A predicament has occurred, in which you speak in the defense of a young female, considered to be guilty on the basis of hair color. Knowledge of the structure of DNA and its role in heredity, how DNA and RNA work together to produce proteins, and how brown hair can result from various gene combinations , will all be an important asset in determining if the young lady is guilty or not.
To begin we must explain the structure of DNA and its role in heredity. As seen in Document A, DNA has a double stranded, double helix structure, also known as a twisted ladder. DNA controls the production of proteins and determines what traits from the parent cell are passed on to the child. Now, karyotyping is one way to prove the defendant innocent, due to the fact that karyotyping is a way to determine if it’s a boy or girl, does this child have down syndrome or not. Document C is a karyotyping of the defendant and it shows in the twenty-first base pair three chromosomes (trisomy) instead of two. All together DNA and karyotyping can play a big factor in deciding if the young lady was the one that committed the crime or not. Secondly, to determine the guilty party you must have a clear understanding of how DNA and RNA cooperate with
…show more content…
A Punnett square can show the different gene combinations to produce brown hair. A Punnett square contains dominant or recessive alleles. An allele is different form of a gene, which is what determines a specific trait. A dominant allele is an allele that hides a recessive trait. A recessive allele is an allele hidden by a dominant allele. In Document E, the dominant allele is Brown hair (BB (Homozygous dominant) and Bb (Heterozygous)) and the recessive blond hair (bb (Homozygous recessive)). In Document D the dominant allele is smooth(S) and the recessive allele is wrinkled(s). As shown in the diagram below there is too many combinations that may result in brown
In today's society no crime is a perfect crime, with the use of DNA testing and modern advancements in health and forensics even the smallest piece of someone's genome can be cultured and used to identify even the most devious of criminals. The use of DNA testing was able to help change the life of Gene Bibbins for the better and further proved how DNA testing is able to be used to help clarify who the culprit actually is. Gene Bibbins life was forever changed the night that he was unjustifiably arrested for aggravated rape which resulted in his being sentenced to life in prison, only for his case to eventually be reevaluated sixteen years after his conviction, leading to his exoneration.
the DNA from the roots of the hair. The replicated DNA samples were then placed into the
The theory of DNA, simply stated, is that an individual’s genetic information is unique, with the exception of identical twins, and that it “definitively links biological evidence such as blood, semen, hair and tissue to a single individual” (Saferstein, 2013). This theory has been generally accepted since the mid-80s throughout the scientific community and hence, pursuant to the 1923 Frye ruling, also deemed admissible evidence throughout our justice system.
An individual can be homozygous dominant (two dominant alleles, AA), homozygous recessive (two recessive alleles, aa), or heterozygous (one dominant and one recessive allele, Aa). There were two particular crosses that took place in this experiment. The first cross-performed was Ebony Bodies versus Vestigle Wings, where Long wings are dominant over short wings and normal bodies are dominant over black bodies. The other cross that was performed was White versus Wild where red eyes in fruit flies are dominant over white eyes. The purpose of the first experiment, Ebony vs. Vestigle was to see how many of the offspring had normal bodies and normal wings, normal bodies and vestigle wings, ebony bodies and normal wings, and ebony body and vestigle wings.
Billings, Paul R. DNA on Trial: Genetic Identification and Criminal Justice. California: Cold Spring Laboratory Press, 1992.
First and foremost is the Michael Mosley case. Michael Mosley was convicted murdering a couple ten years ago (Wurtman, 2011). Two other men were cleared when Mosley’s DNA was found at the scene of the murder (Crowe II, 2012). Also, there was a palm print on the wall and further DNA on the sheets in the bedroom (Wurtman, 2011). In contrast to all the evidence, Mosley’s attorney offered an alternative reason and painted a picture of different events to explain Mosley’s DNA’s presence (Wurtman, 2011). However, the jury didn’t buy the defense’s story, and Michael Mosley’s conviction led to a call for the DNA database to be worked on with the most interesting fact being that Michael Mosley had no DNA in the system until seven years later than the crime (Crowe II, 2012).
Katherine Stang presented her thesis titled, Issues in Forensic Identification and the Use of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs). Short Tandem Repeat (STR) technology is a forensic analysis that looks at specific regions or loci found on nuclear DNA. There are 13 core loci that the FBI uses as a standard for the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). More recently single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have gotten a lot of attention for its use in forensic DNA testing. A SNP array is variation at a single site in DNA and is the most abundant variation in the human genome with over four million identified in the human genome. Some of the advantages of SNP are their high occurrence in the genome, use in lineage testing due to low mutation rates, and their use in degraded samples by using short amplicons. Ms. Stang presented the following case study as an example of the use of SNPs in degraded DNA samples: a charred femur bone badly degraded by time and environmental conditions was found and though STR failed to type the sample, SNP was successful. Ms. Stang said that further work is needed in the area of SNPs and should include an agreement on how SNPs should be used in forensic labs, additional studies to determine optimal procedures, and research into the area of sexual assault evidence.
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic exists in all living organisms, is self-replicating and gives a person their unique characteristics. No two people have the same matching DNA. There are many different forms of DNA that are tested for situations such as criminal. Bodily fluids, hair follicles and bone tissues are some of the most common types of DNA that is tested in crime labs today. Although the discovery of DNA dates back to 1866 when Gregor Mendel proved the inheritance of factors in pea plants, DNA testing is relatively new and have been the prime factor when solving crimes in general. In 1966, scientists discovered a genetic code that made it possible to predict characteristics by studying DNA. This lead to genetic engineering and genetic counseling. In 1980, Organ was the first to have a conviction based off DNA fingerprinting and DNA testing in forensics cases became famous in 1995 during the O.J. Simpson trial (SMC History , 2011).
There are many techniques in the Criminal Justice field that are used to solve cases. DNA testing is one of the best ways to solve cases. Each individual has there own unique DNA profile. Also, in this case DNA testing proved that an innocent person did not do the crimes. Furthermore, I feel that Colin Pitchfork deserves life in prison without a chance of parole.
the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. National Institute of Justice, 10, 15. Retrieved from, https://www.ncjrs.gov/
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.
"Genetics in the Courtroom." Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 21 Nov. 2002. 10 Dec. 2002 [http://www.ornl.gov/hgmis/courts/courts.html].
Rowe, W.F. (1996, February 1). Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. National Institute of Justice, 10, 15. Retrieved from, https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/dnaevid.pdf
middle of paper ... ... avour of "purity of the race" idea, but they understand how it worked. Blond hair and blue eyes are recessive genes. Two brown-eyed people can give birth to a blue-eyed child, but two blue-eyed people cannot give birth to a brown-eyed child. Dark skin and dark hair are also dominant genes, so because of evolution, it must mean that the ancestors of humanity had dominant genes.
The scientific and medical progress of DNA as been emense, from involving the identification of our genes that trigger major diseases or the creation and manufacture of drugs to treat these diseases. DNA has many significant uses to society, health and culture of today. One important area of DNA research is that used for genetic and medical research. Our abi...