Against Proposition 69 and the DNA Fingerprint Act Essay

Beginning in the mid-1980s, the development of DNA analysis technology has revolutionised the field of forensic science within the criminal justice system. As the refinement of procedures and technology continues, even minute samples of biological material (including blood, saliva, semen and skin cells) are able to be analysed and used to link or acquit perpetrators of crimes. (Whitney, R n.d.)

Due to the uniqueness of DNA it has become a powerful tool in criminal investigations

Identification means the steps needed in the analysis of unknown fluids to see what the substance is (“Biology,” 2016). Individualization determines whether a certain individual may or may not be the donor of a bodily substance by examining various markers (“Biology,” 2016). Processing biological trace evidence uses highly complex, automated technology to create a DNA profile that helps the investigators through the association of suspects to victims and to crime scenes (“Biology Services,” 2017). By using techniques such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), forensic biologists can use variable markers found on the regular chromosomes (STR’s), the sex chromosomes (Y-STR’s) and within the mitochondrial DNA to distinguish one person’s DNA from another to a high degree of certainty (“Biology,” 2016). Forensic biologists are involved in assisting investigative agencies because police were led to Bernardo by a police sketch (“Serial Killers: Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka,” 2013). The police took DNA (hair, blood and saliva) from Bernardo as a matter of routine to test it against specimens found on a rape victim’s clothing (Butts, n.d.). Forensic biologists were able to name the substances left on Kristen French’s body and match it to Bernardo’s DNA by processing it. On February 17th, 1995, Bernardo was arrested for the murders of Mahaffy, French, and the Scarborough rapes (Butts,

Because there are many different types of crimes, it is often difficult to find enough physical evidence to convict a person. For example, in rape cases there is usually only a small amount of physical evidence, so cases are based on word alone. Because of DNA testing we can now take samples from the victim and attempt to match the results with those of the suspect. Therefore, DNA is sometimes the only real way of determining the guilt or innocence of a suspect without having any witnesses. Since many rape cases are left unsolved, DNA testing is believed to be the most accurate way of keeping sex offenders off the street. Because of the growing trend of using DNA in rape cases especially, a company in Brooklyn now advertises a small flashlight-like device intended to be used to jab at attackers in order to collect a sample of his skin for later use (Adler). According to a study by Joseph Peterson, with the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Illinois, DNA evidence does not have a major impact on the decision to either convict or acquit

The type of information that DNA can reveal can include future disease potentials and ancestry information (Maclin, 2005). This would be a strong argument under the Fourth Amendment as an illegal search and seizure (Maclin, 2005). Since Maryland v. King, the reliability of DNA labs is subject to compromise because of an unrealistic workload placed on understaffed labs (Ferrell, 2013). This was true even before this case ruling when the

that a DNA sample taken from a suspect could lead to an indictment or release of

Biological Background: It is scientifically proven that DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) contains genetic material and highly specific to individual. DNA fingerprint can be tested by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) methods and Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods. Although RFLP is considered more accurate, due to the cost and requirement of longer period to complete, it is not commonly used. While only 1% of genetic materials are unique to individual, the short tandem repeats (STR) sequences called minisatellites can be used to distinguish all humans as it shows great variation between each person (What is DNA fingerprint? 2016).

Over the past decade, DNA technology has revolutionized the criminal justice system. In countless cases DNA results have served to identify suspects, convict the guilty, and bring solace to many victims. In several cases DNA examinations have exonerated the innocent, at times, after years of unjust imprisonment. DNA technology has also been used to identify human remains from mass disasters, such as the one experienced by the United States of America on September 11, 2001. There are many arguments for and against the use of DNA data banks. Privacy advocates state that DNA data banks may threaten an individuals' rights of privacy due to misuse and unlawful dissemination of DNA information. On the other hand, convicted felons feel that the forcible

Throughout history there has been multiple problems trying to identify victims or remains of victims because the remains were either too manipulated to use or there wasn’t enough pf the remains to use towards discovering the victim that was involved in whatever incident that has happened. Now that Science has become more advance in the forensic area, it’s now easier to identify remains even if they were in harsh conditions or if there aren’t very much of the remains left, through multiple types of DNA analysis such as restriction fragment length polymorphism which looks at variable number tandem repeats, short tandem repeat and PCR. With these new processes available to forensic labs, all the answers can be given even from small samples of DNA, much like how it’s done on the television like in CSI show series.

Long again before DNA was founded detectives relied on their own instincts, witnesses, and suspect confession to solve a crime. “The past decade has seen great advances in a powerful criminal justice tool: deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA. DNA can be used to identify criminals with incredible accuracy when biological evidence exists. By the same token, DNA can be used to clear suspects and exonerate persons mistakenly accused or convicted of crimes. In all, DNA technology is increasingly vital to ensuring accuracy and fairness in the criminal justice system”(justice.gov,2014). In today’s world of crimes nothing has been founded more reliable in court than a DNA evidence. Evidence can include weapons, tape recorder, photographs,

There are various problems and limitations, DNA profiling isn’t infallible; these issues can refer to the newer and older technologies.

The traditional methods of solving a crime scene is by using witnesses and confessions of the suspect. That method can work but there is now the method of using forensic evidence to link a suspect to a crime and potentially solve it, as well. In the being, the use of DNA evidence was seen as being controversial and challenging by the defense attorneys, even though there were about 17,000 and more cases that used DNA test in 1997. 1 It is important to remember that DNA is not the only type of forensic evidence but it is the focus of this paper.

Another work by Jobling and Gill, it states that the DNA analysis has beenknown to become a crucial and in day to day life as part of modern forensic casework, alluringhighlyperceptive PCR(Polymerase Chain Reaction) based techniques to analyze the biological material. Suspects can be companion to crime scenes, or one crime scene to another, using DNA evidence from arestricted as the saliva on a cigarette butt, skin cells on steering wheel or pet hairs on clothing. Large DNA databases can be quicklyquestion formally and systematically for matches to a DNA profiles at the crime scene, or even half matches to close relatives of a criminal. Unexamined 'cold' cases involving the sexual assault can be solved decades after investigations were begun by studying depraved DNA from stored swabs or microscope slides. However, they noted that the DNA evidence must always be studied within the framework of other evidence off

As has been said, the three persons who investigated the DNA fingerprinting conclude that it is more important that the expertise contained in it is not confined to those who specialize in DNA forensics such as the FBI rather the knowledge must be extended to all members of the law enforcement and even the public as to where it identifies the evidence and what its procedures that needed to study to have in order to obtain reliable end products. They also said that the more accurate measures can mean the differences between putting the case to conclusion and letting it remain unsolved.

Forensic laboratories use lengths of fragments from several locations of human DNA to decide whether a sample recovered from a suspect’s clothing is the victim’s. DNA was