Please respond to miguel with 150. words
when a analyst in forensic science says the small sentence “a suspects cant be excluded” is the analyst thinks the suspects dna can still be consistent with the evidence that was collected.The problem with this is that the sample of evidence that was collected was to small or even mixed with different evidences from many other people that its hard to say its someones specific match.But I would say that with this casee the DNA that had been collected and found on the shirt was very small evidence and that is causing to not be able to have a good amount of information to say its with the full DNA matched.To break it down I would say that there is a possible chance that the suspects in this case probably left some type of dna and this causes it to be harder to breakdown every other person with similarity profiles.
The mixed DNA samples that are collected and also small low levled samples for example like the door handle and the knife are harder to study and get details of the samples because the amount of other people’s DNA overlaps and is all around the sample which makes it harder to study the evidence that is collected.For example once three or more people touch something for example like the door handle it all drops DNA on it and becomes hard to study when a crime scene happens because it is hard to tell who’s DNA is who’s.Something to also add onto this is the touch in DNA or even small sampled collected some of the markers may not show when being examined by an analyst.That is the main reason on why the door handle on this case was called inconclusive because during the time of examination there was not lots of DNA to come to a conclusionn.
In my opinion I would say it is very important to think about DNA transfer when its time to examine some type of evidence that was collected a crime scene.The reason why I say this is because someone’s dna can all be put on a certain object in many different indirect ways possible.My example on this would be that if the suspects that is part of a case decided to shake hands with the victims hand earlier in that day then the victim later on touches the shirt the suspects DNA will end up on the sample of evidence without even doing direct contact with the shirt that is being examined.I would say that scientists should be explaining straight forward and clear thaat DNA can show in the presence of something but it also does not prove the guilt itself all in one.Something else I think a scientist should bring up is that excluding the knife handle can be very important sample of evidence that court should consider during the case being discussed.
Get this or a similar paper done in as fast as 4 hours, 24/7.
NB: We do not sell prewritten papers. All essays are written from scratch according to specific needs and instructions
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.