisonment of poor people and people of color. If the government only conducts DNA tests of people convicted of crimes, it will fortify and expand this already unfair process.