Maine case deals blow to DNA fingerprinting

Article Abstract:

DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) fingerprinting is a laboratory technique that matches samples of a suspect's blood to fragments of skin, hair, or body fluids found at the crime scene. The theory behind the technique is that all body cells from an individual contain the exact same pattern of DNA, the substance that contains genetic code. Each person's DNA is unique, just as fingerprints are unique. Judges presiding over court cases in which the results of DNA fingerprinting have been submitted have accepted this evidence as reliable in almost every case. However, a recent rape case in Maine has demonstrated that laboratory techniques can be flawed. The prime suspect in the rape of a five-year-old girl was exonerated because his blood samples did not match semen samples from the crime scene. Even though he matched the description given by the victim and two witnesses and admitted being in the area, the suspect was freed based solely on DNA evidence; DNA fingerprinting had protected an innocent man. Another suspect provided a blood sample, and although he did not resemble the man described by witnesses, his blood matched the semen sample. But during his pretrial hearing, the prosecution suddenly withdrew the DNA evidence; the prosecution's expert witness had decided the laboratory evidence was inconclusive. The laboratory procedures had not been performed carefully by Lifecodes Inc of Valhalla, New York, a company that has previously submitted flawed results in other cases. Commercial laboratories need to follow strictly controlled procedures to obtain accurate results. More research is also needed to perfect certain aspects of the DNA fingerprinting technique. The suspect in the Maine rape case was clearly innocent, but the DNA evidence in this second case proved to be inconclusive. (Consumer Summary produced by Reliance Medical Information, Inc.)

Methods, Case studies, Identification and classification, Criminals, Genetic code, Forensic DNA testing, Forensic genetics

---

House puts its stamp on the budget

Article Abstract:

The House approved a 5.7% budget increase for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Aug 1995, but the Senate is likely to approve spending increases for job and housing programs at the expense of the NIH budget. House spending proposals for biomedical, space and other research areas are described.

Political aspects, Science and technology policy, United States. Congress

---

Brown turns up the heat on pork

Article Abstract:

Rep George Brown announced a House Committee on Science and Technology investigation into the practice of 'earmarking' appropriations to fund specific scientific projects. Over $1.2 billion was spent in 1991 and 1992 on projects not authorized by the committee.

Investigations, Speeches, lectures and essays, United States. Congress. House. Committee on Science, Brown, George E., Jr.

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Making a deep impact: Hollywood tackles the threat of near-earth objects. Invaders from Hollywood
• Abstracts: Did life really start out in an RNA world? Computing at the speed of light. Catalytic RNA wins chemistry Nobel
• Abstracts: New vector delivers genes to lung cells. Tumor suppressor genes: the puzzle and the promise. One Wilms' tumor gene is cloned; are there more?
• Abstracts: Limit of T cell tolerance to self proteins by peptide presentation. Mechanisms of immunological tolerance
• Abstracts: Molecular biology lies down with the lamb. Chronic fatigue as chameleon

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.