Wednesday, September 18, 2019
DNA Analysis: Validity And Doubts :: essays research papers
DNA : Criminal Identification Validity and Doubts           DNA, although controversial on accuracy, has provided a new means of identifying criminals where there is little physical evidence. This allows you to take a piece of hair, a spot of blood, or skin tissue and make a positive identification on a suspect. Since it's first use by the FBI in December 1988 it has grown to become a major factor in criminal investigation. This new key gives them help when the crime scene lacks evidence. DNA evidence also allows detectives to narrow down suspects and keep innocent people from being prosecuted.           In 1990 the FBI began development of a national DNA identification index. The FBI has received over 10,000 submissions of DNA evidence from police agencies and DNA evidence has been used in over 500 cases throughout the United States. The FBI performs testing for free to all police agencies to help keep costs down in prosecuting criminals. More than 50 laboratories perform DNA analysis around the US. The chances of two people having the same DNA profile is 1 in 50,000 all the way to 1 in 5 million according to scientists estimates.           DNA controls all our inheritable information like eye color, hair color, skin color, etc. DNA differs in all people except for identical twins. All cellular matter contains DNA: this includes white blood cells, bone cells, tissue cells, spermatozoa, and hair root cells. Adenine, thymine, guanine, and cytosine are the building blocks of DNA strands which make up the letters of a genetic code. In certain regions of a DNA strand the sequence of genetic code is unique which allows scientists to identify an individual and exclude others.           The FBI, Cellmark, and Lifecodes are the 3 major laboratories that courts accept DNA profiles from. As estimated by the FBI, the chances of two DNA samples being the same is as low as one in a trillion. Critics of DNA say that the FBI has falsely applied theories of population biology behind it's calculations, so courtrooms make DNA seem inaccurate. More than half the states have a mandatory DNA testing of all people convicted of sexual charges and violent offenses, to help in future criminal investigations. Although some people say that this is an invasion of privacy, it's a good way to prosecute repeat offenders and find suspects when only DNA evidence is available.           As accurate as DNA profiling is, there are still many questions about the
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.