You asked for it...
Genetics in relationship to the law is a subject riddled with ethical, and technical issues. Should DNA of convicted criminals be kept in a data bank? Is it okay to take DNA samples for one case, and then use them again in another? David Lazers DNA and the Criminal Justice System discusses these topics along with others pertaining to the subject of genetics in connection to solving criminal investigations.
I believe that the UN should allocate funds towards genetic databases, research, and equipment in countries, which could otherwise not afford it. In regards to the Innocence Project in 2000 Peter Neufeld said, One attorney
had a position that thousands of innocent people are in jail because of DNA typing. That same attorney has this positionthousands of innocent people are in jail because of no DNA typing. In under privileged countries where stereotypes often serve as the basis for guilt and innocence in a trial, it would be beneficial to have the valuable DNA equipment we have in the United States and Great Britain today. Unfortunately innocent people are also in jail do to DNA typing. DNA typing can tell us who was at a murder, but it cannot tell us who committed the murder. However it takes a very skilled criminal to leave no trace of DNA.
Many people argue that a DNA database would be a violation of privacy, and the fourth amendment. However others argue that by committing a serious crime, such as rape, you forfeit your fourth amendment rights. The big problem with DNA databases is that they can cause as many problems as they solve. For instance if an insurance company got a hold of a persons genetic profile, they could isolate the genes which make a person more likely to have a heart attack, and push that persons rates higher. It is still my firm belief that with proper security a nation-wide if not worldwide database would be beneficial in dealing with crimes on a global scale.
Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer reminds us that those in the courtroom do not always understand the complex sciences at work during cases where genetic evidence is involved, Since the implications of our legal decisions in the real world often can and should play a role in these decisions, the clearer our understanding of the relevant science, the better. But I repeat: We are not scientists; hence the dilemma. Even if a judge does not understand how a genetic profile is derived, they understand that it is unmistakable evidence that a certain person was at a crime scene.
DNA is a much more reliable source than fingerprinting. Case in point, the Rojas case in Argentina in 1892. Two young children were murdered, and the original suspect was the mothers suitor, Velasquez. Torture, which was a standard practice at that point in time failed to extract a confession from Velasquez. After the failed torture attempts, detectives examined the crime scene for fingerprints, finding one bloody fingerprint, which matched the victims mother. When confronted with the evidence, Rojas confessed. Still, the bloody fingerprint would not have been proof without a confession, seeing that Rojas could have touched the bodies. Fingerprinting is still useful, but not as concrete as DNA.
In Washington v. State, the Supreme Court of Florida determined that the authorities can trick a suspect into providing a DNA sample by claiming that the sample is for a different case. When Alice Berdat was murdered in her bedroom, the investigator suspected Anthony Washington. The investigator did not let on that he suspected Washington, when he solicited him for a DNA sample for an unrelated case. When Washington tried to stop the state from using samples in the investigation, the court denied the motion, and Washington was arrested on charges of murder, burglary, and sexual battery. Some feel that tricking a person into providing a DNA sample for a case other than what is specified when attaining the sample in unethical. I feel that trickery is in general unethical, but there is an exception to the rule when you are tricking a potentially dangerous criminal into providing a sample for an investigation.
DNA typing is not an easy process. Different types of tests must be used in different scenarios. For example Y-STR analysis is useful for identifying victims of mass disasters. However Y-STR is completely useless in other scenarios.
The only place where fingerprinting is superior to DNA analysis is when a case involves identical twins, whose genetic make-up is the same, but who have different fingerprints. Genetics are complex. It is necessary to remember that only two percent of the human genome differentiates enough for use in forensic investigations. But genetics are also extremely accurate in pinpointing a criminal when there are many suspects.
Atleast wait until after your trip! No telling what kind of things she'll decide to bring up or worse show to your friends! Be very careful grasshopper!
No, glad to be in good company!!! (But, hopefully, Ronnie doesnt think of Bald men w/ unibrows when he thinks of you!)
...How far out do most of you start your coundtdown? I thought about 100 days - but maybe 50 is better, so as to not torture the kids? (100 would keep me psyched - but might seem like FOREVER to them..) Think I did 45 days last time......
