Over the course of time, numerous techniques in DNA analysis have resulted in wrongly accused individuals in court cases. It is significantly important that the techniques used are highly accurate in order to prevent these accusations in the legal system. In addition, there is always the fear that evidence may be contaminated by time it is reached, this is another reason why it is important to have time efficient, accurate techniques. In the past, restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) has been used in the testing of DNA. The process required a small amount of cells either gathered from strands of hair or dried bones and teeth. Today the most common form of DNA analysis is polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Since the 1980’s RFLP has been used for testing on DNA. The testing is done on the DNA from the mitochondria of the cell and typically required approximately 100,000 cells. In addition to RFLP, polymerase chain reaction or PCR has been practiced greatly affecting the field of forensic science. PCR has allowed for evidence from the past to be tested and analyzed today. It has also allowed for a higher success rate of testing evidence that is old and …show more content…
As well as PCR is cost efficient and only requires a small amount of hours. This is important because cases aren’t granted very much time, and sometimes evidence isn’t able to be looked at until several days, weeks or even months following the crime. PCR testing is capable of producing results even after a period of days or weeks. PCR not only benefits criminal cases but also provides advantages in the medical field. The medical field benefits in two areas: detecting mutations in DNA and determining infectious diseases. PCR is capable of producing millions and millions of DNA, therefore researchers are able to examine a single cell of sperm. PCR has allowed for doctors to quickly identify
(PCR), which isolates small fragments of DNA that have a high degree of variability from
Today in the crime world, DNA evidence is strongly accepted in solving crime cases. This is all based in part by allowing a crime laboratory to have a designated unit whose main goal is to analyze DNA evidence to aid investigators with positive outcomes in crime case solving. With that being said we are going to discuss the functions of a DNA unit within a crime lab as well as address the vital role these units play in solving crime.
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.)
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
DNA evidence is extremely helpful in criminal trials not only because it can determine the guilt of a suspect, but also because it can keep innocent people from going to jail. The suspect must leave a sample of their DNA at the crime scene in order for testing to occur, but DNA can be found in the form of many things such as semen, blood, hair, saliva, or skin scrapings. According to Newsweek, "thousands of people have been convicted by DNA's nearly miraculous ability to search out suspects across space and time… hundreds of innocent people have also been freed, often after years behind bars, sometimes just short of the death chamber" (Adler ). Though some may think it is a waste of time to go
There have been many incidents where cases have needed a solid prosecution in order to convict the defendant in a murder or rape case. This is where DNA Testing comes in to help. By taking a DNA test, a person can be found guilty or not guilty. If a person claims they have been raped there can be a sperm sample taken from the suspect in order to prove that he is guilty or not. In addition, in a murder case there can be blood taken from the suspect so they can tell of his innocence. There are several ways to determine whether a person is guilty or not by this method. Many cases have begun to use this method saying that it is foolproof. People say this is the method of the future of crime
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.
DNA forensics can also narrow down suspect pools, exonerate innocent suspects, and link crimes together if the same DNA is found at both scenes. However, without existing suspects, a DNA profile cannot direct an investigation because current knowledge of genotype-phenotype relation is too vague for DNA phenotyping. For example, a profile from a first time offender that has no match in any database may give the information that the criminal is a left handed male of medium stature with red hair and freckles. It would be impossible to interview every man who fits that description. However, with available suspects, DNA forensics has many advantages over other forms of evidence. One is the longevity of DNA. Although it will deteriorate if exposed to sunlight, it can remain intact for centuries under proper conditions (Sachs, 2004). Because DNA is so durable, investigators can reopen old cases to reexamine evidence.
Due to the uniqueness of DNA it has become a powerful tool in criminal investigations
The results in this lab showed that suspect 2 was a match for the DNA found at the crime scene. This was determined by DNA fingerprinting. In this lab, the samples of DNA from two suspects and the DNA from the crime scene were cut with two different restriction enzymes and then the DNA was run through gel electrophoresis. The different restriction enzymes cut the DNA in different places, so when the DNA was run through the gel, the gel showed two fragments for each sample based on their size. The fragments shown are known as bands of DNA. These bands of DNA for each suspect were analyzed and compared with the bands of the DNA from the crime scene. The bands of DNA were compared based on the distance they traveled through the gel from the wells.
Another report from Turman, herarticle about the importance of DNA evidence to say in a strong and definite way that the offenders or to prove prisoner in criminal cases has arose in the media with the developing regularity over the last few years. Criminal justice professionals and the public behold that the forensic DNA technology is reforming
This paper examines Carrell et al’s research along with three other scholarly research articles to better understand the effects that the DNA recovered from a crime scene has on a particular case and the forensic science community.
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).
A general issue is that PCR techniques can be very sensitive; any contamination can be amplified. This in combination with the improvements in technique seen over the last few years can mean that for instance in forensics, extensive care needs to be taken when handling samples to prevent contamination. The interpretation of results can also prove tricky for levels of contamination (or DNA that was there due to circumstances unrelated to the crime) that may not have been noticeable with earlier techniques can point the blame to someone who was in fact innocent.
RFLP or restriction fragment length polymorphisms became the first scientifically accepted DNA analysis method in the United States (Jones). The repeat segments are cut out of the DNA strand by a restrictive enzyme that acts like scissors and the resulting fragments are sorted out by electrophoresis (Saferstein 391). However, there are some drawbacks using the RFLP method in the forensic science community. The RFLP technique requires a large amount of DNA and must be of high quality and cannot be degraded (Jones). Forensic scientists and the law enforcement community