by team UAB, CHWB
How much can contamination affect DNA results? Will it be enough to provide reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors? The defense seemed to take note of OJ's defense Dream Team strategy.
| "Evidence was picked up by people who had no idea DNA would be important 24 years later," Griffith said. "We wouldn't do it that way now." |
3 comments:
I believe that while the evidence was contaminated they were right in saying that the investigators collected it without knowing that in the future we would be able to test it and get DNA off of it to arrest the suspect(s). It may cause reasonable doubt in the trial but because it was a cold case I would think the jury would realize that we have come a long way in the colletion of evidence. The fact that they took the evidence and tested it to see if they could find out who did it and close a cold case is great, they can finally give the families closure. SK
hmm... i'm not sure how far the lawyers will be able to go with the contamination issue. DNA tests now are much more definitive than when the OJ was happening. If they found the suspects DNA at the scene, then there really isn't much doubt about whether they were there no matter how lousy the collection methods were (unless they mixed the unknown samples with blood collected from the suspect).
-dr. l
Thanks for this!!!
SIFS INDIA Experts Opinions and Reports are acceptable in every court in India and abroad (In India- U/S 45 of Indian Evidence Act) and Our Educational Courses Certificates are valid and legal.
SIFS-Investigation Department
2443, Basement, Hudson Lane,Kingsway Camp,Behind GTB Metro Station, Delhi - 110009
Phone : 09953 546 546, 09871 502 343
Email : contact@sifsindia.com, forensicdocument@gmail.com
Website : www.sifsindia.com, www.sifs.in , www.sifs.org.in
Post a Comment