Essay about DNA, The New Crime Investigator

In McClure, Weisburd and Wilson (2008) summary article arguing that in addition to bench science, field experimentation involving forensic methods is key to assess the utility of various methods to solve crimes. The study reflected that there is a need for more research into many aspects of forensic science, criticizing the strength of scientific evidence that’s collected at a crime scene and interpretations of most forensic methods while omitting DNA testing. McClure et al’s (2008) explains that in sexual cases and homicides, the presence of DNA evidence actually increased the likelihood of prosecution and a conviction. According to the article “…the case of convictions, the odds-ratio for the presence of DNA evidence was 33.1 for sexual offenses and 23.1 for homicides” (McClure et al., 2008). Subsequently, the research shows that there was a consistent gradual decline in the national homicide rates that began in the 1900s and continued through into the 21st century. The decline of homicides in the US has dropped by from more than 90% in the 1960s to 62% in 2003. Even though this significant drop has occurred during the introduction of the new DNA testing

The Southside Strangler: The Advent of DNA Exploration and Testing Forever Changed the Criminal Justice System

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

There have been many cases over the years within in the criminal justice system where people have walked free from committing a crime as well as those being put behind bars for being accused of committing a crime they never committed. DNA testing in the criminal justice system can be the decision maker for someone who is either going to walk free from the crime they possibly committed or get put behind bars for a crime they may have not committed. DNA testing has been used to sentence hundreds and convict thousands of people across the country every year. DNA evidence is one of the best examples on how technology has made convicting the criminals who have committed a crime much easier than it has been done in the past. DNA evidence does not necessarily pinpoint the exact criminal on who have may commited the crime, but it does bring it down to a handful of the population who are being questioned for the crime. It is one of the most accurate ways of finding out evidence as long as it is properly done and handled correctly.

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)

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.

We will examine the importance of DNA in the conviction of Tommie Lee Andrews and the significance of this decision in the United States Judicial System. We will discuss an overview of some of the essential elements in conducting utilizing this DNA evidence and its repercussions. This case signified the first time in the United Sates that DNA evidence was actually admissible in court proceedings during a criminal trial.

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

Forensic science has become the greatest collective method for intelligence gathering of human identifiers. The forensic sciences are used around the world to resolve civil disputes, to justly the enforcement of criminal laws and government regulations, and to protect public health. Over the years, judges have trusted forensic methods without a second thought. DNA analysis is the most reliable method that forensic has, but how reliable is it? (Jonathan Jones, pbs). According to a group called The Innocence Project, “Misapplication of forensic science is the second most common contributing factor to wrongful convictions, found in nearly half (46%) of DNA exoneration cases” (Innocence project).

The first DNA-based conviction in the United States occurred shortly after in 1987 when the Circuit Court in Orange County, Florida, convicted Tommy Lee Andrews of rape after DNA tests matched his DNA from a blood sample with that of semen traces found in a rape victim (Calandro, 2005). It was two years later that DNA was again ruled admissible in a Virginia state ruling. In the years that followed the use of DNA in trial proceeding was not disputed. It was not until the technique of obtaining the evidence was more largely used did the practice become questionable.

DNA comparisons are crucial when investigating crimes. Amanda Christopher’s home had a significant amount of forensic evidence behind that has yet to be determined. The Supreme Court has analyzed the issue as to whether or not use storing and using DNA was considered constitutional. Although, Pennsylvania is silent on the issue, several states have seen the need for the use and storage of DNA that is obtained of arrestees charged of serious crimes, such as felonies and sexual offenses. Analyzing both the federal and other states provides some guidance as to whether or not the use of previously obtained DNA is constitutional.

Before any release, there must be proper evidence showing that the accused had nothing to do with the crime. The introduction of the first person using DNA to prove his innocent was David Vasquez. In 1985, he was convicted, later in 1990; he was released due to DNA evidence (O’Leary, 2012). Since the Vasquez case, DNA testing has been a very powerful technique to use to prove a person’s innocence. A great reason for this is because victims are capable of lying and misidentifying.

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

Former attorney General Janet Reno described our system of justice as a search for the truth.(1) Increasingly, the forensic use of DNA technology is an important ally in that search. DNA fingerprinting, better known in the scientific realm as DNA profiling, has given police and the courts a means of identifying the perpetrators of rapes and murders with a very high degree of confidence. However, nine years after its introduction, forensic DNA typing is still used only selectively. This is due to a variety of factors, including the unavailability of forensic typing to local prosecutors, the time required to perform the typing, and the costs of the tests if private laboratories are utilized. Formerly