• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

DNA Evidence A Lot More Nuanced Than Previously Thought

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Studies of the genome or DNA for human individuals are revealing that each person may contain multiple versions of the genome. A group of cells or an organ may not have the same genetic makeup as other cells in the body. It's as if a person is made up of the DNA from several people. The term for this is chimera, and it was previously thought to be rare, as in the case of conjoined twins.

Where this intersects with law enforcement, of course, is in terms of matching DNA from evidence to people. In short, the DNA from a man's semen, for example, and his saliva may not match. And typically that is the way it has been done, matching semen, blood, and other tissues to saliva.

This throws a big, fat monkey wrench into the whole practice of DNA evidence in law enforcement.

In other words, a match is still valid as evidence that a given person left his DNA on the evidence, but a definite non-match does not necessarily rule him out where previously this was thought to be definite evidence that he was not the guy. A number of men have been cleared of charges of rape and murder, for example, based on that assumption. The practice of rescuing men from death row based on DNA evidence may come to an end.

This has obvious implications for medicine, also. An abnormal genome may coexist with a normal one in some patients. It would make a great deal of difference in terms of which tissue is sampled to sequence the DNA.

This is mind-blowing and greatly magnifies the difficulties in a number of ways.
 
This issue was brought up in an episode of CSI Las Vegas, about 6 or 7 years ago
 
This is a VERY serious matter and also very concerning. DNA evidence can be used to prove guilt but no to prove innocence? Disturbing.
 
Back
Top Bottom