Includes a Foreword by Dr. James D. Watson, the co-discoverer of the DNA double helix, and Dr. Jan A. Witkowski.
"From the Foreword by Drs. Watson and Witkowski: 'DNA: Forensic and Legal Applications is a comprehensive and invaluable guide to the field, covering topics ranging from collecting samples in the field to presenting the complex results to a jury. We are sure that it will play its part in promoting this most powerful tool in the forensic scientist's armamentarium.'"
DNA: Forensic and Legal Applications covers the technology and laws related to DNA, as well as the use of DNA evidence in the legal system. This combination of science and law makes it the first comprehensive title of its kind and an appropriate reference for those with both elementary and advanced knowledge of the topic. It draws together in one source information that would previously have required extensive research and reliance on experts to obtain, offering both breadth and depth in a clear style without s acrificing scholarly goals.
With material from both scientific and legal areas, DNA: Forensic and Legal Applications covers the latest advances in technology. It provides an ideal text for forensic scientists and students of forensic science, analytical chemists, lawyers, judges, police officers, and detectives.

lgli/_353181.107cd151a34b20f53d3e95b28d01125d.pdf

lgrsnf/_353181.107cd151a34b20f53d3e95b28d01125d.pdf

scihub/10.1002/0471681911.pdf

zlib/Medicine/Lawrence Kobilinsky, Thomas F. Liotti, Jamel Oeser-Sweat/DNA: Forensic and Legal Applications_1071466.pdf

Lawrence Kobilinsky, Thomas Liotti, Jamel L. Oeser-Sweat, James D. Watson, Jan A. Witkowski, James D. Watson

Lawrence Kobilinsky, Jamel L. Oeser-Sweat, Thomas Liotti, James D. Watson, Jan A. Witkowski

Lawrence F Kobilinsky; Thomas F Liotti; Jamel Oeser-Sweat

Lawernce Kobilinsky Thomas F.Liotti Jamel Oeser-Sweat

Jossey-Bass, Incorporated Publishers

Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, John

John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated

WILEY COMPUTING Publisher

John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, N.J., 2005

United States, United States of America

EUi collection, Hoboken, N.J, ©2005

Hoboken, N.J, New Jersey, 2005

October 1, 2004

New York, 2003

New York, 2005

1, US, 2004

до 2011-08

lg632318

{"edition":"1","isbns":["0471414786","0471681911","9780471414780","9780471681915"],"last_page":383,"publisher":"Wiley"}

Includes bibliographical references (p. 293-294) and index

<div><div> <h2>CHAPTER 1</h2> <p><b><i>Biochemistry, Genetics, and Replication of DNA</i></p> <br> <p>1.1 EVOLUTION OF IDENTIFICATION: FROM FACES TO FINGERPRINTS TO DNA</b></p> <p>When a crime has been committed, it is the job of the investigator to reconstruct the events leading up to and during the incident. The investigator will seek information from a number of sources including witnesses, physical evidence, and records.</p> <p>People are a very good source of information, but their observations and reporting must be carefully evaluated. One can often learn a great deal by questioning the victim's family members, and associates, as well as strangers. Those who come into contact with a criminal suspect may include, among others, witnesses to or the victims of a crime. Investigators can use information obtained from such individuals to recreate the past and to solve a crime mystery. Before modern scientific and technological methods were developed to study physical evidence, this was one of the most important methods for solving crimes. Eyewitness testimony was the best way to identify the perpetrator. Indeed, two eyewitnesses were required to convict a person of a crime under Hebraic law (Deut. 17:6).</p> <p>When eyewitnesses are lacking, physical evidence may be the only way to solve a crime. Materials found at a crime scene can be used to link or associate a suspect to it, and the information derived from evidence analysis can be used to exonerate or convict a suspect. Various types of physical evidence can be found at crime scenes. Shoe prints are used to show what type of shoes a suspect was wearing (Bodziak, 1990). Such evidence allows an investigator to identify the shoe as being part of a certain class. As a result, shoes belonging to other classes can be ruled out. For example, if a shoe print found at a crime scene is from a particular brand of sneaker, this might be used to rule out suspects who are known to have been wearing some other brand of sneaker during the time that the crime was committed. Such information can also be used to individualize an item. One refers to a specimen from a known source as an <i>exemplar</i>. The pattern on the sole of a shoe obtained from a suspect, classified as an exemplar, can be matched to the pattern of a plaster cast of a print found at a crime scene (which we refer to as the <i>questioned print</i>). The comparison between exemplar and questioned specimen can result in what is known as a <i>physical match</i>. Experts can analyze the patterns found on the sole and print, and, as with fingerprints, certain distinguishing markings could prove a match, for example, if there is a deep scratch in the sole of the shoe, caused by wear, and the print found at the crime scene exhibits the identical scratch. Such a match is incontrovertible evidence of the origin of the questioned print. The same kind of analysis can be conducted on tire impressions or even on tool marks. Tool marks refer to the markings made on an object when a tool or other instrument is used to gain entry, i.e. to break open a locked closet or window. Another example of a physical match is a sheet of paper or fabric ripped in half. A comparison of the torn ends by microscopic analysis can reveal if the two halves were created from the same sheet. Both torn ends constitute a physical match or perfect fit. In some situations a relatively unique kind of evidence is found that associates a suspect and victim. Several examples follow of evidence that is uniquely important at a crime scene. A relatively rare type of carpet fiber is found on the body of a murder victim, and it is subsequently found to be identical to the fibers of a rug in the bedroom of a suspect. In such a scenario, the fibers become significant associative evidence.</p> <br> <p>Synthetic or natural fibers are sometimes transferred from person to person upon physical contact, making these forms of trace evidence important. This is an example of the Locard exchange principle described in more detail in Section 3.6.1. When two bodies come into contact, there is an exchange of material between them. Sometimes these materials are so miniscule as to go unnoticed; for example, when extremely small fibers are transferred from victim to suspect or vice versa. If these fibers are somewhat unique, for example, dyed using an unusual chemical compound, they may be useful in linking victim and suspect. The same is true of hair that is easily transferred on clothing from person to person. There are numerous characteristics of evidentiary hair both visual and microscopic that can be used to compare it to known hair specimens taken from a suspect or victim. Hair can also be examined using several DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) techniques to determine its origin.</p> <p>The O.J. Simpson prosecution team attempted to link him to the crime scene after one bloody glove was found at the scene and its mate was found behind his house (Schmalleger, 1996). These gloves were easily identified because of the palm vent, stitching, hem, and other characteristics. Nicole Brown Simpson, his former wife and murder victim, had bought him two pairs of these Aris Isotoner Lights, size extra-large gloves in December of 1990, about three and a half years before she was murdered. What makes these gloves even more significant is the fact that there were only about 200 pairs sold that year by Bloomingdales's department store. The defense argued that the pair of gloves in question was unlikely to be Simpson's when O.J. unsuccessfully tried, at the prosecutor's request, to put on the pair of gloves found at the crime scene. Many observers of the trial felt that the prosecution should never have allowed the defendant to take possession of the evidence, thereby allowing him to demonstrate to the jury that the gloves were too small to fit his hands. In fact, some felt that either the gloves had shrunk or that Simpson was trying to show that he could not get them on. Simpson had put on a pair of rubber gloves before trying to put his hands into the evidentiary gloves. This would have made it difficult to put the gloves on even if they actually had fit his hands.</p> <p>Fingerprints are another type of physical evidence used for human identification and also to link an individual to a location or to a victim (Cole, 2001; Lambourne, 1984; Cowger, 1983; Rhodes, 1956). Fingerprints are impressions made from the papillary ridges on ones fingertips. These epidermal ridges are arranged in very different or unique patterns on each of our fingertips. These patterns do not change from the time of birth until the time of death. Fingerprints provide absolute proof of identity. The science of fingerprint identification is called <i>dactyloscopy</i>. Similar ridges can be found on the palms and on the toes and soles of the foot. Although a print pattern can be described as a loop, whorl, or arch, within each of these configurations, ridges can be arranged in a variety of ways including straight lines with forks that split like forks in a road. In 1880 Henry Faulds and William Herschel discovered that every individual has unique, permanent fingerprint patterns on the tips of his or her fingers. This discovery was subsequently verified by Sir Francis Galton, who proposed a system of fingerprint classification based on the patterns of loops (hairpin ridges), whorls (circular or spiral ridges), and arches (tent or mountainlike ridges). Sir Edward Henry developed a classification system based on the work of Galton. The Henry system of classification was published in 1900 and was used to collect and categorize fingerprints of criminals and is still in use today. Beside the Henry system there is also a widely used system called the NCIC (National Crime Information Center) classification system. The FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) classifies a total of eight different fingerprint patterns: (1) plain arch, (2) tented arch, (3) radial loop, (4) ulnar loop, (5) double whorl, (6) central pocket whorl, (7) plain whorl, and (8) accidental whorl.</p> <br> <p>The most common type of fingerprint pattern is the ulnar loop. Another fingerprint classification system based on Galton's work was introduced by Juan Vucetich, an Argentinian, in 1888, and this system is still used in many Latin American countries.</p> <p>Although the impression left by the ridges on the ends of our fingertips when we handle objects are not always visible, they can be made visible through chemical enhancement. A fingerprint invisible to the naked eye is called a <i>latent print</i>. Latent prints are usually created upon touching an object or surface and at the same time depositing some naturally secreted or environmentally acquired material onto it. However, after one's finger contacts an object, a perfect fingerprint is not always left (Barnett and Berger, 1977). Sometimes only a portion of the pattern on the edge of one's finger remains; a partial fingerprint can be found in the spot that was touched. Other times no useful print information remains at the point of contact. Fingerprint examiners will compare latent prints to known or exemplar prints by examining specific identification points in the pattern that consist of either dots, islands, ridge endings, or bifurcations (branching of a single ridge into two ridges). Although an inked print can reveal up to 100 such points (minutiae), latent prints may have only a small fraction of these points. Some examiners require at least 7 or 8 identical points before they will state that the latent and exemplar have the same origin. However, there is no specific minimum number that will satisfy all examiners.</p> <p>In the early 1970s, law enforcement began using computers to classify, store, and retrieve fingerprint data. Today, crime labs have Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS) that scan a fingerprint image and convert the minutiae to digital information (Wilson, 1986). The computer also records relative position and orientation of the minutiae and therefore stores geometric data. Computer databases have been created to record the unique imprints of those in the population who have been arrested or who have provided their prints for employment (armed forces or security guards) or gun ownership. Using AFIS, law enforcement agencies have been able to store fingerprint digital data in large databases. Using these digitized files and a powerful search algorithm, prints obtained from new crime scenes can be compared to those of known offenders on file. The computer also determines the degree of correlation of the pattern, location, and orientation of the minutiae. It can compare hundreds of thousands of prints on file in a second or two. AFIS then prepares a list of those prints that come closest to matching the questioned print so that a fingerprint examiner can make the ultimate call of identification or not. In recent years, using fingerprints to run background checks on individuals attempting to gain employment in certain areas such as early childhood teaching has become common.</p> <p>Forensic DNA testing has emerged as a highly effective way to identify the source of biological evidence with reliability equal to that of fingerprint identification (Neufield and Coleman, 1990). An individual's total genetic composition, in the form of DNA, is referred to as the human genome. Most of the genome is located in the nucleus of a cell, while the remainder is found in the subcellular organelle known as the mitochondrion. Differences in DNA make every individual unique, and that uniqueness can be attributed to differences in certain areas of the human genome. Portions of DNA are invariant from person to person while other portions differ. Most people thinking about an individual's identification will focus on differences in physical appearance such as height, weight, hair color, eye color, skin color, and so forth. However forensic DNA examiners study the differences in the sequence of subunits that make up the DNA molecule. It is known that the difference between two individuals is only 1 in 1000 building blocks. With the human genome consisting of approximately 3.1 billion building blocks, there are about 3.1 million differences in genome subunit sequence between any two persons. The one exception is the DNA of identical twins (or cloned animals), which is identical.</p> <p>In recent years DNA analysis has been used the same way that fingerprints have been used to link individuals to crime scenes (Kelly et al., 1987; Jeffreys et al., 1985). One advantage of fingerprinting over DNA analysis lies in the fact that even though identical twins have identical genomes, they still have different fingerprints and can easily be distinguished in this way. DNA does not control this trait because the establishment of ridge patterns on the fingertips, palms of the hands, and soles of the feet is a developmental process that takes place as the embryo develops into a fetus and is not a DNA-coded trait, that is, fingerprint patterns are not related to a person's genetic blueprint.</p> <p>The advantages of DNA analysis over fingerprint analysis are clear. Even if a surface is touched, a useful record of that contact is not always left behind. A latent print requires a suitable surface and certain conditions for a print to remain. As mentioned above, natural and environmentally derived materials present on the fingers result in fingerprints. If a surface is not smooth, or if it is porous, irregular, or rough, it is unlikely that a useful fingerprint can be obtained. If nothing is touched or gloves are worn, discovering any fingerprint whether whole or partial will be virtually impossible. However, DNA can be obtained from a site even if nothing has been touched. A hair fiber with or without its root intact might have fallen from one's scalp, a cigarette butt with saliva (containing epithelial cells) may have been discarded (Hochmeister et al., 1998), or an item of clothing such as a hat or glove worn by a suspect could be discovered. Today, technology is so advanced that exceedingly small amounts of biological substances (blood, semen, saliva, urine, etc.) generated during the commission of a crime can be DNA tested resulting in the identification and conviction of a suspect (Stouder et al., 2001; Erlich, 1989). The one requirement is that there must be a sufficient amount of DNA and that it be in relatively good enough condition to allow testing to be successful.</p> <p>However, shifts in environmental conditions including high temperature and/or humidity can have an adverse impact on the extraction of high-quality DNA. When DNA becomes fragmented as a result of bacterial or fungal enzymes, it may become so degraded as to render it useless for forensic purposes. This concept is explained in greater detail in Section 3.2.1.</p> <p>Official records, documents, and databases are a type of physical evidence that can be used in criminal investigation. DNA sequences of various individuals can be recorded in the same way as fingerprints, to create databases by which characteristics of unknown perpetrators of a crime could be matched. The federal government, through the FBI, and all 50 states, through their state crime laboratories, have established such databases. Some ethical and legal issues still remain unresolved. For example, there has been much discussion about whose DNA profile should be placed into these databases, how they can be protected from abuse, who should have access to this information, and the like. Another issue with respect to databases concerns what happens to the specimen (e.g., blood or buccal swab) after the forensic analyst has obtained from it the desired identifying information. Does the government have the right to retain these specimens or should they be destroyed or returned to the subject?</p> <br> <p><b>1.2 DNA AND HEREDITY</p> <p>1.2.1 A Look at DNA from the Outside In</b></p> <p>Imagine the construction of a building. First, plans are drawn up by an architect. The plans are given to a builder who uses different materials to construct the building. The builder uses the plans to guide him in figuring out what goes where. Different symbols and shorthand are used in the plans to show what must go where. Using the plans in the proper environment at the proper site with the right materials, the builder can construct the desired structure.</p> <p>Most of us only see the finished product of this complex process, namely the completed structure. This process is similar to the way our bodies are constructed. Our bodies are similar to the building, our cells analogous to the bricks. The plans are analogous to the DNA found in our cells. </div></div><br/> <i>(Continues...)</i> <!-- Copyright Notice --> <blockquote><hr noshade size='1'><font size='-2'>Excerpted from <b>DNA</b> by <b>Lawrence Kobilinsky, Thomas F. Liotti, Jamel L. Oeser-Sweat, James D. Watson, Jan A. Witkowski</b>. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. Excerpted by permission of John Wiley & Sons. <br/>All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.<br/>Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.</font><hr noshade size='1'></blockquote>

2011-08-31