DNA Database
In 1974, a 19 year old man named James Bain was wrongly convicted of both rape and kidnapping. He was accused of raping a little boy on a baseball field in Florida. A piece of DNA was left at the scene, but the trial occurred before DNA testing was available. Although Bain could not be directly linked to the piece of DNA, blood types could be compared. The perpetrator’s blood type was a match for Bain’s. James Bain was found guilty at his trial, and was sentenced to life in prison. He spent 35 gruesome years in jail before he was granted an amazing opportunity. A scientist would perform post conviction DNA testing, and would retest the DNA found at the crime scene 35 years before. This new test proved his innocence, but it didn’t prove another’s guilt. This heartbreaking story proves the need for a database consisting of DNA from all citizens. One benefit of having a larger DNA database is it can prove if someone committed a crime (Your Genome, 2015). Not only that, but many suspects of one crime are guilty of committing others. The
…show more content…
Only very small amounts of DNA need to be left at a crime scene in order to complete a test, and they are left behind on crime scenes more often. Most criminals wear gloves, or they wipe their prints after they finish committing a crime. It is hard for someone to protect his/herself from their DNA being found at the scene. Not only that, but DNA can be tested from many different types of “prints” as opposed to fingerprinting where there is only one. A DNA test can be run if hair follicles, blood, saliva, semen, or skin are found because all of those kinds of cells contain DNA (Baker, n.d.). A large DNA database has many more advantages than the fingerprinting database (IAFIS- or Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System) that is used
DNA testing is the most accurate way to identify an individual, and should therefore be used to increase the effectiveness of our justice system. This brings to light the issue of genetic privacy. Society questions the motives of government in DNA collection and floods the media, which acts as an informal actor on the court, with ideas of this invasion of privacy and encroachment of biological liberties. The 2010 article, Create a National DNA Database? stated that “such sensitive information is prone to misuse, and one should not have such blind faith in the security of government access to it.” EPIC, the electronic privacy
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
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
From cases such as OJ Simpson to Chandra Levy, DNA profiling also called DNA fingerprinting or DNA typing has played a major role in the criminal justice system. The law enforcement community uses DNA profiling to rule out or identify suspects. Unlike hair microscopy, bite mark comparisons, shoe print comparisons, and firearm tool mark analysis, DNA typing has been developed through massive scientific research and has undergone meticulous scientific evaluation (Innocence Project). DNA is a foolproof method of identifying a perpetrator of a crime.
The prospect of a genetic database in Australia has been raised recently. The federal police are pushing for a national database to help solve crime and are asking for legislation to be allowed to collect DNA samples from people accused, or suspected of committing an offence (the Australian, 06.12.1997 see appendix one)
that could still potentially be used for unethical genetic and eugenic experiments if the proper
2. The millions of copies that are created from a meager amount of DNA assist the laboratory in generating a DNA profile that will be compared against the DNA profile of the suspect.
Beginning in the mid-1980s, the development of DNA analysis technology has revolutionised the field of forensic science within the criminal justice system. As the refinement of procedures and technology continues, even minute samples of biological material (including blood, saliva, semen and skin cells) are able to be analysed and used to link or acquit perpetrators of crimes. (Whitney, R n.d.)
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.
There have been many incidents where cases have needed a solid prosecution in order to convict the defendant in a murder or rape case. This is where DNA Testing comes in to help. By taking a DNA test, a person can be found guilty or not guilty. If a person claims they have been raped there can be a sperm sample taken from the suspect in order to prove that he is guilty or not. In addition, in a murder case there can be blood taken from the suspect so they can tell of his innocence. There are several ways to determine whether a person is guilty or not by this method. Many cases have begun to use this method saying that it is foolproof. People say this is the method of the future of crime
The concept of genetic profiling through fingerprints was first introduced in the 1980’s (Paul Johnson, Robin Williams, 2006). While at first it was primarily carried out on high-profile cases, most modern crime investigations use some form of genetic identification technique. The technology behind DNA identification has been rapidly growing. Instead of
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 as an exact counterpart(Cooper,