Nowadays, our modern life is becoming more comfortable and safe because of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). DNA is a genetic code that is made up of four chemical bases namely, adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C) and thymine (T). Our body consists of about 3 billion bases and almost everyone has 99 percent of the same bases. Some organizations such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, uses DNA and to help find and convict criminals. It is time-consuming to check and match DNA samples, but this can help the authorities to apprehend the real culprit. In the past, fingerprints, blood and other bodily materials in the scene of an offense were used by detectives in their investigation to catch and put criminals in prison but they were not foolproof methods. Wrongful convictions followed. But DNA …show more content…
Today, arguments for and against the use of DNA have surfaced.
DNA profiling is the technology that uses the individual’s DNA characteristics. Each human has his own DNA, comprising 99.9% of the same DNA but scientists have found the remnant 0.1% difference. One of its benefits is that scientists are using this crucial distinction to find criminals from bodily fluid samples, hair, skin and other parts of the body. (sciencemuseum, 2016)
DNA also has another advantageous application; it is used to find biological family relationships. In a Korean drama, the writer includes in his plot problems surrounding a family conflict. The father or the son gives his DNA sample such as found in his hair or toothbrush to the forensic scientists. Then, they
It can refute a claim of self-defense and put a weapon in the suspect's hand. It can change a story from an alibi to one of consent. The more officers know how to use DNA, the more powerful a tool it becomes.” This proves that DNA evidence is very reliable and is hard evidence that cannot be argued upon. DNA is either found at the scene of the crime or isn’t.
It is a great technological innovation that can help bring evidences and fact faster. In the article The DNA Wars Are Over, “Forensic use of DNA technology in criminal cases began in 1986… In one of the first uses of DNA in a criminal case in the United States, in November 1987.” Sadly in 1985, DNA testing was not popular in the U.S. investigation and was not available in Cole’s case. I believe the U.S. court system is improving and yes there are a lot mistrials and wrongful conviction cases, but you cannot avoid the fact that DNA testing can bring better truth than just relying on statements of both
DNA has given some innocents their freedom, but others are still being locked up. Jurors are giving guilty verdicts to people who don’t deserve it based on theories and confessions that may have been beaten out of them. It was reported in the studies that exculpatory DNA does sometimes help a defendant that had confessed, but then prosecutors come up with theories and that doesn’t help the defendants, as was the case of Joseph Buffey (Appleby & Kassin, 2016). I didn’t expect for exculpatory DNA not to be taken into consideration when prosecutors told a theory that can explain why DNA of the accused was not at the scene of the crime. It just doesn’t make sense.
Copeland’s purpose to inform, as well as engage or entertain, is developed through the structure of the article. Specifically, the structure of Copeland’s article consists of a personal story and other examples, along with statistical data. Copeland wants her readers to understand how DNA testing can be an emotional process, having positive outcomes for many families and yet also causing potential burdens for
Within our contemporary society, the Bill of Rights serves as symbol of the basic American freedoms and protects individuals from irrational government policies, which are not explicitly stated in the Constitution. In the Supreme Court case Maryland v. King, the culprit, Alonzo Jay King, utilized the Fourth Amendment after Maryland police arrested him for first and second-degree assault and swabbed his mouth to collect his DNA in order to check for any previous crimes committed. King argued that the practice of collecting DNA was unconstitutional because Maryland did not have a definite reason to analyze his DNA, as this intruded his privacy and that law enforcements would abuse the collection of DNA in order to convict people of unrelated
Today, the FBI has DNA records of more than 5 million convicted offenders in the database CODIS, or Combined DNA Index System. However, DNA fingerprinting has limitations: it is limited to directly connecting crimes to felons already in CODIS, has high risk of contamination, does not look at familial records, and only analyzes short pieces of DNA. With the advent of more affordable and high resolution genetic technologies after The Human Genome Project, over 35 million people have submitted their DNA to the largest direct-to-consumer genetic companies. Two companies, FamilyTreeDNA and GEDmatch, also allow law enforcement access to their databases. Thus, beginning investigative genetic genealogy, a new method of forensic investigation not only with higher resolution DNA information than DNA fingerprinting but also the capability of finding a suspect from distant relatives.
In the lab report three students are tested along with one suspect. Student number two’s DNA matched the suspects DNA. The student’s DNA’s are cut with five different enzymes as well as the suspects DNA. Student two’s DNA matched exactly with the suspects DNA; the other two student’s DNA did not resemble the suspects DNA at all. (Choi, et al, 2008) DNA fingerprinting is used a lot in determining who committed a crime.
One of the most accurate methods of connecting a suspect with a crime is through the use of DNA analysis. Even if no fingerprints are left behind at a robbery, for instance, a single strand of hair or skin cell from the thief can be used to positively identify a suspect. Conversely, if a suspect’s DNA does not match samples procured from a crime scene, the use of so-called “genetic fingerprinting” can exonerate, or clear, them. Concern over the issue of wrongful convictions, coupled with a sense of greater trust in DNA analysis over other, more conventional methods of prosecution, such as eyewitness testimony, has led some to call for mandatory DNA testing before any person begins serving a sentence for a serious crime, as well as
“On September 20th, 1986 a young woman was killed and, left behind at the scene, was a piece of DNA that investigators hoped would help solve the case” (Biemesderfer). There was no way to identify people yet. Nowadays, you can identify whose footprint it is by investigators and
The Department of Justice says, "States began passing laws requiring offenders convicted of certain offenses to provide DNA samples. " That DNA evidence can help convict someone of a crime and it helps to uncover more things about the crime itself. Investigators have been using forensic science to help them solve cases since before the 90 's, mostly fingerprints that were found at the crime scenes and on the victims (O 'Brien). DNA evidence has solved countless cases including ones that happened over a prolonged period of time because of the technological advancements there is
A FBI study indicated that since 1989, DNA evidence excluded the primary suspect in 25% of sexual assault cases. Sexual assault cases are of really high importance and happen worldwide, and DNA evidence makes it hard for the assaulter to deny his/her actions. This is due to the traceable DNA, a person would inject in his/her victim after sexual intercourse is conducted. DNA could be a revolutionary turning point in the world of crime solving, because of its durability in this world, which could last for decades, explaining many unsolved mysteries that occurred in the
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) holds genetic information inside of all living organisms as the sole component of chromosomes. DNA embraces the information that is kept as a code which is prepared by four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). DNA is known as a double helix structure, a thread-like chain of nucleotides that uses growth, development functioning and reproduction for living organisms and viruses. Five important facts that I found out about DNA is that: 1. 99 percent of DNA is shared by every other human being.
Today, practical methods of using fingerprinting are extremely wide. In 1995, the size of the FBI fingerprint card archive contained over 200 million items, and archive size was increasing at the rate of 30,000 to 50,000 new cards per day [2]. Forensic science was the very first and most important area of its application, which still remains. The rapid development of computer technology has made it possible to create such fingerprint scanners that can be installed on laptops, cell phones, flash drives,
I feel that DNA is the only reliable forensic tool because its principles are example of real science. Mentioned in the video, forensic science was developed by law enforcement, but DNA analysis was developed by medical science. A much more reliable source. There may be certain situations where DNA isn’t the best tool to go off of. Like for example if there isn’t an enough quantity of it at the scene of a crime or if it has been mixed with someone else’s (Kaye and Sensabaugh, 2000).
DNA in forensic science The majority of cells making up the human body are diploid cells carrying identical DNA, with the exception of haploid gametes and red blood cells. Several types of biological evidence such as blood and hair are commonly used in forensic science, which is the scientific study of evidence for crime scene investigations and other legal matters. Forensic science is used for the purpose of DNA analysis, this is the analysis of DNA samples to determine if it came from a particular individual. DNA analysis is done by obtaining DNA samples from an individual; next, a large sample of DNA is produced from amplified selected sequences from the DNA collected.