Abstract

Today DNA analyses represent a method of exceptional importance for the resolution of judicial cases. On the one hand, they allow courts to secure criminal convictions, while on the other hand they can help exonerate innocent suspects. Unfortunately, DNA analyses are often considered an unbeatable and infallible method to discover the truth, with the consequence that judges feel forced either to “bow to science” or to totally refuse the genetic evidence when it is considered too complex. On the contrary, genetic investigations have limits that must always be considered and properly explained to the fact-finder by the forensic geneticist. Courts need to know what results were observed and how likely it is to observe such results under both the prosecution and defense hypotheses. This may be particularly challenging for low quantity, degraded or mixed genetic material, and is further complicated by the need to take into account the potential of (laboratory) error. Despite such circumstances, the evidence can still be informative although its probative value may be reduced.

Highlights

  • Today DNA analyses represent a method of exceptional importance for the resolution of judicial cases

  • The murder of British student Meredith Kercher in Perugia (Italy) in 2007 and the case that ensued have highlighted the limits of genetic analyses

  • Particular attention has been drawn to the interpretation of genetic profiles derived from Low Template (LT) or Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA and mixed samples

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Today DNA analyses represent a method of exceptional importance for the resolution of judicial cases. The Appellate Court experts (author Carla Vecchiotti was one of the two experts who reviewed the case for the Court of Appeal) were asked to repeat, if possible, the genetic analyses carried out during the initial investigation on certain items and whose results led to the conviction of the two defendants: a knife, considered by the prosecution to be the murder weapon, and a bra clasp belonging to the victim.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call