What Are The Causes Of Dna Crimes

Research shows that jurors place more value on eyewitness testimony than any other important form of evidence, including DNA. (Anderson, T. M.,2015). More often than we might think, the eyewitness testimony is false, ultimately leading to false convictions, and possibly the death of an innocent person. According to the Innocence Project (2014), inaccurate eyewitness testimonies and identifications make up about 72% of the current 329 wrongful convictions that have been later overturned with DNA evidence. Thankfully, as technology advances, this issue has been put in the limelight with a large number of eyewitness conviction cases being exonerated by DNA evidence. The Innocence Project in New York City advocates DNA testing to exonerate wrongfully convicted people. Of a list of 310 exonerated individuals (as of July 8th, 2013), they were typically convicted on the basis of eyewitness testimony and spent an average of 13.6 years in confinement before being released. This number is only a small portion of the large number of wrongful convictions that occur because DNA evidence is not available in all cases. (Lacy, J. W., & Stark, C. E. 2013). Science has come such a long way with allowing us to get the truth through DNA and because it shows certainty, it should be all that is considered when presenting a case to jurors and finalizing a verdict.

Every time an innocent person is exonerated based on DNA testing, law enforcement agencies look at what caused the wrongful convictions. There are many issues that contribute to putting guiltless lives behind bars including: eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, imperfect forensic science, and more (Gould and Leo 18). When a witness is taken into a police station to identify a suspect, it is easy for their memories to be blurred and their judgment influenced. This can lead the witness to identify a suspect who is actually innocent. Flawed forensic science practice also contributes to wrongful imprisonments. In the past, analysts have been inaccurate due to carelessness, testified in court presenting evidence that was not based

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.

The Innocence Project was established in the wake of a landmark study by the United States Department of Justice and the United States Senate with help from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (Schneider, 2013). This study found that there were numerous reasons why people are wrongfully convicted including, but not limited to eye witness identification, perjured testimony, improper forensic science techniques, and government misconduct (Roberts & Weathered, 2009) The original Innocence Project was founded twenty two (22) years ago as a part of the Cardoza School of Law of Yeshiva University in New York City, New York (Davis, 2012). The Innocence Projects primary goal is to exonerate those whom have been convicted of a crime when there is DNA evidence available to be tested or re-tested (Mitchell, 2011). DNA testing has been possible in five (5) percent to ten (10) percent of cases since 1992 (Risinger, 2007). On the other side, other members of the Innocence Project help to exonerate those have been convicted of a crime where there is no DNA evidence to test. A goal of the Innocence Project is to conduct research on the reasons for wrongful convictions, how to fix the criminal justice system, as well as advocate for those who have been wrongfully convicted (Steiker & Steiker, 2005). The members of this organization strive to teach the world about the dangers of wrongful convictions. To date, this non-profit legal organization, has freed three hundred eighteen (318)

With the number of DNA exonerations growing in the recent years, wrongful convictions reveal disturbing trends and fissures in the justice system. It shows how broken the system is, and why it needs urgent fixing. According to Huff (1996), over ten thousand people are convicted wrongfully for serious crimes each year. This study established that factors leading to wrongful convictions are false eyewitnesses, a prejudiced jury, incompetent prosecutors, and suspects’ ignorance. Where DNA evidence clears a suspect, array of reasons emerge; misconduct, mistakes, to race and class factors. It is important to make DNA data available to attorneys in order to enable them mount a strong

Will the use of forensic DNA in the courts be the equalizer for the wrongly convicted? Per the National Registry of Exonerations, there have been 1,916 exonerations in the United States since 1989 (“National Registry of Exonerations,” n.d.). Barry Scheck and The Innocence Project have been instrumental in facilitating the exoneration process by presenting forensic DNA evidence to American courtrooms. DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material that lies within the nucleus of all cells in humans and other living organisms. Each person’s DNA is unique, and only identical twins share the exact DNA (Vocabulary.com, 2016). Quite by accidents, while conducting research in his laboratory, Sir Alec Jeffreys developed the technique for the biological ID of any person using only a tiny sample of their DNA (Royal Society of Biologists, 2016, p. 16). Since the introduction, the use of forensic DNA has manifested a major impact upon the prosecution, juries, and the wrongly convicted in the American Court System.

Even with vast majorities of new technology today, DNA testing still finds people guilty in trials even when they didn’t commit the crime. America is known for having one of the most fair-minded criminal justice systems. We give every person, who is arrested, the chance to be proven innocent until they are found guilty through evidence. Within these trials, DNA tests account for a majority of the convictions or exonerations.

Forensic science is defined as the practice of utilizing scientific methodologies to clarify judicial inquiries. The field of forensic science contains a broad range of disciplines and has become a vital aspect of criminal investigations. Some forensic disciplines are laboratory-based; while others are based on an analyst’s interpretation of observable patterns (Kourtsounis, 2009). According to the Innocence project’s website; in greater than fifty percent of wrongful convictions, the use of invalidated or improper forensic techniques played a role in cases; which were later

    A review of false convictions that involved forensic science and can help identify critical lessons for forensic scientists as they perform testing, interpret results, render conclusions, and testify in court from the national institute of justice.

Melley, Brian. "Man is cleared after 16 years; DNA ties crimes to fugitves." Miami Herald 24 November 2015: 12A.

and could get up to 50 years in jail if convicted of rape and kidnapping.

Another way that forensic science has impacted the judicial process is through appeals. With the increase in forensic science being used in the courtroom for trial, it has also increased in the use for appeals. The Innocence Project, created by Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld who were the lawyers in the previously mentioned New York case, is an advocacy group that strives to exonerate wrongfully convictions individuals through DNA evidence and lead reform efforts to the criminal justice system. Since the Innocence Project began in 1992, they have exonerated almost 350 individuals through DNA testing with about 150 of the actual offenders being found.

In some cases, such as murder there are some people that have been wrongfully accused. Due to wrongful practices, people have been convicted of circumstantial evidence. ``DNA is a very powerful tool . . . but it is circumstantial evidence like other pieces of circumstantial evidence and a proper investigation still has to take place,'' she said. (Matthew, n.d.).

Contamination can occur when transferring DNA or the collection of DNA evidence. In the case involving Mr. Farah, he was wrongful charged of rape although he had appealed in the High Court with the basis of the scientists not having said he was undisputedly the perpetrator. The scientists said that it was a very small chance that it was not Mr. Farah which he argued was still a reasonable doubt. The judges dismissed the case within twenty minutes but it was later found that the evidence was contaminated. Other examples include R v. Rendell (1999) and R v. Carroll (2002.)Though technology is advancing, the process of collecting, processing and analyzing DNA has faults. There needs to be more training, procedures and checks put in place for the system to be effective. Faults in evidence presents to be ineffective justice as although the jury weighed up the evidence, there was inadequate access to allow him to refute the claims and lead to wrongful convictions.

Law and science, two powerful institutions, converge and at the same time show their differences in the criminal justice process. The seminar investigates how truth in law and truth in science are involved in the admission of forensic evidence. How does scientific uncertainty intersect with the legal process? The recent discovery of wrongful convictions involving forensic evidence addresses this question and opened a large debate among forensic scientists and legal scholars. Participants are invited to attend trials of the regional court of Berlin, the largest of its kind in Germany with three different locations. The court in Moabit tries in first instance serious crimes and in second instance less serious crimes on appeal against first instance