CJI 6114 DNA- Technology the Revolutionized Criminal Investigations

Are you seeking out CJI 6114 DNA- Technology the Revolutionized Criminal Investigations Assignment Answer? Call at Assignmenthelpaus.com. It’s the cheapest assignment, help provider. You will get A+ Solution of Particular question from expert writers. We never compromise on the quality of delivered papers and always available 24/7 on-site for your homework related queries. Our writing services come with quality and plagiarism guarantee. Hence, students receive premier Academic work. Join us for the best Assignment services like case study help, dissertation, essay writing help, and more.

ASSIGNMENT DETAILS:

Referencing Styles : APA
Words: 1500
Course Code: CJI 6114
Course Title: DNA- technology the revolutionized criminal investigations
University: Adler University
Country: US

QUESTION:

Source attribution Do you think it is reasonable for a DNA scientist to go into court and declare the bloodstain or semen stain found at the scene IS FROM THE DEFENDANT since we are talking about odds of one in the quadrillions or septillions?

Thoughts on this explanation used in court all the time If there are well over 7 billion people alive today, how do you explain odds which vastly exceed the number of people on the Earth? For example an analyst might say; the odds of finding this bloodstain are a trillion to one. Thoughts? What are the odds? Huuum!

Using the thirteen standardized loci (DNA types) or the newer kits with 15 (recently many more up to 24) Loci (DNA types): odds are usually reported for matches in the quadrillions to septillion sand above, that is, millions, billions or trillions times the Earth’s current population.

Do you think declaring these odds are meaningful to the jury or to the court? Unique or a vestige? One of the main tenants of forensic typing is to determine the origin of a stain, that is, it of human or animal origin even though human STR (short tandem repeat) profiles are unique to humans and are not shared with any other critter. So do you think this is a viable concept or is it just a vestige of the history of forensics? Think in terms of a juror or an investigator.