Before Dna Testing Existed In Aid Of Crime Solving, Simple

Even though DNA evidence is generally linked to an offenders profile through DNA database. In the late 1980’s the federal government laid a ground work for the system of state, local and national DNA databases for the storage and exchange of the DNA profiles. This system was named the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). Maintaining DNA profiles set of databases that can be shared to the law enforcements all across the country. The CODIS can compare crime scene evidence that has been stored to a database of DNA profiles obtaining previous offenders. This

The DNA Identification Act of 1993 was formerly known as the Omnibus Crime control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. Under the new act forensic laboratories are authorized to analyze DNA for identification purposes that are retrieved from crime scenes. With the regulations of the act the Federal Bureau of Investigation is obligated to follow standards such as setting standards for testing and issuing an advisory board to supervise the standards for quality assurance. Of the results under the act records are established of persons convicted of crimes, samples recovered from crime scenes, and samples from unidentified human remains.

Advances in DNA technology has expanded greatly in the world of forensic science. In the past a vast number of crime scene evidence was not considered for analysis is now being tested. Trace DNA is more effective in this century when convicting a criminal than it was 20-30 years ago. Due to the consist improvement of DNA technology forensic scientist are able to put away criminals the correct way.

Previously used only in research labs, DNA fingerprinting has become more common to the public. Although mostly used for paternity testing, DNA profiling is reliable enough as evidence that prosecutors are relying on it more and more to help convict suspects in criminal cases. One specific example occurred in Goldsboro, North Carolina. A man known as the “Night Stalker” had committed offenses of rape in 1990 to three elderly women. Each incident resulted in an attempt to murder the victim; however, only two lost their lives along with one husband. One woman was fortunately saved by the unusually early arrival of her daughter. The suspect planned to burn the residence to hide the crime, but panicked and ran, leaving behind substantial evidence. A matching pap smear was taken from each victim to cross reference DNA samples, but no suspect was known. This is where the NDIS came into effect, adding a profile to North Carolina’s database. After 10 years of

One way of how DNA Evidence affects us is by using it to identify either identified or unidentified suspects. Before DNA evidence was found, only the work of physical evidence was provided to make arrests. For example, there was little physical evidence for the Ted Bundy case. What lead to his arrest and soon to his death in 1989 was the ability to match the bite mark on his victim that lead to his crooked and chipped teeth. According to the Department of Justice, if a suspect is identified, a sample of his or her DNA will be given so that it can be compared to the evidence found. Although, if a suspect has not yet been identified evidence from the crime scene can help connect the offender through the profiles in the DNA Database. This affects

They use this information to put it into the NDIS, or the National DNA Index System, which is the collective database of people’s DNA in the US. The FBI uses this database to match DNA that they find at a crime scene to a person who they will be able to bring into custody to question. If it was a rapping case, they would be able to collect DNA and match it to the person who committed the crime and bring them into custody. This system came about when DNA started to be prevalent in putting criminals away. They used the database to store information about every person so that if a crime is done they will be able to easily find them and bring them in. They can also use this information to try and help find people from the National Missing Persons DNA Database. It began in 1990 and was legitamized by the DNA Identification Act of 1994. The team is constructed of a program manager, forensic system program manager, a biologist, an auditor, a management and program analysts, and a paralegal specialist. All of these people work together to make the CODIS

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 (Phillips, 2008). 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 (Phillips, 2008). 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 (Lewis, 1989).

As it gradually progresses to be a more improved and powerful tool in the Criminal Justice system, it should inarguably be believed that this form of forensic evidence remains as the only reliable source for providing just outcomes in a case. This technique can be discerningly used to identify criminals and exonerate wrongly-accused individuals with tremendous accuracy due to DNA’s biology to pinpoint specific suspects, it’s unique processes and the many databases it possesses. With all things considered, DNA technology has become increasingly vital to provide fairness and accuracy in the Criminal

Once a person is arrested they are put into the system and this includes fingerprints, DNA samples, along with all of their personal information. Their information stays in the system indefinitely leaving their DNA in the database which the law enforcement members of the criminal justice system can use when looking for the criminal of a new case. The database is called, the Combined DNA Index System also known as CODIS. The system contains the DNA profiles obtained under the federal, state, and local criminal justice systems in a database that is available to law enforcement agencies across the country for law enforcement purposes.

It is the observation of a specific sequence of base pairs that allows us to identify a single individual from the residual DNA. The DNA database enables us to compare traces of DNA from the crime scene to individuals who already have a criminal record and whose genetic data are stored in the database. The technique does not allow the identification of individuals not on the database, but it can be used to find serial perpetrators and to exclude the innocent (Morris, 2013).

It is well understood that DNA is useful in the criminal justice system, whether it is rape and murder case to prove paternity for the sake of civil cases or the identity of the missing person. The value and reliability of DNA is manifested in science and justice because DNA took part to help and facilitate the criminal proceedings. However, the DNA used also the risk of reliability when it is created by an act of false police collected evidence from the crime scene.The police officer must protect and recognize the crime scene.

DNA in forensic science in this world can be a powerful tools to use in some cases today. Based on (Genetic Science and Learning center) it was 1987 the DNA forensic was first use inside the courtroom and it was called “DNA fingerprinting”. Human cells contains billion of DNA and through DNA test or a small dine is enough to tell the person unique identity. STR or short tandem repeat is a method to look at the pattern of two or more nucleotides are being repeated over and over. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STR_analysis). Is more likely one person who have similar number of repeat and shares same DNA unless they are twins. Evidence can be a small tiny hair or even a dot of saliva is enough to identify the person. (Edmond Locard) who is a physician

The forensic scientists usually use a variety analytical methods to collect evidence from crime scene, then to determine exactly what happened in there and who may participate in criminal activities. DNA identification is one of the most reliable and powerful tools for forensic investigation to find out criminal. This is because DNA shows the uniqueness of the individual, even “monozygotic twins are genetically not absolutely identical.” (Elmar S. et al, 2013).

There are many types of evidence used in our justice system including testimony, documentary evidence, real evidence, exculpatory evidence, inculpatory evidence, demonstrative evidence, and DNA evidence. However, the piece of evidence I will choose to talk about is DNA evidence which is also known as DNA profiling. This piece of evidence changed the landscape of the justice system when it was first introduced 1986 by Professor Alec Jeffreys; he developed DNA fingerprinting techniques to link two rapes/murders to a perpetrator named Colin Pitchfork while exonerating an innocent man in the process (www2.le.ac.uk). According to the National Institute of Justice, there are currently four types of DNA evidence Analysis but I will discuss three of them. The four types are Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Short Tandem Repeats (STR), Y-Chromosome, and Mitochondrial DNA. “Sources collected for these analysis come from blood, semen, saliva, urine, feces, hair, teeth, bone, tissue, and cells” (www.forensicsciencesimplified.org). These samples are taken from clothing, tools, weapons, beddings, and just about everything else around a crime scene. Basically, I will be going more into depth about the many forms of analysis for DNA evidence.

As times have changed, technology has become more advanced. In many ways, it has changed the way people have lived. Technology is supposed to make life easier and better, and it has done that, but it has also cut down on then number of serial killers. Since the advancement of technology, the number of serial killers has declined. Serial killers are most likely to get caught sooner, and less likely to kill more. In 1980 serial killing was at an all time high, but by the 2000s it has dropped greatly (Racine). Various factors have changed that, but technology may be a big part of that.