Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

What is the chief misconception about DNA evidence?

Chief dna misconception
0
Posted

What is the chief misconception about DNA evidence?

0

There are several misconceptions. First, that DNA profiling is as specific as traditional fingerprints analysis. People tend not to grasp that when a suspect is included, and the inclusion is described as a “match,” that refers only to a profile or small portion of the respective DNA taken from a suspect and recovered from a crime scene or evidence. Depending upon the given suspect’s race or ethnicity the “matching” profile will occur with some degree of frequency–even if somewhat remote. The strength of the inclusion thus depends upon the statistical probability of a random coincidental match. On the other hand, an exclusion is unqualified if the isolated DNA profiles do not correspond it means, absent references to any statistical analysis, that the suspect could not be the source of the crime scene sample. Another misconception: DNA testing can only be done on some kind of biologic material (e.g., blood, saliva, semen, skin tissue, hair) that contains an individual’s DNA. It cannot

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123