SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Atlantic has a lengthy, but informative, article on the problems with DNA testing, often seen as infallible by juries:
"Ironically, you have a technology that was meant to help eliminate subjectivity in forensics," Erin Murphy, a law professor at NYU, told me recently. "But when you start to drill down deeper into the way crime laboratories operate today, you see that the subjectivity is still there: Standards vary, training levels vary, quality varies."
Last year, Murphy published a book called Inside the Cell: The Dark Side of Forensic DNA, which recounts dozens of cases of DNA typing gone terribly wrong. Some veer close to farce, such as the 15-year hunt for the Phantom of Heilbronn, whose DNA had been found at more than 40 crime scenes in Europe in the 1990s and early 2000s. The DNA in question turned out to belong not to a serial killer, but to an Austrian factory worker who made testing swabs used by police throughout the region.
The article also notes the increasing reliance on computer processing and the desire of the firms responsible to keep the details of the processing hidden, highlighting the example of DNA-testing firm Cybergenetics and their TrueAllele software:
William Thompson [attorney and a criminology professor at the University of California at Irvine] points out that Perlin [Cybergenetics CEO] has declined to make public the algorithm that drives the program. "You do have a black-box situation happening here," Thompson told me. "The data go in, and out comes the solution, and we're not fully informed of what happened in between."
Last year, at a murder trial in Pennsylvania where TrueAllele evidence had been introduced, defense attorneys demanded that Perlin turn over the source code for his software, noting that "without it, [the defendant] will be unable to determine if TrueAllele does what Dr. Perlin claims it does." The judge denied the request.
...
When I interviewed Perlin at Cybergenetics headquarters, I raised the matter of transparency. He was visibly annoyed. He noted that he'd published detailed papers on the theory behind TrueAllele, and filed patent applications, too: "We have disclosed not the trade secrets of the source code or the engineering details, but the basic math."
Originally seen at Bruce Schneier's Blog.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday June 02 2016, @09:06PM
we collectively know they have it DNA evidence will still be used in court against politically unacceptable individuals.
Well if by politically unacceptable individuals you mean murderers and rapists, yeah.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Thursday June 02 2016, @09:43PM
I mean that any time a notable political dissident is accused of a crime they deny partaking in based on DNA evidence, the judge/jury should be extremely skeptical. If Cody Wilson denies being the shooter, and his DNA is on the gun, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Thursday June 02 2016, @10:25PM
Also, he did get away with it for years. After two unsuccessful DNA tests, I would probably be as skeptical of the victim's testimony as the court was. Good thing she got a detective to break into the guy's car and get another DNA sample, but too bad he still had to be caught raping again (this time a 15 year old) before they found him guilty of anything. I guess he got out with parole in four years.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Thursday June 02 2016, @10:28PM
Bah, meant to attach this comment to a different reply to frojack [soylentnews.org], not grandparent
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 03 2016, @02:52PM
Murderers and rapists are hardly the only ones who have their DNA collected. Some states collect DNA over very minor things. Furthermore, even murderers and rapists deserve a fair trial.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 03 2016, @02:59PM
Go lick some more boots.