The Usage of DNA, Essay Example

How has the usage of DNA in forensics affected the court system?

DNA is often given an amount of weight in court cases and investigations.  The method allows for the precise identification of individuals in order to determine, without a doubt, who the culprit is.  However, this association is incorrect, and often leads to a misunderstanding of the power that that DNA usage in forensics can have upon the direction of a court case.  Often, there is no evidence at all, and when there is, all it can do is link an individual to the scene of the crime, or the location in which the evidence was gathered.  In this way, most people exclusively associate the use of DNA testing in forensic science with the irrefutable identification of a specific individual.  This evidence is often given more weight then what it deserves.  The importance of determining the race, gender, and blood type of a specimen, as well as many other various factors, are often overlooked, and these are important aspects that should be carefully considered when identifying the true culprits in homicide, robbery, and rape cases.

Murder and homicide investigations should take these factors into account.  Guns have been used for murder, suicides and assault for many years, but there are citizens that use guns to prevent themselves and their loved ones from becoming victims of crime.  According to Joseph Peterson, the ability to either eliminate a suspect or to link them to the crime scene in some way has become essential to law enforcement (Peterson, 2010 p. 46).  However, it is also true that this DNA evidence could arrive at the crime scene for various reasons.  “DNA evidence can be collected from virtually anywhere, and in theory only a few cells are sufficient to obtain useful DNA information for comparison and analysis to assist investigations” (Mouzos, 2001 p. 8).  While, in some cases, it is difficult to actually obtain DNA evidence, when it can be found, very little is actually needed in order to establish a positive identity on an individual.  For this reason, it is important for the evidence to be carefully considered.

Robbery cases should take this into account as well.  This is due to the complex nature of these types of cases. The question of whether rights can be ensured for defending yourself and your family is important.  The problem arises when it is considered that evidence for these types of crimes is difficult to come by.  “Burglary represents that crime category where the least amounts of physical evidence and substrates were collected” (Peterson, 2010 p. 60).  In this way, it is difficult to link any sort of genetic evidence to these types of crimes, as it is often difficult to establish a specific timeframe in which the crime took place.  This is primarily due to the fact that many crimes of this sort are done in stealth and, are therefore, difficult to investigate.  This essentially leads to a lack of physical evidence, in which case, it becomes difficult for individuals to remain safe.  Furthermore, the importance of presenting the evidence in these cases is often overlooked.

Rape and Molestation cases should take into account more than just DNA evidence as well. “However, it’s rare that DNA is involved because the reality is that most child victims wait several days or years to inform law enforcement about the sexual violence” (Black, 2006 p. 3). The mental associations that a child forms when confronted with these types of actions can be difficult to determine, due to the psychological complexities of the events, therefore, these individuals can often repress the memories for long periods of time.  In this way, children’s cases are less likely to be fully investigated, and childhood trauma can lead to PTSD and hallucinatory experiences throughout the victim’s lives.  Furthermore, it is more difficult than many individuals believe to use DNA to come to a conclusion.  While DNA does have the ability to prove that something did occur, it does not have the ability to prove that something did not.  In this sense, a case in which no DNA evidence is found can not necessarily exonerate an individual, it can only refute or confirm the hypothesis that the individual was in a specific place at a specific time.  This can either be due to the fact that the victim failed to visit a hospital for testing, the testing itself was done to long after the event occurred, or, in some cases, the assailant didn’t actually physically contact the victim, but rather used some other object to do so (Black, 2006 p. 3).

In conclusion, there are various important ideas and key points that can be dismissed with DNA evidence.  However, these points should also be taken into account when covering these types of cases.  DNA evidence is not the catch all that has been branded as in popular culture.  In fact, many crimes go without the ability for investigators to obtain any small amount of DNA evidence.  The value of such evidence, furthermore, is only applicable to associating an individual with a crime, and will not necessarily afford a verdict for the case.  “Its value is that it can establish to a virtual certainty the presence or the absence of a defendant at the scene of the crime.” (Smith, 1997 p.1)  However, the use of such evidence is widely regarded as actually being necessary, and most court cases that are concerned with linking an individual to a crime scene will be expected to at least try to put forth some type of DNA evidence.  In these cases, careful observation of the identities of those involved is crucial to maintaining a just court system.  This is due to the profound impact that this type of evidence has had on the courts over the last few decades.  However, when considering the weight of this evidence, it is important to take consideration of the limitations of the information.  In cases involving homicide, robbery, and rape, it is especially important to take these limitations into account.

References

Black, Sean. (2006). Unraveling ABCs of DNA+Rape. ICASA, 95(7), 2-7.

Mouzos, Jenny. (2001). Investigating Homicide: New Responses to an Old Crime. Crime in Australia. Australian Institute of Criminology, 113(6), 1-11.

Peterson, Joseph. (2010). The Role and Impact of Forensic Evidence in the Criminal Justice Process. U.S. Department of Justice. California State University, 46(7), 35-60.

Smith, George Bundy. (1997). The Admission of DNA Evidence in State and Federal Courts. Fordham Law Review. The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and Liberty, 102(11), 1-4.