(Ebook) Misleading DNA Evidence.

A Guide for
Scientists, Judges, and Lawyers by Peter Gill
(Auth.) ISBN 9780124172142, 0124172148 download

https://ebooknice.com/product/misleading-dna-evidence-a-guide-
for-scientists-judges-and-lawyers-4735518

Explore and download more ebooks at ebooknice.com

Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebooknice.com

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles,

James ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492,
1459699815, 1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II

Success) by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018

(Ebook) Master SAT II Math 1c and 2c 4th ed (Arco Master the SAT
Subject Test: Math Levels 1 & 2) by Arco ISBN 9780768923049,
0768923042

https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094
(Ebook) Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth
Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition by Benjamin
Harrison ISBN 9781398375147, 9781398375048, 1398375144,
1398375047
https://ebooknice.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-history-
workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-edition-53538044

(Ebook) Forensic Metrology: An Introduction to the Fundamentals

of Metrology for Judges, Lawyers and Forensic Scientists by
Ferrero, Alessandro, Scotti, Veronica ISBN 9783031146190,
9783031146183, 3031146190, 3031146182
https://ebooknice.com/product/forensic-metrology-an-introduction-to-the-
fundamentals-of-metrology-for-judges-lawyers-and-forensic-
scientists-54831962

(Ebook) Vagabond, Vol. 29 (29) by Inoue, Takehiko ISBN

9781421531489, 1421531488

https://ebooknice.com/product/vagabond-vol-29-29-37511002

(Ebook) Advances in Insect Physiology, Vol. 29 by Peter Evans

ISBN 9780120242290, 012024229X

https://ebooknice.com/product/advances-in-insect-physiology-vol-29-1308058

(Ebook) Forensic Practitioner's Guide to the Interpretation of

Complex DNA Profiles by Peter Gill, Øyvind Bleka, Oskar Hansson,
Corina Benschop, Hinda Haned ISBN 9780128205624, 0128205628

https://ebooknice.com/product/forensic-practitioner-s-guide-to-the-
interpretation-of-complex-dna-profiles-32736136
Misleading DNA Evidence
Misleading DNA Evidence:
Reasons for Miscarriages
of Justice

Peter Gill
Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo,
University of Oslo, Norway

AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG • LONDON

NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO
SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO
Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
Acquiring Editor: Elizabeth Brown
Editorial Project Manager: Joslyn Chaiprasert-Paguio
Project Manager: Mohana Natarajan
Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
32 Jamestown Road, London NW1 7BY, UK
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, UK
Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451, USA
525 B Street, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101-4495, USA
Copyright 
c 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek
permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangement
with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency,
can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the
Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and
experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or
medical treatment may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in
evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In
using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of
others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors,
assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products
liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products,
instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

ISBN: 978-0-12-417214-2

For information on all Academic Press publications

visit our website at store.elsevier.com
DEDICATION

This book is for my wife Christine. With tolerance and patience, she has
supported and encouraged me for many years.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to all of my colleagues for their help and support during

this project, in particular, Hinda Haned, Thore Egeland, Oyvind Bleka
and Jonathan Whitaker have all provided me with valuable advice and
comments.

The preparation of this book has received funding from the European
Union seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agree-
ment no. 285487 (EUROFORGEN-NoE) and it contributes towards the
deliverable: “A protocol to describe best practice at the crime-scene”.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

My career began 32 years ago at the Home Office Central Research

Establishment (Aldermaston, UK) in 1982; I stayed with the Forensic
Science Service until 2008. I became Professor of Forensic Genetics at the
University of Oslo, Norway and in 2011 accepted a concurrent position at
the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. I have published more than 180
peer-reviewed papers and these have been cited by other authors of scientific
papers more than 12,800 times (lifetime h-index = 63). I am chair of the
DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics (ISFG);
co-chair of the “Analysis, Methods and Interpretation” subgroup of the
European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) DNA working
group; and a member of the Euroforgen network of excellence, which is
funded by the European Union. I was awarded ISFG Scientific Prize in 2013.

While at the Forensic Science Service, in 1985 I developed the DNA

extraction methods for forensic samples and used the results to publish
the first demonstration of forensic DNA profiling with Alec Jeffreys. In
the 1990s, I led the team that developed the modern genotyping methods
of short tandem repeat (multiplexed) STR analysis. The methods were
subsequently introduced worldwide and were used to create the world’s first
national DNA database in the United Kingdom, along with interpretation
and search protocols. In 1993, I was formally approached by the Russian
Federation to lead a joint project to analyze the putative remains of the
last Tsar of Russia—the first historical mystery to be solved by DNA
analysis. Although the results were considered controversial at the time, in
the following decades, subsequent analysis by others verified the original
conclusions. The claim of Anna Anderson to be the duchess Anastasia was
also investigated by DNA analysis and shown to be false. In the year 2000,
I led the team that developed a new ultrasensitive method of DNA typing—
called low copy number—also considered to be controversial at the time. An
interpretation framework was concurrently developed, and once again the
methods have since been adopted worldwide. Since then, I have specialized
in developing statistical methods to interpret complex DNA profiles and
have supported open-source initiatives. I have given evidence in several
high-profile trials and courts of appeal, both in the United States (Frye
x About the Author

hearing in New York) and in the United Kingdom, including the Omagh
bombing trial, where the judge summarized: “In my view it was extremely
fortunate that the prosecution decided late in the day to call Dr Gill as
his evidence greatly helped to inform and bring some objectivity to the
debate.” The motivation for this book arose from a meeting in Rome that
was organized by Vince Pascali in 2012, entitled: “The hidden side of
DNA profiles.” I have carried out a deep analysis of a number of poorly
reported cases, which are described in the book. Bearing in mind that this
represents a tiny snapshot of current practice, there is little doubt in my mind
that misinterpretation of DNA profiling evidence may cause miscarriages
of justice. My purpose is to provide some clarity—in particular to urge
scientists, lawyers, judges, and their policy makers to engage in debate and
to examine their existing practices.
FOREWORD

Forensic DNA testing, which is arguably the most significant advance in

forensic science in the twentieth century, began with a publication in the
prestigious journal Nature in December 1985. While we appropriately honor
Professor Alec Jeffreys as the father of forensic DNA analysis, Dr. Peter
Gill, the first author of this initial paper, has been a thought leader in many
areas of forensic DNA methods and interpretation over the past several
decades.

In my opinion, over the past three decades no one has done more to
advance forensic DNA analysis and interpretation than Peter Gill. He has
been part of every major development in the field. A few of the articles
that come to mind include the early exploration of short tandem repeats in
1993 (published in PCR Methods & Applications), use of DNA to solve
the Romanov historical mystery in 1994 (published in Nature Genetics), the
establishment of the first national DNA database in 1995 (based on concepts
originally published in 1990 in Electrophoresis), the introduction of mixture
interpretation techniques in 1998 and low-copy number procedures in 2000
(published in Forensic Science International), recognition of the potential
impact of DNA contamination in 2004 (published in the Journal of Forensic
Science), simulation of the DNA testing process in order to understand it
better in 2005 (published in Nucleic Acids Research), and development of
recommendations on probabilistic genotyping methods in 2012 (published
in Forensic Science International: Genetics). His work has longevity as well
as a breadth and depth unequaled in the field. He has had and continues to
have real impact with his visionary work.

This book furthers the reach and impact of Dr. Gill, who is now a profes-
sor of forensic genetics at the University of Oslo in Norway. Misleading
DNA Evidence contains five primary sections: (1) a definition of “trace
DNA,” (2) a review of some causes of miscarriages of justice when there
is an oversimplification of evidence interpretation, (3) a framework to guide
trace DNA evidence interpretation with 13 recommendations, (4) a discus-
sion of uses and abuses of DNA databases, and (5) an interesting review and
discussion of the case investigating the death of Meredith Kercher where
Amanda Knox and others were accused and convicted by an Italian court.
xii Foreword

Misleading DNA Evidence should be required reading for all forensic

DNA analysts so that they can better appreciate the limitations of the
powerful technique that they wield with DNA testing results that have
become increasingly more sensitive in recent years. Police investigators
and members of the legal community who rely on DNA evidence to make
decisions should also read this book as it provides an important word
of caution on the challenges surrounding DNA interpretation as detection
methods have become more sensitive. The text reminds us that just because
a DNA profile can now be obtained from a few cells does not mean that
the source of the profile is relevant to the crime event being investigated.
Transfer, persistence, and mixtures are all possible and can confound
interpretation of the results obtained. Likewise, readers are reminded that
the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence and so not obtaining
a DNA profile does not mean that a potential suspect is not associated with
the crime under investigation and therefore may not be truly innocent.

Professor Gill notes the true challenge he is trying to address near

the beginning of his book: “to refrain from overstepping boundaries of
knowledge—[in other words] to imply that the evidence has more meaning
than it really does—this is how miscarriages of justice occur.” These mis-
carriages of justice can occur due to what he describes as “the compounded
error effect” from “the association fallacy,” “the hidden perpetrator effect,”
“the naïve investigator effect,” and the “swamping effect.”

In my interactions with Peter over the years, I have found him to be a

forward thinker and an excellent scientist. This book serves as a reminder
and demonstration of Peter Gill’s work ethic, his scientific integrity, and
the positive impact he has had over the years on the field of forensic DNA
typing. Hopefully, the message of his book will be understood and potential
miscarriages of justice avoided as these principles are applied to strengthen
the field of forensic science.

John M. Butler, Ph.D.

NIST Fellow & Special Assistant to the
Director for Forensic Science
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA
PREFACE

It is nearly 30 years since the first demonstration of DNA profiling in

forensic science. Since then, the technique has evolved remarkably. In
the early days, only large “visible” crime stains (e.g., blood, semen) were
analyzed. This was imposed by the relatively poor sensitivity relative to
today’s standards. There is an inherent advantage to the interpretation of
macro-DNA samples, in that it is much easier to deduce the relevance of
a supposed crime stain to the crime event itself. From the perspective of a
court, the fact that a DNA profile may match a defendant is of secondary
interest to the questions: “how” and “when” did the DNA transfer take
place? For a defendant to be found guilty, a court must be convinced that the
DNA profile is associated with the crime event itself. The forensic scientist
attempts to apply “deductive logic” in order to associate the DNA profile
with some other aspect of the case—it is not the “fact” of a matching DNA
profile that is of primary interest, rather it is the “context” or the “relevance”
of the DNA profile to the crime event itself. To make deductive inferences,
a chain of associations is implied. For example, the DNA profile may be
found along with a positive test for blood. The scientist may deduce that the
origin of the DNA is from blood—an association is made. The confirmation
of a body fluid “source” is often sufficient to imply an “activity”—if blood
is present, then the prosecution may imply that the defendant or victim
bled at the crime scene; alternatively, the confirmation of semen may imply
sexual assault. Once these associations have been accepted, the court’s task
to decide the ultimate issue of guilt/innocence is a short step to take.

Associations are necessary for any deductions to be made. In recent

years, the sensitivity of DNA profiling has steadily increased, so that now
the analysis of just a “handful” of cells is not only possible, but also
routine in most forensic laboratories. This has been made possible by the
introduction of new multiplexes by manufacturers (these are biochemical
systems used to detect DNA profiles), along with new highly sensitive
detection platforms.

However, as the sensitivity of DNA profiling technology increases, there

is a parallel increase in the uncertainty of associations. This is because DNA
is everywhere in the environment. It can be transferred passively, e.g., by
xiv Preface

touching a surface, or by secondary transfer, mediated by a person other than

the defendant. DNA will persist indefinitely in a dry environment, hence
there is no implicit information attached to the DNA profile that gives a clue
to the “how” and “when” transfer occurred.

To avoid false associations leading to false deductive logic, it is necessary

for scientists to actively consider all possible methods of transfer: before
the crime event—innocent transfer or background contamination; after the
crime event—investigator mediated contamination. The identification of a
DNA profile and body fluid are two separate tests. The association of the
body fluid with the DNA profile is not implicit. The strength of the evidence
expressed as the chance of a random man match or a likelihood ratio cannot
be simply transposed to express an equivalent strength of evidence under
the assumption that the DNA profile originated from a given body fluid;
the uncertainty reduces the strength of the evidence, but this is not always
taken into consideration when expert evidence is provided. The uncertainties
increase as we consider the “activity” that produced the DNA transfer—as
before, the DNA statistic cannot be transposed.

The book is structured into a number of chapters:

The first chapter discusses a definition of “trace-DNA” and proceeds to

explain the main types of contamination and its impact. There follows a
description of causes of miscarriages of justice: the association fallacy; the
hidden perpetrator effect; the compounded error effect; cognitive biases—
especially confirmation bias. The role of the forensic scientist is clarified
within the context of a “statement of limitations” intended to anchor the
evidence at a level that can be supported in a strict scientific sense, so that
speculative “expert-opinion” is avoided.

The second chapter investigates the causes of miscarriages of justice

by reference to several verified and unverified examples, showing how
mistakes occur at every level of the criminal justice system: the investigator;
the scientist; lawyers; the judge; the jury are all susceptible to an over-
simplistic interpretation of evidence that is primarily driven by a family of
cognitive errors.

In the third chapter, a detailed framework is provided to interpret “trace-

DNA” evidence. Recovery of DNA from underneath fingernails is used as an
example since there has been much research into the investigation of transfer
and persistence of DNA in this type of evidence. The exemplar framework
can be expanded to other evidence types.
 Preface xv

There has been much debate on the use of national DNA databases in
crime investigation, but the “debate” was never properly resolved. In the
fourth chapter, it is shown that databases can be misused or misunderstood
to provide an impression that the DNA evidence is highly probative in
a given case. However, when the other non-DNA evidence is neutral, or
exculpatory, it is demonstrated that the DNA evidence can be overweighted
in relation to the non-DNA evidence. This is because the former is expressed
numerically (e.g., one in one billion), whereas the non-DNA evidence is
expressed verbally, without statistics. I call this the “swamping effect”.
There are numbers of proposals put forward to redress the balance.

The final chapter brings together the various strands—using the case
of “Death of Meredith Kercher” to illustrate the various principles and
cognitive biases explained in previous chapters. A list of recommendations
is provided.

Books are often static entities, but I would like this to be a vehicle to
facilitate discussion between all of the participants of the criminal justice
system and their policy makers. It has been prepared as a contribution to a
deliverable towards: “A protocol that describes best practice at crime scene”,
under the auspices of the EU-funded, Euroforgen-Network of Excellence,
http://www.euroforgen.eu/. The European Network of Forensic Institutes
(ENFSI) is concurrently running a project entitled “The development and
implementation of an ENFSI standard for reporting evaluative forensic ev-
idence”, http://www.enfsi.eu/projects/monopoly-programmes-mp/mp2010.
The ideas also contribute to this programme. They were recently discussed
at an ENFSI meeting in Tbilisi, Georgia. I am very pleased that a general
consensus is already emerging within the scientific community. I am sure
that I will need to expand, modify, update, and consolidate some of my ideas.
I welcome comments to peterd.gill@gmail.com and I will post updates on
my Web site, https://sites.google.com/site/peterdgill/.
CHAPTER 1
Definitions: Contamination and Interpretation
1.1 HISTORICAL ................................................................... 1
1.2 DEFINITION OF “TRACE-DNA”........................................... 1
1.3 A DISCUSSION ON CONTAMINATION ................................. 4
1.4 WHY DO MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE OCCUR? ..................... 11
1.5 SOME FALLACIES AND ERRORS OF THINKING...................... 12
1.6 THE LIKELIHOOD RATIO ................................................... 17
1.7 THE ROLE OF THE FORENSIC SCIENTIST ............................. 19

1.1 HISTORICAL
The original DNA profiling technique developed in 1985 had relatively
low sensitivity. It was limited to the analysis of large visible crime
stains that were at least 1 cm in diameter. Improvements facilitated by
the widespread adoption of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method
gradually increased the sensitivity to the point that only a few cells were
required in an assay (Gill et al., 2000). At first this development was
regarded as controversial, but now, the analysis of “trace-DNA”1 has
become routine. This book is about the interpretation of DNA profiles
derived from “trace-DNA” evidence.

1.2 DEFINITION OF “TRACE-DNA”

The term “trace-DNA” was used in a recent review by van Oorschot et al.
(2010):

Trace-DNA samples may be defined as any sample which falls below recom-
mended thresholds at any stage of the analysis.

I have modified this definition simply because this type of analysis is now
universal. It has been motivated by the introduction of new biochemistry and

1 Encompasses “low-level” DNA, “low-template,” or low-copy-number DNA.

2 Misleading DNA Evidence

instrumentation over recent years. Manufacturers compete with each other

to develop the most sensitive methods and forensic scientists readily adopt
the new systems, along with protocols that now standardize tests.

Therefore, I have altered Oorschots definition of “trace-DNA” to take

account of this change in practice. The key to the definition is whether a
DNA profile is meaningful within the context of the “Locard’s exchange
principle”: “every contact leaves a trace” and its implied extension to:
“every perpetrator leaves a trace.”

Accordingly, I have redefined as follows:

Trace-DNA is defined as any sample where there is uncertainty that it may be

associated with the crime event itself—so that it is possible that the transfer may
have occurred before the crime event (innocent transfer) or after the crime event
(investigator mediated).

The definition is deliberately vague: it hinges upon an assessment of the

relevance of a “trace-DNA” profile to the crime event which is considered
in the context of a “statement of limitations” originally published in 2001
and reproduced below.

1.2.1 “Trace-DNA” Evidence: Statement of Limitations

(Gill, 2001)
This is the “starting” position:

1. Although a DNA profile has been obtained, it is possible neither to

identify the type of cells from which the DNA originated, nor to state
when the cells were deposited.
2. It is not possible to make any conclusion about transfer and persistence
of DNA in this case. It is not possible to estimate when the suspect last
wore the [watch],2 if it is his DNA.
3. Because the DNA test is very sensitive, it is not unexpected to find
mixtures. If the potential origins of DNA profiles cannot be identified,
it does not necessarily follow that they are relevant to this case, since
transfer of cells can occur as a result of casual contact.

The definition of “trace-DNA” will encompass a large proportion of crime

samples that are currently processed within DNA laboratories. It will include

2 This statement was originally used in relation to DNA evidence found on a watch found at
a crime scene.
 Definitions: Contamination and Interpretation 3

all low-level DNA profiles, for which there is no concurrent body fluid that
has been identified with certainty (Section 1.5).

1.2.2 Assessment of “Trace-DNA” Evidence in the Context of the

Case: “The List of Possibilities”
With some cases (examples described later in the book) it will not be
possible for a scientist to go beyond the “statement of limitations.” The pros-
ecution will nevertheless “push” the scientist to associate the “trace-DNA”
evidence with the crime event “activity”; the challenge is to refrain from
overstepping boundaries of knowledge—i.e., to imply that the evidence has
more meaning than it really does—this is how miscarriages of justice occur.

The second step is to explain all of the different possibilities describing

how a “trace-DNA” may be transferred, without expressing any preference.
The list should be fully inclusive—just because the scientist believes that a
particular mode of transfer is remote, it is not a reason to omit it from the
list of possibilities:
1. The “trace-DNA” profile was transferred during the crime event itself.
2. The “trace-DNA” profile was part of the background contamination of
the crime scene (innocent transfer).
3. The “trace-DNA” profile was a post crime scene contamination event
(investigator-mediated contamination).
The list can be subdivided or expanded further to take account of the
specific case circumstances. The next question evaluates whether the various
possibilities can be ranked in order of “likelihood.” This is the most difficult
part of the exercise and much caution is required to take the interpretation
toward an opinion on the “activity” that led to the transfer of the “trace-
DNA” profile. Whether this is possible is very case specific, but provided
that there are sufficient experimental data that are relevant, underpinned by
peer-reviewed literature, and provided that there is a good understanding
about the background and investigator-mediated contamination, then it may
be possible to provide some further meaning to the “trace-DNA” evidence.

Chapter 3 provides a detailed exemplar framework to assess “trace-

DNA” evidence from underneath fingernails. This is probably the best-
researched evidence type; probabilistic assessments can be made to describe
the likelihood of a transfer event via each of the possibilities. The research to
date shows the inherent unpredictability of DNA transfer at the crime scene
that is influenced by numerous variables which are difficult to evaluate and
to quantify.
4 Misleading DNA Evidence

Sometimes forensic scientists may try to find meaning in the absence of a

DNA profile, to prove a negative: e.g., “Mr X was not in the room because I
could not find his DNA.” This is a specious argument. Absence of evidence
is not evidence of absence.

1.3 A DISCUSSION ON CONTAMINATION

DNA is everywhere in the environment. A DNA profile cannot be inter-
preted under the strict confines of “Locard’s exchange principle” as there are
several alternative transfer methods other than direct “contact.” DNA can be
transferred from one place to another—either by other people or in aerosol
suspension, as house dust, composed of dead-skin-cells, for example, first
demonstrated by Toothman et al. (2008) who concluded:

even though anti-contamination measures may be in place at a crime scene and

in the laboratory, trace DNA derived from dust in the vicinity of other evidence is
capable of producing signals higher than background noise in STR analyses.

1.3.1 Mechanisms of DNA Transfer

There are three different mechanisms whereby DNA may be transferred
between surfaces, people, or objects. These methods are exhaustive (i.e.,
I can’t think of another method), but they are not mutually exclusive—
more than one mechanism may occur either simultaneously or at different
times.

1. Direct transfer: Directly touching a surface object or person. No interme-

diary is involved.
2. Aerosol transfer: Transfer to a person, surface, or object is achieved
without an intermediary. Examples are exhaling or speaking where
saliva spray is transferred from a person to a surface, object or another
person. Another example is skin cells which are continually shed into
the environment. An intermediary is not involved with this method of
transfer.
3. Indirect transfer (or secondary transfer): Where a DNA profile initially
deposited either by direct means or by aerosol is transferred via an
intermediary who touches the DNA profile and transfers “sticky-DNA”
to another surface, object, or person. The definition includes transfer
between two objects that physically touch each other. Multiple transfer
events, where a DNA profile may be transferred by indirect method more
than once may occur. An intermediary is always involved with indirect
transfer.
 Definitions: Contamination and Interpretation 5

1.3.2 Relevance of DNA Transfer at the Crime Scene

It is usually necessary to interpret the relevance of the DNA profiles
recovered from the crime scene in relation to the crime event itself.
Here, DNA transfer is described as either active (relevant) or passive (not
relevant):

1.3.2.1 Active Transfer

Active transfer is associated with direct transfer of DNA during the crime
event itself—e.g., by sexual assault and transfer of sperm to the victim; a
victim scratches an assailant and a DNA profile is transferred underneath
fingernails (Chapter 3).

1.3.2.2 Passive Transfer

1. Passive transfer results in the “background” distribution of DNA profiles
that pre-exists the crime scene. The population of DNA profiles is derived
by any of the following mechanisms which are described above:
• Direct transfer
• Aerosol transfer
• Indirect transfer
2. Once the crime scene is established, the investigator may inadvertently
act as a vector to passively transfer DNA within the immediate environ-
ment (Section 1.3.7)
3. These risks extend to collection of items, their packaging, examination
in the laboratory, storage, re-examination where indirect passive transfer
may act to redistribute DNA profiles within and between items of
evidence (Section 1.3.3).

1.3.2.3 Summary of DNA Transfer Methods

In summary, there are six exhaustive methods or “states” to describe DNA
transfer, as listed below:

1. Active, direct: Describes relevant transfer from the perpetrator at the time
of the crime event.
2. Active, indirect: This “state” is probably not significant since it describes
relevant secondary transfer at the time of the crime event.
3. Active, aerosol: For example, transfer from perpetrator via saliva spray
from exhaling, shouting.
4. Passive, direct: Innocent touching, not associated with the crime event.
5. Passive, indirect: Innocent secondary transfer.
6. Passive aerosol: Innocent transfer via speaking, exhaling, skin cells.
6 Misleading DNA Evidence

For any recovered “trace-DNA” profile, the actual method will not be known
with certainty.

1.3.3 Aerosol Transfer at the Crime Scene and Between

Packaged Items
• Where airborne-DNA is transferred to a surface. It has been demonstrated
that speaking or coughing will result in transfer of DNA up to 180 cm
distance from the contributor (Finnebraaten et al., 2008; Port et al., 2006;
Rutty et al., 2003). It has been previously proposed that airborne passive
transfer is responsible for contamination of plasticware (supposedly DNA
free) (Gill et al., 2010), either in the laboratory itself or at manufacturing
source. DNA can be recovered from “house-dust,” hence it would be
expected to be in suspension in the air. However, from the limited amount
of work that has been carried out (Vandewoestyne et al., 2011; Witt
et al., 2009), this does not appear to be a major mechanism of cross-
contamination.
• Aerosol transfer has been convincingly demonstrated to occur between
case items that are loosely packed together, e.g., heavily contaminated
blood on clothing will transfer to other objects that may be packed
separately (Goray et al., 2012a). Classified as “passive transfer” as it
is not physically mediated by an individual. Visible encrusted body
fluid stains readily produce aerosol flakes upon disturbance and this
is particularly “dangerous” within the confines of loosely packaged
material. This phenomenon will be particularly relevant to “cold” cases;
these are unsolved crimes, where the items were collected, stored, and
examined under conditions that did not anticipate highly sensitive DNA
profiling methods. As technology progresses, these cases are sometimes
reanalyzed in an attempt to discover perpetrators. Each time the case is
re-examined, the risks are increased because of the added disturbances.
If items from a known suspect have been kept together with questioned
items from a case, then it is to be expected that cross-contamination will
occur between them. The “statement of limitations” (Section 1.2.1) will
apply to all such cases; the possibility of cross-contamination would rank
highly (see Section 2.3.3).

1.3.4 Indirect (Secondary Transfer) at the Crime Scene

There are excellent experimental designs to illustrate the risks of secondary
transfer described by a series of papers by Goray et al. (2010a,b, 2012b).
These articles also serve as reviews of the literature, not reproduced here.
These papers show that secondary transfer is dependent upon the type of
 Definitions: Contamination and Interpretation 7

surface (porous or smooth), and also whether the samples are wet vs. dry.
It was shown that porous/dry samples were less likely to transfer DNA
than smooth/wet samples. Friction between two surfaces aided secondary
transfer.Skin cell transfer is of particular interest, since this is the cell type
that is most likely to be inadvertently transferred at crime scenes. Goray
et al. (2010a) showed that just 2 ng of skin cell DNA were required to
transfer 1 ng to be retrieved from another surface. A review of the literature
showed that a handprint deposited between 0 and 385 ng of DNA—i.e., there
was usually more than enough to be realistically implicated in the possibility
of secondary transfer. In addition, it was shown that latex gloves worn by
investigators at crime scenes are “high risk” in this respect (Poy and van
Oorschot, 2006; Szkuta et al., 2013) (Section 5.13.3). It is important to note
that the published literature has focussed on retrieval of DNA profiles of
1 ng or more, which is reflective of “traditional” DNA profiling methods.
However, the examples that are examined in this book include the retrieval
of much lower amounts of DNA—these are typically low-level, partial
DNA profiles that are routinely reported using enhanced PCR amplification
cycles, or the new, more sensitive multiplexes and platforms that are
currently utilized.

Since the new methodologies are in the region 20 times more sensitive
than those previously considered, there is an urgent need to carry out new
research, following the experimental design of Goray et al., in order to
properly quantify the risks of the new technologies that have already been
implemented—Ballantyne et al. (2013) reported greatly increased detection
of background contamination on surfaces and equipment associated with
laboratory analysis. Profiles that are demonstrably low-level, partial, and in
admixture with other contributors should always be considered as potential
background contamination.

1.3.5 The “Natural Environment” of the Crime Scene

The “natural environment” of the “crime scene” is defined by background
DNA distribution that existed before the crime event. After the crime event,
a crime scene is established. The purpose of the investigation is to determine
the differences between the DNA distributions of the “natural environment”
from the new distributions imposed by the crime event itself. Apart from the
complications arising from the “background contamination,” investigators
may themselves contaminate the crime scene—this is called “investigator-
mediated contamination.” The transfer mechanisms were described in
Section 1.3.1.
8 Misleading DNA Evidence

Background contamination is unavoidable and must always be taken into

consideration when a crime scene is investigated.3

Investigator-mediated contamination is theoretically avoidable, but in

practice it will be difficult to preclude the possibility. The two main types of
contamination are summarized below.
1.3.6 Background Contamination
People who inhabit premises, along with their visitors, will shed their
DNA so that it will be all pervasive in the environment. It will be present
on surfaces as “sticky-DNA” and in aerosol as skin cells which form
a component of “house dust” or saliva spray generated by exhaling or
speaking.4 It can be propagated either by passive or active transfer as
outlined above. Background contaminating DNA remains intact for months,
if not years after deposition, provided that the environment is dry and
undisturbed (Raymond et al., 2009).

1.3.7 Investigator-Mediated Contamination

This kind of contamination is outside the “natural environment” of the case.
It is mediated by investigators who unwittingly contaminate the crime scene
with their own DNA—this is usually detected if investigator DNA databases
are kept. However, the second form of investigator-mediated contamination
is more serious—disposable paper suits and gloves intended to prevent
DNA transfer from the wearer may inadvertently transfer “sticky-DNA”
from one part of the crime scene to another (e.g., by not changing gloves in
between examination of items). Once items are packaged and transported for
analysis, e.g., a knife or some clothing, “aerosol DNA” can redistribute itself
both within and between poorly packaged evidential items (Goray et al.,
2012a). Laboratory contamination includes contamination of plasticware
and reagents, either at the manufacturing source or within the laboratory
itself (Gill et al., 2010; Tamariz et al., 2006).

1.3.8 A Theoretical Example to Illustrate the Various Transfer

Mechanisms
Routes of contamination relative to a time line are illustrated in Figure 1.1.
At a premises, several people cohabit a house. They and their visitors
shed DNA by passive transfer. Three profiles are deposited by individuals

3 Currently, there is insufficient research and guidance to recommend exactly how this should
be done, but I envisage a system of random sampling by transects taken from the vicinity of
the crime scene.
4 This is why investigators wear face masks.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree
to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease
using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the
work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement
by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full
Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and
with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it,
give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of
the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
 containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute

this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must,
at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy,
a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy
upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
 payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these
efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium
on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data,
transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property
infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be
read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you
do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status
by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or
federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions
to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact
 Section 4. Information about Donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine
the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com