Established Dna Databank

Though, the chances are small, people have been convicted of crimes who are innocent. DNA databases are used significantly to solve crimes. With solving crimes also comes the chance of putting an innocent person behind bars. Forensics is not always 100% accurate and can be faulty in identifying the wrong person. Sometimes, there are biased forensic analysts that misconstrued evidence and biased police officers in the criminal justice system. An issue with police officers is a cognitive bias called confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is when someone, such as a police officer receives information on a person, but chooses to throw out the information and rather put their own believes before evidence. If police officers are able to swab DNA when they arrest someone, they could use that DNA to misidentify an individual of a crime. If a DNA database is contaminated with millions of innocent people, the risk of an innocent percent being abused by the system is higher. A big case in the criminal justice system was of the lawyer Brandon Mayfield. His fingerprints were misidentified at a terrorist bombing in Madrid. He had converted to Islam and felt that he was discriminated against, while being held captive for two weeks. He is just one of the many innocent people who have been suspects in criminal cases. In the primary source document The Case Against Expanding Forensic DNA Databases to Innocent

This paper explores deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) collection and its relationship to solving crimes. The collection of DNA is one of the most important steps in identifying a suspect in a crime. DNA evidence can either convict or exonerate an individual of a crime. Furthermore, the accuracy of forensic identification of evidence has the possibility of leaving biased effects on a juror (Carrell, Krauss, Liberman, Miethe, 2008). This paper examines Carrells et al’s research along with three other research articles to review how DNA is collected, the effects that is has on a juror and the pros and cons of DNA collection in the Forensic Science and Criminal Justice community.

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

The proposal has sparked a moral dilemma. Victoria has had a DNA database since 1992 with the reasoning that, if a suspect is cleared, their DNA must be erased off the list. However, recently Victorian government has allowed police to collect samples from more suspected criminals, not just those accused of murder, serious assault or rape. Now they are allowed to collect from those accused of drug trafficking, arson causing death and aggravated burglary.

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

If a wrongful conviction occurs nowadays, our greatest chance to prove that it is a wrongful convictions is with DNA

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.

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

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

Perhaps the most critical improvement in criminal examination since the happening to one of a kind finger impression ID is the usage of DNA development to convict punks or get rid of persons as suspects. DNA examinations on spit, skin tissue, blood, hair, and semen can now be reliably used to association guilty parties to wrongdoings. Dynamically recognized in the midst of the past 10 years, DNA development is in the blink of an eye by and large used by police, prosecutors, shield course, and courts in the United

Many times when a person is raped they are too traumatized to actually remember the full details or only remember certain characteristics, or facial features of the person who hurt them. So law enforcement makes an arrest based on the victims memory. Then after convicted it is found out that the wrong person was

In previous cases, the collection of DNA samples was ruled constitutional by state courts. For instance in the 2004 Maryland v. Raines case, felon Charles Raines was forced to turn in his DNA test, linking him to a sexual assault case. Maryland’s Court of Appeals declared

Allowing the annual report of the National DNA Database Strategy Board as of 2012-2013, NDNAD helps the law enforcement in giving worthful information that will lead in determining the suspect and solve crime cases. However, sometimes the crime doesn’t solve and more evidence needs to be collecting to secure a conviction but in dealing with NDNAD it provides the police of its needed information for DNA matches.