Australia |
focus
points
|
 |
Insert forensic
focus points here
Canada |
focus
points
|
|
|
|
DNA
|
|
"Because
DNA is unique to each individual, except in the case of
identical twins, it provides a basis of comparison which
can be matched against evidence obtained from a crime scene
thus, potentially identifying the perpetrator of the criminal
act" (Bassan, 1996).
"A scientist
or technician compares samples of DNA collected from a known
suspect to evidence collected at the scene of a crime or
from a victim's body. There are three possible outcomes
for this comparison including (1)exclusion, where the samples
do not match and could not have originated from the same
source, (2)inclusion, where the profiles from two samples
are sufficiently similar that they could have originated
from the same source, and (3)inconclusive, where the data
is insufficient to draw a conclusion" (Bassan, 1996).
"If two
samples match, they are evaluated for the likelihood of
this occurrence by using statistical population data to
estimate how common or uncommon certain factors within the
DNA profile are within a given category of population such
as Caucasian, Hispanic or African, for example" (Love,
1993; Bassan, 1996).
"Essentially,
it is the odds of obtaining such a DNA match at random in
the relevant population that are being calculated"
(Bassan, 1996).
"In Canada,
the most commonly used technique of DNA analysis and comparison
which is used for forensic purposes is that of Restriction
Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLP) (Love, 1993; Connors,
1994; Bassan, 1996). Some background is necessary to understand
how this method of comparison functions. Inherited traits
are passed from parent to offspring in genes which are located
on chromosomes and are composed of DNA" (Bassan, 1996).
"The DNA
consists of two twisted strands linked by pairs of bases
such that the entire structure resembles a twisted rope
ladder, commonly called a double helix structure. Although
the sequence of most of these base pairs is the same for
everyone, about one percent of the sequence varies, and
the order in which the variation of these base pairs occur
is unique to each individual. These sequence variations
are localized to specific areas of the DNA molecule known
as polymorphic regions which simply means that this is a
region in which alternative forms of a gene can appear.
These alternative forms differ in the length of their DNA
sequences and thus provide a base for comparison" (Bassan,
1996).
"In Canada,
the collection and testing of forensic DNA samples is regulated
by Bill C-104 which was passed in 1995" (Bassan, 1996).
"Under
the provisions of this statute a provincial court judge
may issue a DNA warrant when he/she is satisfied by information
given under oath that there are reasonable grounds to believe
(1) that an offence has been committed, (2) that a bodily
substance has been found either where an offence was committed,
or on or in a victim or anything worn or carried by a victim,
or on or in a person or thing associated with the commission
of the offence, (3) that a person was involved in the commission
of an offence, or (4) that forensic DNA analysis of a bodily
substance from a person will provide information as to whether
the bodily substances referred to in (2) are from that person"
(Bill C-104, 1995).
"In Canada,
the most likely challenge to Bill C-104 would be in terms
of conflict with rights set out in s. 8 of the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter). The specific
argument that could be made here is that Bill C-104, with
its allowance for the removal of bodily substances without
a person's consent, violates a person's right to be secure
against unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed under
s.8 of the Charter" (Bassan, 1996).
"To date,
no court in Canada has rendered a decision with regard to
this issue. Consequently, it is necessary to look at challenges
to similar laws and guaranteed rights that have occurred
in other countries to obtain guidance as to the likely interpretation
Canadian courts may take" (Bassan, 1996).
"In examining
the stance the courts have taken in the United States, it
seems likely that Canada, with the creation of the loosely
worded Bill C-104, will likely follow a similar path in
interpreting s. 8 of the Charter as it pertains to the taking
of DNA samples for forensic purposes. Like the United States
and the Fourth Amendment challenges, Canadian courts will
not likely find DNA sampling for the detection of criminal
activity to be a violation of an offender's privacy and
search and seizure rights granted in s. 8 of the Charter"
(Bassan, 1996).
|
|
deoxyribonucleic
acid (DNA)
|
|
"DNA is
the genetic material contained in the cells of the human
body which acts like a genetic blueprint providing a plan
for development unique to each individual" (Redmayne,
1998).
"As technology
within a given society progresses and becomes more sophisticated
and advanced, many things that were once only dreamt of
become reality. This has been the case in the biological
arena of gene technology. The basic substance of inheritance
contained within the genes is deoxyribonucleic acid"
(DNA) (Redmayne, 1998).
"However,
the ability to test, profile and store DNA has created several
issues within the law:
- "Which
offenders are required to provide DNA samples for profiling
and storage" (Redmayne, 1998)?
- "Is it
necessary to type all offenders or only those who commit
particularly violent classes of crimes" (Redmayne,
1998)?
- "How
will these DNA samples be collected? This is basically
an issue of mandatory testing and the rights afforded
offenders under various statutes. Additionally, once tested
and typed, should legal organizations be able to create
data banks in which to store these samples for comparison
to evidence gathered from crimes yet to be committed?
This is an issue of gathering evidence to prove specific
charges versus the possibility of deterring future crimes
and victims rights balanced against offenders rights"
(Redmayne, 1998).
- "What
are the implications of mandatory for testing for those
working in the health care fields? This is primarily an
issue of care versus custody and whether trust can develop
between those offenders forced to give DNA samples and
those who must take them" (Redmayne, 1998).
|
|
role
of health care worker
|
|
"The primary
role of health care workers in the issue of DNA testing
revolves around the collection of samples, particularly
samples which are not freely given. In this case, someone
qualified must be responsible for the taking of a mandatory
sample, no matter what the form of that sample may be. The
major conflict that can occur in this situation involves
issues of trust between what is likely correctional medical
staff and the prison population they treat. If correctional
staff have to take mandatory DNA samples from offenders
how does this affect their future relationships with these
prisoners? Questions here revolve around how long it takes
trust to build when offenders may feel that the person they
look to for care has violated their rights and invaded their
privacy. Essentially, this remains a conflict in a situation
of care versus custody and perhaps the easiest resolution
to this issue may be to have a qualified person not responsible
for future health care of the offender collect the actual
DNA samples for processing" (Redmayne, 1998).
France
|
focus
points
|
|
|
anthropometry
(or personal identification)
|
|
"Alphonse
Bertillon's (1853-1914) anthropometry (or personal identification)
system using a series of body and facial measurements for
individualization, developed in 1882" (De Forest, Gaensslen
& Lee, 1983, cited in Almirall & Furton, 1995).
"Edmond
Locard's (1877- 1966) exchange principle is often quoted
to this day: "objects or surfaces which come into contact
always exchange trace evidence" and it was he who set
up the world's first forensic laboratory in France in 1910"
(De Forest, Gaensslen & Lee, 1983, cited in Almirall
& Furton, 1995).
International |
focus
points
|
|
Insert forensic
focus points here
United Kingdom |
focus
points
|
|
|
"So
much has changed since the Victorian era of Sir Arthur
Conan Doyle, when crime-solving involved Sherlock
Holmes and Dr Watson piecing together evidence in
the study of 221B Baker Street. Today crimes are solved
through the collaborative efforts of a wide range
of experts including police and lawyers in the simplest
cases, through to pathologists, forensic scientists,
psychiatrists, dentists and even geologists and engineers
in more complicated cases. With the recent advent
of DNA technology, molecular biologists have been
included in the team of forensic professionals. They
offer the powerful technique of DNA profiling to crime-solving"
(Edmondston, 1999, p. 11).
"When DNA profiling was first introduced by Alec
Jeffreys and his colleagues in 1985, it was called
DNA fingerprinting. In essence, DNA profiling is similar
to fingerprinting. As each individual has a characteristic
fingerprint, so each individual has a characteristic
DNA profile. However, DNA profiles are much more discriminating
than fingerprints. Every person carries about 3 billion
DNA bases in each cell and the DNA in each cell is
virtu- ally identical (give or take the random changes
that occur in DNA as a natural result of ageing).
Subtle changes in the composition of these DNA bases
between people gives us our individuality. Approximately
1 in every 1000 bases of DNA varies between individuals.
These differences are not randomly distributed throughout
the DNA but appear in clusters. DNA profiling utilises
one type of cluster, known as single tandem repeats
(STRs)" (Edmondston, 1999, p. 11).
|
United States |
focus
points
|
|
|
DNA
database
|
|
In contrast to
the Canadian position where the focus remains on the collection
and use of individual DNA samples to solve particular designated
crimes, the focus in the United States has shifted to the
collection of samples on a large-scale basis from entire
categories of offenders for the purpose of solving past
and future crimes (Bassan, 1996).
"In October
of 1998, the Federal "Bureau of Investigation officially
opened its DNA database (Post-Gazette, 1998). This database
links databases previously set up in all 50 states, unifying
them into a national database, which can be accessed by
law enforcement agents. Although the United States has a
unified system of storing DNA evidence obtained from criminal
investigative procedures, there is no agreement among states
as to what classes of offenders should be tested. The majority
of states collect and store DNA samples from offenders convicted
of serious sex-related or violent crimes. However, some
states collect DNA samples from all convicted felons, while
others make it a requirement of parole or release"
(Bassan, 1996).
"Challenges
to the laws that established DNA data banks in the United
States have all occurred on the grounds that removal of
a blood sample constitutes a violation of an individual's
Fourth Amendment rights" (Kier, 1992; Love, 1993; Connors,
1994). "The Fourth Amendment, like s. 8 of the Charter,
protects against unreasonable search and seizure. However,
to date none of these challenges have been successful"
(Connors, 1994; Bassan, 1996).
"The majority
position has been that the taking of blood for the purpose
of creating a record in a DNA data bank does not violate
convicted felons Fourth Amendment rights" (Kier, 1992;
Love, 1993; Connors, 1994; Bassan, 1996). "In fact
in one case, Olivas, 1993, it was held that the collection
of a DNA sample was necessary to meet the special needs
beyond law enforcement clause of the Fourth Amendment; specifically
the special needs of the government to establish and maintain
a DNA data bank as a deterrent to repeat offenders"
(Connors, 1994; Bassan, 1996).
Focus Points
Reference
http://www.mdpd.com/astmhtm.html
| Bassan,
D. (1996). Bill C-104: Revolutionizing criminal |
investigations
or infringing on Charter rights? University of
Toronto Faculty of Law Revue, 54, 246-92.
|
| Connors,
M. A. (1994). DNA databases: The case for |
the Combined
DNA Index System. Wake Forest Law Review, 29,
889-914.
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Love, S.
H. (1993). Allowing new technology to erode |
constitutional
protections: A Fourth Amendment challenge to non-consensual
DNA testing of prisoners. Villanova Law Review,
38, 1617-60.
|
| Redmayne,
M. (1998). The DNA database: Civil |
liberty
and
evidential issues. Criminal Law Review, 437-54.
|
Top
of Page
Topic
A - Forensic Medicine > Section A.6.0. Forensic Concepts > Unit.A.6.3.
DNA
