Crime Case Study Report

DNA forensics is a division of forensic science that focuses on the use of genetic material in criminal investigation to answer questions pertaining to legal situations, including criminal and civil cases. Through DNA testing, law enforcement officers are able to identify human remains or the individual responsible for a crime. DNA testing is a highly advanced scientific process that involves replicating the human DNA sequence to create a genetic map of an individual. Because of its reliability, DNA testing has become a significant factor in criminal cases. However, it has also been identified as having the potential to violate privacy and constitutional rights. The DNA identification process consists of five stages. These five stages

DNA analysts have been profiling DNA since 1985. Then in 1998, the Combined DNA Index System became fully operational (“FAQs” 2010). CODIS’s three levels are the national level, the state level, and the local level. As September 2015, there is 14,740,249 DNA profiles in CODIS (“CODIS”, n.d.). Since everybody has different DNA, except identical twins, DNA analysts have been able to assists with investigator to determine between who is guilty and who is innocent. With some of their findings, they are able to exonerate individuals, who have been wrongfully convicted. Even though television may make DNA analysts’ life look simple on the screen, it is not. There is need for interest and education. Lastly, the actual job that entails for the DNA

As human overpopulation increases, there will be a lack of resources and basic necessities that will become scarcer elevating crime rates. The broad field of forensics has numerous jobs that specialize in a specific duty. It provides and analyzes evidence in laboratories or offices that helps both state and local police departments solve crimes. As technology advances it also aids in the advancement of forensics. Forensic Science Technicians are required to have a variety of distinctive skills to assist in criminal investigations.

DNA testing was first used in criminal prosecutions in 1985 and is now admissible in all states. (Hails, 184) Scientific and legal communities seem to universally accept the use of DNA as “good” evidence. Questions could arise regarding testing procedures. There are several testing methods that have been proven reliable and easily pass general acceptance and scientific validity tests. This is causes number of Daubert cases questioning DNA to decline. “In most cases, the tests that are used are well established and do not require a separate hearing” (Hails, 160)

Q1. What college education do you need to meet the requirements to become a DNA analyst?

DNA testing is a critical and accurate tool in linking accused and even convicted criminals for crimes, and should be widely used to assess guilt or innocence before jail sentences are imposed. It was started up by scientists Francis C. Crick and James D, Watson in 1953 as they had described the uses, structures and purpose of the DNA “deoxyribonucleic acid” genetic fingerprint that contains organism information about an individual (testing

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

This report acts as guidelines for handling post-conviction DNA testing. These guidelines explore the legal and biological issues. Also, a set of guidelines are recommended for prosecutors, defense counsel, judiciary, victim assistance and laboratory assistance. This report also examines the impact on DNA testing on exonerations.

The training needed to be a forensic scientist is either a bachelor's in forensic science or in a natural science. This means that a normal police officer would not be qualified to act as a forensic scientist unless he had one of those degrees, and that would mean someone fresh out of the academy wouldn’t qualify unless he had one of those degrees.

After that, they spend four more years in medical school to earn either an M.D. or D.O. degree. Once they have done this, they could either spend four years training in anatomic pathology and then train for one more year in forensic pathology, or spend five years training in anatomic and clinical pathology followed by one year of residency or fellowship in forensic pathology. Then, to become certified, they must pass an exam given by the American Board of Pathology, which certifies competence in forensic pathology.

First, they must graduate from an accredited college or university with a bachelor’s degree in a science like anatomy which can be two to four years long. Secondly, they must graduate from an accredited medical school which can be four years. Thirdly, they past the Medical College Admission Test or the MCAT, complete the forensic pathology residency which can be three to four years longs, and complete the forensic pathology fellowship which can be one to two year long. After about sixteen years in school, they have to pass examination and receive a certification in anatomic pathology and forensic pathology through the American Board of Pathology which have to be renewed every ten years, and they get their State medical license.

You can spend three years in anatomic pathology (hospital pathology) followed by one year of training in forensic pathology. The program might consist of anatomic pathology, clinical pathology (laboratory medicine) and forensic pathology (5 years) or anatomic pathology (2 years), forensic pathology (one year) and one year of neuropathology, toxicology or a related field. The residency training in forensic pathology involves on the job experience supervised by trained forensic pathologists. The forensic pathology resident performs autopsies and partakes in death investigation. To become certified, you must pass an examination given by the American Board of Pathology certifying special competence in forensic

Every day DNA technology becomes more advanced and innovative, for example can match the smallest amounts of biological evidence to a criminal offender. Future DNA techniques will be applied to existing systems and testing methods that will become more automated and will be more effective and less time consuming. Instead of waiting months of DNA results the future will provide instantaneous means for DNA profile development.

With regard to the US, where social science and STS research have, focused less on forensic databases and more on the production of expertise and evidence in court, Jay Aronson provided a historical account of the early practices, the scientific and legal controversies, and the ultimately successful acceptance of forensic DNA evidence in court in 2007. Another particularity of social science and STS research in this domain is that it has so far mostly concentrated its “high end” forensic technologies, namely those which received a lot of public attention because they were new, because stakeholders in the criminal justice system struggled to determine the parameters of scientific reliability and admissibility, or because they were prominently featured in the media. While the use of DNA analysis for police investigations and forensic casework dates back to the late 1980s, the second half of the 1990s marked the beginning of the quest to render DNA profiles systematically and routinely searchable and minable by setting up centralized DNA databases in many countries around the world. A DNA molecule is a long, twisting chain known as a double helix. DNA looks pretty complex, but it's really made of only four nucleotides: Adenine, Cytosine, Guanine, and Thymine. These nucleotides exist as base pairs that link together like a ladder. Adenine and Thymine always bond together as a pair, and Cytosine and Guanine bond together as a pair.

Recent advancements in DNA technology have improved law enforcement’s ability to use DNA to solve old cases. Original forensic applications of DNA analysis were developed using a technology called restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP). Although very old cases (more than 10 years) may not have had RFLP analysis done, this kind of DNA testing may have been attempted on more recent unsolved cases. However, because RFLP analysis required a relatively large quantity of DNA, testing may not have been successful. Similarly, biological evidence deemed insufficient in size for testing may not have been previously submitted for testing. Also, if a biological sample was degraded by environmental factors such as dirt or mold, RFLP analysis may have been unsuccessful at yielding a result (Turman).