Asked in InventionsCSI Crime Scene InvestigationForensic ScienceHazardous Materials Training
Inventions
CSI Crime Scene Investigation
Forensic Science
Hazardous Materials Training
What is the origin of DNA evidence in crime scenes?
Answer

Wiki User
September 04, 2007 9:40PM
According to Answers.com DNA profiling was developed in 1984 by British geneticist Sir Alec Jeffreys, and first used in forensic science to convict Colin Pitchfork in the 1988 Enderby murders case.
http://www.answers.com/DNA
Related Questions
Asked in Genetics
Is DNA testing useful?

Yea, it is used for several different tests. For example we have
DNA testing for paternity tests to confirm the babies father also
we use DNA tests in crime scenes to help find the criminal in a
specific crime. Yea, it is used for several different tests. For
example we have DNA testing for paternity tests to confirm the
babies father also we use DNA tests in crime scenes to help find
the criminal in a specific crime.
Asked in Health, Biology, Genetics
Is hair DNA?
Asked in Science
Why is blood evidence important?
Asked in Genetics
Why is DNA important in crime scenes?

The DNA of each individual is unique. No two individuals share
the same genetic make up unless they are identical twins. Analyzing
DNA samples found at a crime scene can help place a suspect at the
crime scene.
If it can be legally proven that a suspect was present at a
crime scene, there is practically no refutation to this finding.
DNA test data is very valuable in court.
But if you were never at the scene of the crime how can they
prove you were anyone could have put it there?
Asked in Genetics
Are there any downsides to DNA evidence?

There are a few downsides to DNA evidence:
It has been suggested that the prominence of DNA evidence on TV
shows has caused juries to expect irrefutable DNA evidence before
convicting someone. This may be a problem if other forms of
evidence are ignored.
DNA evidence can only be obtained in instances where biological
substances are left behind or exchanged. This only occurs in a
minority of cases.
DNA evidence sometimes only proves that the person was present
at the scene - it does not always prove guilt. However, if a
person's DNA is found at the scene, this may be perceived as proof
that they committed the crime.
Asked in Criminal Law, Forensic Science
How does using DNA in criminal investigations and crime scenes compared to other older methods?

DNA is only narrowly applicable in identifying an INDIVIDUAL who
may or may not have been involved in an offense.
Older methods of crime detection, evidence collection and
identification are still WIDELY USED. DNA is useless in identifying
such things as tire track impressions - paint chips from cars -
ballistics - fingerprints - and in so many more areas that they
cannot possibly be included here.
Asked in Forensic Science
What might be used to destroy forensic evidence?

While criminals have used many means and tried many chemicals to
destroy evidence, today, scientists can easily locate enough
forensic evidence at most crime scenes. Fire (arson) and bleach
have been two commonly used measures, but science can identify
inflammatory agents and bleach does not remove all blood evidence.
It only takes one tiny blood cell to track DNA.
The BEST way to completely eliminate forensic evidence is to
never commit the crime!