A broader look at familial DNA use within criminal investigations. Some good, some bad. What appears in all examples, is that ‘presumptions’ of guilt can be incorrect and send prosecutors off in the wrong direction. What’s also apparent is that across the country there are many isolated LEO databases that don’t reflect consistent ‘likelihood ratios’ of match rates with a suspect ‘s DNA profile.
Controversial use of familial DNA searches helps lead to finds in cold cases
About csidds
Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in AAFS, criminal justice, criminal justice reform, CSI, DNA mixtures, DNA profiling and tagged AAFS, ABFO, ADA, Anthropology, ASCLD, ASFO, bias, bite mark, bite marks, bitemark, bitemark analysis, bitemark evidence, bitemark testimony, Bitemarks, board certified dentist, comparison confirmation bias, David Sheets, DNA, DNA likelihood ratios, Dr. Greg Golden, Dr. L.T. Johnson, Dr. Michael Bowers, Dr. Michael West, Dr. Robert Barsley, Dr. roger Metcalf, Elsevier, exoneration, expert opinion, forensic, Forensic Dental Evidence, forensic dentist, forensic dentistry, forensic odontologist, Forensic Odontology, Forensic science, homicide case, Humberto Leal, Innocence partners, innocence project, Innocent, Investigator's Handbook, JADA, Kennedy Brewer, Kunco, Leal, Leigh Stubbs, Levon Brooks, Mary Bush, Michael bowers, Michael West, Mississippi Innocence, NAS National Academy of Science, National District Attorney Association, National Forensic Science Foundation, observer effects, Odontology, PCAST, Peter Bush, Ray Krone, Ray Miller, reliability research, Saliva, screening film, starks, Stinson, surveillance video, theIAI.org, toolmark, University of Buffalo, UV photography, validity, West, Wisconsin, wrongful conviction, wrongful convictions, wrongfully convicted. Bookmark the permalink.