DNA Information System : The Use Of The Combined DNA Index System

DNA testing is the most accurate way to identify an individual, and should therefore be used to increase the effectiveness of our justice system. This brings to light the issue of genetic privacy. Society questions the motives of government in DNA collection and floods the media, which acts as an informal actor on the court, with ideas of this invasion of privacy and encroachment of biological liberties. The 2010 article, Create a National DNA Database? stated that “such sensitive information is prone to misuse, and one should not have such blind faith in the security of government access to it.” EPIC, the electronic privacy

Though there are many arguments against having a DNA database there are also reasons to have a DNA database. DNA is one of the leading factors in putting criminals behind bars. When DNA is evident in a criminal case, it makes that case a lot stronger. With a database of all citizens DNA it can help law enforcement catch criminals to make communities safer. DNA will not only be able to help solve crimes ongoing now and for the future but to help solve past crimes. DNA also allows for scientist to use the valuable information for research to get a better understanding of health and safety for individuals and to help link people who have the same medical condition. With an entire database of all people, it allows for the system to not be discriminatory. Minorities make up the vast majority of the criminal justice system. With every race, gender and ethnicity in the system it opens up the ability for all people to be at risk for being in the system with DNA placing them for a crime and making it harder to get away with one. There is also a possibility that having a DNA database will lower crime rates. People who feel they can get away with crimes now, will have a higher chance of getting caught. Those who fear getting caught because the government and police agencies have their DNA will be less likely to commit crimes. Mark Kleiman a professor who deals with criminal justice stated, “DNA databases reduce crime rates,

Human DNA is very similar to one another, but only about 0.1% is different from the next person. That 0.1% can tell a person’s eye color, hair color, and other physical features. DNA analyst are able to take a drop of blood, the size of a dime, and duplicate the number DNA found in that drop. With the ability to duplicate DNA, analysts can have a back-up, in the event a human error were to occur. Analyst can tell you exactly where your ancestors came from and the percentage that is still inside your DNA. DNA is a very powerful tool that can identify a murder if the individual left any blood, saliva, skin tissue, hair or semen. The education needed to be able make use of the DNA consists of a great deal of science classes.

DNA testing has overthrown the way police collect evidence in a number of criminal cases, especially rape and murder and consequently had a large impact on many past cases. However there are many disadvantages to DNA testing, such as a challenge of accuracy, the costs of DNA testing and the possible misuse of DNA. The prospect of a national DNA database in Australia has been heavily criticised with complaints of invasion of privacy and stigma against those with terminal diseases.

Basically, our DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is our genes, and every person, except for twins, are born with a different DNA profile and that is in a giant database, containing every DNA profile of every person in the world. DNA testing started in 1985 by scientist Alec Jeffreys and was first used to solve a crime a year later. Before 1985 DNA evidence could not be used in court because it wasn’t invented yet, this increased the number of wrongful convictions which would have been prevented using DNA analysis. However, DNA analysis can still be used to solve crimes that occurred prior to the invention of DNA analysis, with a sufficient amount of DNA to be analyzed of course, which is a very small amount. Only a small amount of DNA is needed to find out who it belongs to, it can be found in blood, saliva, finger residue, hair, skin, semen and more.

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

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.

DNA is considered an individuals genetic fingerprint, thus it is exclusive to each and every individual. Since this exclusivity exists, DNA is a tool used for identification purposes. It has been utilized for investigations of serious crimes, identification of individuals killed in mass disasters, wars and paternity uncertainties1. Since the inception of the use of DNA in the 1980’s thousands of criminals have been caught and prosecuted with the help of DNA evidence2. Additionally, countless victims of mass disasters have been identified through DNA and returned to their loved ones. Although, there are various benefits to employing DNA it does not come without a sundry of ethical and legal concerns. The ethical concerns that have presented themselves are questions involving scientific reliability, DNA evidence in court, human rights, and finally the other uses of the DNA database.

DNA is one of the most important pieces of evidence that a criminal justice agent can use in a court of law. There ae slim to no crimes committed that doesn’t have some type of DNA evidence left behind. Some DNA evidence could be, but not limited to, fingerprints, blood, hair, and any other bodily fluids. DNA is known as Deoxyribonucleic Acid, and is one of two types of molecules that encode genetic information (Medicine.net, 2017). DNA is characteristically unique to each person individually, unless they are a twin. DNA dictates a person’s look such as their eye color, blood type, height, hair color, skin color, etc. With this genetic information, intense testing can be done to find who may be connected to the genetic makeup of each stand

In the essay, “DNA fingerprinting: Cracking Our Genetic ‘Barcode’,” by Elaine Marieb, illustrates how significant DNA fingerprinting is today. She initiates a candid example of how New York City’s World Trade Center massacre killed more than 3, 000, left millions of bodies distorted, charred, and decayed. It was the staple for the ever-increasing need for DNA fingerprinting.

DNA collection is a good thing not only can it help catch the person responsible for an illegal crime, but it can also clear up a suspect’s name. In the case of Maryland v. King on April 2009 Alonzo Jay King was charged for first and second degree assault for scarring a crowd of people with a shotgun, he was arrested and as a part of their booking procedure, they swabbed Alonzo Jay King for his DNA. Kings DNA sample later resulted to be a match of a DNA sample in the system “CODIS” of a rape victim by the name of Vonette W.’s Salisbury. Vonnette was raped on September 2003 but had not gotten justice for the crime against her since the only evidence was the DNA sample of the semen that was swabbed. No matches were found in the data base until Alonzo Jay King was arrested. By collecting DNA, it can help lead to an arrest of a suspect and to be able to close cases.

DNA is certain characteristics that identifies a person by race, hair color, and their sex. Technology had changed the criminal justice tremendously and DNA is a prime example of how much technology has changed the aspect of the criminal justice system. When the DNA is used in an investigation it is used to help with identifying a suspect for committing a crime. The impact that DNA has had on the criminal justice system is that it has changed the way DNA is handled, collected, and the importance of DNA. DNA has revolutionized the criminal justice system in a major way because cold cases has been solved, people have cleared from murder cases, and it has been a vital source for information in criminal cases. The case of a Florida man by name

If the government had every U.S. citizen’s DNA, and could in fact determine this information, I have no doubt it would be abused. This furthers my stance that a database like this should not be created or allowed.

DNA testing was introduced late in the 20th century. Since then it has been debated whether or not law enforcement should be allowed to use DNA samples in their investigations. There are currently 21 states in America that have passed laws allowing law enforcement to collect DNA from an arrestee. In order to get a sample of DNA, many agencies swab the inside of the arrestee’s cheek. Samples are used to then chemically test the DNA for genetic markers and stored in the state’s database (Taking). The state of Michigan recently became the 21st state to pass legislation allowing these DNA samples to be taken at the time of any felony arrest; felonies are classified as the most serious of crimes. A person convicted

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a chemical structure containing a base sequence. Base pairs are genetic codes made up of four chemicals (Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine and Thymine) and each sequence differs in every person. Because DNA is so complex and varies immensely in individuals, it can be used like a fingerprint, hence the name DNA Fingerprinting. DNA can be found and analyzed in blood, semen, saliva, hair and skin--even decades old if properly stored. The process takes longer than simple fingerprinting and is very expensive, but the results are almost perfect in determining identity. While these tests are very accurate, there is a 1 in 50 billion chance that two people