Abstract
This article discusses two factors that may profoundly affect the value of DNA evidence for proving that two samples have a common source: uncertainty about the interpretation of test results and the possibility of laboratory error. Three case studies are presented to illustrate the importance of the analyst’s subjective judgments in interpreting some RFLP-based forensic DNA tests. In each case, the likelihood ratio describing the value of DNA evidence is shown to be dramatically reduced by uncertainty about the scoring of bands and the possibility of laboratory error. The article concludes that statistical estimates of the frequency of matching genotypes can be a misleading index of the value of DNA evidence, and that more adequate indices are needed. It also argues that forensic laboratories should comply with the National Research Council’s recommendation that forensic test results be scored in a blind or objective manner.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Devlin, B., N. Risch & K. Roeder, 1994. Comments on the statistical aspects of the NRC’s report on DNA typing. J. Forensic Sci. 39: 28 - 40.
Graves, M.H. & M. Kuo, 1989. DNA: A blind trial study of three commercial testing laboratories. Presented at the meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Las Vegas.
Hagerman, P.J., 1990. DNA typing in the forensic arena. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 47: 876–877.
Hart, S.D., C. Webster & R. Menzies, 1993. A note on portraying the accuracy of violence predictions. Law & Hum. Behay. 17: 695–700.
Kaye, D.H., 1994. DNA evidence: Probability, population genetics and the courts. Harvard J. Law & Technology 7: 101–172.
Koehler, J.J., 1993a. DNA matches and statistics: Important questions, surprising answers. Judicature 76: 222–229.
Koehler, J.J., 1993b. Error and exaggeration in the presentation of DNA evidence at trial. Jurimetrics 34: 21 - 35.
Lander, E., 1989. DNA fingerprinting on trial. Nature 339: 501–505.
Lempert, R., 1991. Some caveats concerning DNA as criminal identification evidence: With thanks to the reverend Bayes. Cardozo L. Rev. 13: 303–341.
Moenssens, A.A., 1990. DNA evidence and its critics-How valid are the challenges? Jurimetrics 31: 87 - 108.
National Research Council, 1992. DNA Technology in Forensic Science. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Nisbett, R.E. & L. Ross, 1980. Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
People v. Castro, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985 (N.Y.Sup.Ct. 1989 ).
People v. Keene, 591 N.Y.S.2d 733 (N.Y.Sup.Ct. 1992 ).
Shields, W.M., 1992. Forensic DNA typing as evidence in criminal proceedings: Some problems and potential solutions, pp. 1–50 in Proceedings from the Third International Symposium on Human Identification. Promega Corp., Madison, Wisconsin.
State v. Futch, 860 p.2d 264 (Ore. 1993 ).
State v. Jobe, 486 N.W.2d 407 (Minn. 1992 ).
Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (TWIGDAM), 1990. Statement of the Working Group on Statistical Standards for DNA Analysis. Crime Lab. Dig. 17(3): 53–58
Thompson, W.C. & S. Ford, 1989. DNA typing: Acceptance and weight of the new genetic identification tests. Virginia L. Rev. 75: 45–108.
Thompson, W.C. & S. Ford, 1991.. The meaning of a match: Sources of ambiguity in the interpretation of DNA prints, pp. 93–152 in Forensic DNA Technology, edited by M. Farley & J. Harrington, Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Michigan.
Thompson, W.C., 1993. Evaluating the admissibility of new genetic identification tests: Lessons from the “DNA War”. J. Crim. Law & Criminology, 84: 701–781.
Weir, B.S., 1992. Population genetics in the forensic DNA debate. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 89: 11654–11659.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thompson, W.C. (1995). Subjective interpretation, laboratory error and the value of forensic DNA evidence: three case studies. In: Weir, B.S. (eds) Human Identification: The Use of DNA Markers. Contemporary Issues in Genetics and Evolution, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-46851-3_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-46851-3_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-1803-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-46851-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive