Your DNA, deoxyribonucleic acid, is as distinctive as your fingerprints.
DNA, a shorthand for deoxyribonucleic acid, is a double-helix-patterned blueprint for the development or functioning of a living organism. Since even trace fragments of skin or hair carry DNA, tests can identify the offenders in criminal cases, especially rape and murder. DNA "profiling" or testing was developed by Sir Alec Jeffreys, a British geneticist, in 1984.
Creation of a Method
While at the University of Leicester, Alec Jeffreys researched and developed the basic principles of DNA forensic testing. During an experiment on the morning of September 10, 1984, Jeffreys discovered that two members of one of his assistant's family had entirely unique DNA. British authorities invited Jeffreys to weigh in on a highly disputed immigration case around a British child whose family was from Ghana. He also worked to identify the guilt of Colin Pitchfork of rape and murder, and the posthumous identity of Dr. Josef Mengele, a Nazi doctor known as "the Angel of Death," who had hidden in South America as a war criminal until his death in 1979.
Introduction of Criminal Testing
DNA testing was first used in an U.S. criminal trial in Florida in 1987, to convict Tommie Lee Andrews for rape. In 1988, DNA evidence concluded the guilt of a Virginia rapist and murderer named the "South Side Strangler." As some criminals were located and prosecuted on the strength of DNA testing, other convicted individuals were exonerated. In the early 1990s, a landmark study produced by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law found that, of the individuals exonerated by DNA evidence, 70 percent had been prosecuted on the strength of eyewitness identification. This study and subsequent social science has lowered the confidence in eyewitness identification and strengthened the faith in DNA testing.
Developments in Criminal Testing
Since its introduction in 1985, DNA testing has benefited from more careful coordination with first responders, improvements in the science and a confidence in testing by jurors. This forensic test has also become a major method for the Innocence Project, a non-profit legal organization that is dedicated to appealing the convictions of criminals who have been exonerated by DNA testing. Between 1992 and 2010, the Innocence Project used DNA testing to exonerate 249 previously convicted individuals.
Fictional Representations
Since its premiere in October 2000, the show "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" has brought a larger awareness of DNA testing specifically and forensic science generally. Critics, such as Tom R. Tyler, have questioned whether this awareness has affected juror behavior and the criminal justice system. Tyler published his study, "Viewing CSI and the Threshold of Guilt," in which he argued that CSI had two, divergent effects on its audience. Oddly enough, Tyler found, the audience of the show consider DNA testing more absolute and certain than it sometimes is, meaning that expectations of forensic scientists to present their evidence have been simultaneously raised and lowered.
Legal Developments in the 21st Century
On March 2, 2009, the case District Attorney's Office v. Osborne was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. The case debated the point as to whether a convicted man (William G. Osborne) is legally entitled to a DNA test, which might exonerate him, by the state (in this case, Alaska). The majority, made up of John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito, held that the state is not responsible for providing this test.
Tags: Alec Jeffreys, convicted individuals, Criminal Testing, deoxyribonucleic acid, eyewitness identification, have been, Innocence Project
