The aim of this experiment was to utilise the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) to amplify eight genomic DNA samples, before using both P20 and P200 micropipettes to accurately load the made-up PCR samples and a control PCR into the wells of an agarose gel. Having carried out the electrophoresis of these PCR samples for an hour, the agarose gel was placed under an ultraviolet light in order to image the separation of the samples into their constituent DNA fragments. Subsequently, the agarose gel image could be analysed to evaluate through chromosome inheritance whether the shared DNA fragments between a murder victim, the potential murder weapon and various relatives of a suspect (referred to as Mr X) could be used to implicate Mr X in the theorised …show more content…
Firstly, the blood sample taken from the base of the glass bottle in lane 1, hair samples from the victim’s body in lane 3 and a victim’s blood sample in lane 5 all had in common the 238 and 192 bands of DNA fragments. The presence of the victim’s DNA on the base of the glass bottle strongly suggests that this object was used as a blunt instrument to strike the head of Dr Jones and thus is the murder weapon. Furthermore, if it is assumed that the blood sample from the broken edge of the bottle (lane 2) contains Mr X’s DNA, then from the shared homozygous 281/271 DNA bands between lanes 2, 4 (cheek sample of Mr X’s father) and 7 (cheek sample of Mr X’s brother), it can be concluded that Mr X and his younger brother inherited identical alleles from the parents. Moreover, as Mr X acquired one each of two variant alleles from both parents, the second DNA band in Mr X’s blood sample (lane 2) with 194 base pairs is shared with Mr X’s mother (lane 6) and Mr X’s older brother (lane 8). In summation, Mr X displayed a heterozygous inheritance of chromosomes from his parents, sharing the 281/271 DNA band with his father and younger brother, and sharing the 194 DNA band with his mother and older …show more content…
Use of DNA polymorphism has proven particularly pertinent in criminal investigations since DNA sequencing can be used to identify suspects and hence evaluate their potential guilt. In order to be able to prove an individual was responsible for a crime, a specific DNA sequence must be amplified (lengthened) by specialised strands of DNA (known as primers) in the process of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), to differentiate it from any other repeat sequence in the human genome. This process of amplifying every DNA sample used is repeated 28 times to generate millions of DNA copies so that the samples can be visibly seen in the agarose gel when placed under the UV light. Subsequently, observations can be made about how far the DNA fragments of each sample have travelled along the agarose
Nowadays, DNA is a crucial component of a crime scene investigation, used to both to identify perpetrators from crime scenes and to determine a suspect’s guilt or innocence (Butler, 2005). The method of constructing a distinctive “fingerprint” from an individual’s DNA was first described by Alec Jeffreys in 1985. He discovered regions of repetitions of nucleotides inherent in DNA strands that differed from person to person (now known as variable number of tandem repeats, or VNTRs), and developed a technique to adjust the length variation into a definitive identity marker (Butler, 2005). Since then, DNA fingerprinting has been refined to be an indispensible source of evidence, expanded into multiple methods befitting different types of DNA
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 profiling was first introduced to the criminal justice field in the mid-1980’s (DNA Initiative). DNA profiling was first described in 1984 by Alec Jeffreys, a geneticist at the University of Leicester in Britain (Aronson, 7). Dr. Jeffreys found that the genes that have no function, called “junk DNA” is where most of the variation is used for DNA profiling (Aronson 9). This region contains DNA sequences that repeat over and over again. Alec Jeffreys determined that the number of repeated sections at different locations vary from individual to individual (DNA Initiative). Consequently these repetitive regions became known as “variable number of tandem repeats” or VNTR’s.
forensic identification technique today1. It is the case of analyzing and profiling a DNA sample
The Australian Institute of Criminology has produced documentations explaining “the technique of ‘DNA identification’ compares the DNA of two bodily samples to ascertain whether or not they came from the same human being. Identity of DNA in the cells across both samples implies that the samples are derived from the same person (or identical twins); non-identity implies different human sources.”
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
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.
Due to the uniqueness of DNA it has become a powerful tool in criminal investigations
No two people, except identical twins, have identical DNA sequences, which makes DNA testing appealing to law enforcement. Two types of DNA testing include short tandem repeat and variable number tandem repeat. Short tandem repeat requires less DNA compared to variable tandem repeat, which is “useful when a sample has been degraded at the crime scene.” (“DNA Evidence”) Whilst DNA evidence is a useful weapon in solving crimes, it is not infallible; therefore, it needs to be used with caution, especially with partial DNA profile,
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.
Identification means the steps needed in the analysis of unknown fluids to see what the substance is (“Biology,” 2016). Individualization determines whether a certain individual may or may not be the donor of a bodily substance by examining various markers (“Biology,” 2016). Processing biological trace evidence uses highly complex, automated technology to create a DNA profile that helps the investigators through the association of suspects to victims and to crime scenes (“Biology Services,” 2017). By using techniques such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), forensic biologists can use variable markers found on the regular chromosomes (STR’s), the sex chromosomes (Y-STR’s) and within the mitochondrial DNA to distinguish one person’s DNA from another to a high degree of certainty (“Biology,” 2016). Forensic biologists are involved in assisting investigative agencies because police were led to Bernardo by a police sketch (“Serial Killers: Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka,” 2013). The police took DNA (hair, blood and saliva) from Bernardo as a matter of routine to test it against specimens found on a rape victim’s clothing (Butts, n.d.). Forensic biologists were able to name the substances left on Kristen French’s body and match it to Bernardo’s DNA by processing it. On February 17th, 1995, Bernardo was arrested for the murders of Mahaffy, French, and the Scarborough rapes (Butts,
Sally Anne Bowman, an 18-year-old model/singer, was murdered outside her home in Croydon after a night out with her sister. She was stabbed 7 times in total with 3 exits wounds where the knife completely penetrated her body. Sally also suffered severe bite wounds and was raped after she was killed. Her ex-boyfriend Lewis was the initial suspect and he was arrested before DNA evidence proved his innocence. The DNA found on intimate examination of Sally’s body did not match Lewis’s, instead it matched an unsolved sexual assault from 4 years prior. Police were then informed of an attempted attack which occurred nearby around an hour before Sally was killed. The victim was able to provide some detail of the appearance of her attacker, which was
DNA profiling technologies have had a considerable impact on how forensic science and criminal investigation have been understood, carried out, and regulated in the last 25 years. Current methods of forensic DNA profiling (known also as DNA fingerprinting and DNA typing), based on Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) amplifications of a varying number of Short Tandem Repeat (STR) loci found at different locations on the human genome, are regularly described as constituting the “gold standard for identification” in contemporary society. Prior to the implementation of PCR based extraction and amplification methods in the 1990’s, the initial uses of DNA fingerprinting (based on Multiple and Single Locus Probes) were largely confined to reactive
There has been a murder at the museum in Tokyo, Japan on April 10th. It happened during the night at around 6:45 A.M. on Monday. The list of suspects includes numerous individuals who tried to sell items at the black market, so I needed to eliminate suspects when each piece of evidence was analyzed. The evidence that was found at the crime scene included a half-eaten strawberry, samples of hair, a religious necklace, and fingerprints taken from a wrench. It is believed that the wrench found at the crime was the murder weapon. Finally, I used different genetic analysis strategies like Punnett squares and DNA extractions to narrow down the list of suspects until a single individual was left take into trial.
DNA fingerprinting is a scientific technology involving the extraction, replication and arrangement of strands of an organism’s DNA. This results in the formation of a genetically distinctive fingerprint that is unique to the organism which the DNA sample was originally extracted from. Because of the specificity of a DNA fingerprint, the application of this technology can have a substantial influence on many aspects of society. Accessibility to a DNA database allows for higher efficiency in forensic investigations, personal identification, maternal and paternal testing. The availability of a national database to police officers and forensic scientists would equate to increased productivity in investigations and prosecution of suspects in a