More handpicked essays just for you.
Use of DNA fingerprinting in criminal justice
How does DNA help in solving crimes
Disadvantages of DNA evidence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Use of DNA fingerprinting in criminal justice
DNA profiling is a process used to identify individuals. Usually we hear about law enforcement officials utilizing DNA testing to apprehend and eliminate individuals from a case. However, there are several pros and cons of DNA testing. This process helps “clear the name of the innocent” to help those who have been wrongfully accused of a crime. This evidence can also help those who have been accused of a crime and put behind bars. DNA testing proved to solve many cases that have went unsolved, this is better known as cold cases. In Illinois, Governor George Ryan in the year 1988 gave DNA testing to inmates who were on death row, which led to 13 of the 25 being cleared from death row. DNA evidence from the crime scene (even cases many years
in the past) has proven that the convicted person was not the offender” (Walker 110). Furthermore, some cons of DNA testing is sometimes it leads to wrongfully accusing individuals. In some cases there can be flaws within testing and it brings forth wrongful convictions. The major concern that some people have is that these samples violates their rights to privacy. Personally, I would consent to a DNA test if I had to. I do not see this as violating my privacy. I rather prove my innocence than continue being a possible suspect. This can prevent further interrogation which can be considered a violation to your privacy if you're innocent.
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.
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 the blueprint of life. It stores our genetic information which is what is in charge of how our physical appearance will look like. 99.9% of human DNA is the same in every person yet the remaining .1% is what distinguishes each person (Noble Prize). This small percentage is enough to make each person different and it makes identifying people a lot easier when its necessary. DNA not only serves to test relationships between people it also helps in criminal cases. DNA testing in criminal cases has not been around for many years if fact it was not until the early 1990s when the use of DNA testing for criminal cases was approved and made available. By comparing the DNA of a suspect and that found in the crime scene a person can either be convicted of a crime or they can be exonerated. This method of testing gained more publicity in the 1984 case of Kirk Noble Bloodsworth a man who had been convicted of the rape and first degree murder of a nine year old girl in Maryland. His case was a milestone in the criminal justice system since it involved the use of new technology and it also raised the question of how many people had been wrongly incarcerated for a crime they did not commit.
One of society’s problems is that the wrong people are convicted of a crime they did not commit. None have more dire consequences on those than who are wrongly convicted of rape and murder. The punishment for these crimes are as harsh as possible to deter the crimes and when wrongly convicted, the wrong person gets punished while the true perpetrator gets away. In order to increase the chance of convicting the true perpetrator of the crime, the tools to find and convict criminals had to be refined. And it was refined due to extensive research into DNA. This research was done by Alec Jeffreys and Vicky Wilson, the research’s technician, and it found that in the massive amount of junk codes, there exists many repetitious codes that have copied so many times that it varies from person to person. (Ridley 132) This means that people can be identified with only their DNA from their hair, fluids, skin, etc. This discovery has led to convictions of rapists and murderers such as the Pickford case that Ridley wrote about. It has also led to the sentences of many wrongly convicted people to be retracted and this had led to the release of about 200 people known as the DNA 200. (Phelan) Now, most of the world keeps criminals’ genotype information in order to identify repeat offenders. In the United States, every state requires that every convicted
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.
Today, DNA testing has become more evident in solving cases by proving guilt or innocence. I am focusing on a case of three boys convicted of murder with no substantial evidence to prove guilt and how DNA evidence could help them receive an acquittal they have anticipated for eighteen years. According to the Innocence Project website, there have been 272 post conviction DNA exonerations in the United States (“Innocence”). Since the late 1980’s, DNA testing has exonerated more than 250 wrongly convicted people, who spent an average of 13 years in prison for crimes they didn’t commit (Rosen, New York Times, 2011). There are a total of 205 exonerations that have been won in 34 states since 2000, and 35 percent of those confessions were done by a person that was eighteen years old or younger (“Innocence”).
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.
...igators a lot about a perpetrator it can not tell them his name, where he lives or if he has a previous criminal record. While DNA profiling is not the only forensic tool available, DNA testing technology and improved databases are inspiring investigators and law enforcement agencies to re-open cases that were previously considered unsolvable.
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.
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.
This has helped convicting people of crimes much easier and efficient. “For the first time, the criminal justice system now has a body of cases in which there is scientific proof that the truth finding mechanisms of the system failed.” The American justice system takes great precautions to make sure people are not falsely convicted band say that “ It is better to let 10 (or 100) guilty people go free than to convict one innocent person”. However nothing is perfect and even our justice system makes mistakes. Without DNA testing Edwin Borchard identified sixty-five cases of wrongful convictions in 1932. Not everyone who is falsely convicted is completely innocent either. They could have just been convicted of a greater charge than what they actually deserved. Most people like this live with
"Using DNA to Solve Crimes." U.S. Department of Justice: National Institute of Justice. (September 9, 2014). Web. 29 May 2015.
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:
In today’s world, people are learning a great deal in the rapidly growing and developing fields of science and technology. Almost each day, an individual can see or hear about new discoveries and advances in these fields of study. One science that is rapidly progressing is genetic testing; a valuable science that promotes prevention efforts for genetically susceptible people and provides new strategies for disease management. Unnaturally, and morally wrong, genetic testing is a controversial science that manipulates human ethics. Although genetic testing has enormous advantages, the uncertainties of genetic testing will depreciate our quality of life, and thereby result in psychological burden, discrimination, and abortion.
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.