DNA transfer through nonintimate social contact

Jones, S; Scott, Kevin; Jw, Lewis; Davidson, G.; Allard, J.E.; Lowrie, Claire; McBride, B.M.; McKenna, Louise; Teppett, G.; Rogers, Carol; Clayson, Nicola; Baird, Anthony

doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2015.10.004

Cited by 24 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…DNA has been demonstrably transferred by handling both with and without gloves [97], from a range of items to both secondary and tertiary objects [98]. The transferred DNA may yield profiles ranging in quality from non-existent to complete and database-uploadable [97,98], following either prolonged or brief social contact [99], leaving unpredictability (see Table 2).…”

Section: Transfer Of Trace Dna After Initial Depositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of trace “Touch DNA” deposits: Variability factors and an exploration of cellular composition

Burrill

Daniel

Frascione

2019

Forensic Science International: Genetics

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Transfer Of Trace Dna After Initial Depositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of trace “Touch DNA” deposits: Variability factors and an exploration of cellular composition

Burrill

Daniel

Frascione

2019

Forensic Science International: Genetics

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…to build a model usable for assigning transfer probabilities in cases with features covered by this model (Curran et al, 1998, 2000). In the context of DNA, studies have been conducted to examine the rates of transfer, for example between shooters and guns (Polley et al, 2006), but also in more general situations (e.g., Phipps and Petricevic, 2007; Daly et al, 2012; Jones et al, 2016; Samie et al, 2016). So, when a scientist is faced with assigning a probability for finding trace material given the proposition of handling an object by a person of interest (e.g., the activity of discharging a firearm), we do see no harm in referring to studies that have focused on rates of transfer not exactly the same in the alleged circumstances of the case.…”

Section: Discussion Of Selected Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Forensic DNA Traces When Propositions of Interest Relate to Activities: Analysis and Discussion of Recurrent Concerns

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When forensic scientists evaluate and report on the probative strength of single DNA traces, they commonly rely on only one number, expressing the rarity of the DNA profile in the population of interest. This is so because the focus is on propositions regarding the source of the recovered trace material, such as “the person of interest is the source of the crime stain.” In particular, when the alternative proposition is “an unknown person is the source of the crime stain,” one is directed to think about the rarity of the profile. However, in the era of DNA profiling technology capable of producing results from small quantities of trace material (i.e., non-visible staining) that is subject to easy and ubiquitous modes of transfer, the issue of source is becoming less central, to the point that it is often not contested. There is now a shift from the question “whose DNA is this?” to the question “how did it get there?” As a consequence, recipients of expert information are now very much in need of assistance with the evaluation of the meaning and probative strength of DNA profiling results when the competing propositions of interest refer to different activities. This need is widely demonstrated in day-to-day forensic practice and is also voiced in specialized literature. Yet many forensic scientists remain reluctant to assess their results given propositions that relate to different activities. Some scientists consider evaluations beyond the issue of source as being overly speculative, because of the lack of relevant data and knowledge regarding phenomena and mechanisms of transfer, persistence and background of DNA. Similarly, encouragements to deal with these activity issues, expressed in a recently released European guideline on evaluative reporting (Willis et al., 2015), which highlights the need for rethinking current practice, are sometimes viewed skeptically or are not considered feasible. In this discussion paper, we select and discuss recurrent skeptical views brought to our attention, as well as some of the alternative solutions that have been suggested. We will argue that the way forward is to address now, rather than later, the challenges associated with the evaluation of DNA results (from small quantities of trace material) in light of different activities to prevent them being misrepresented in court.

show abstract

“…to build a model usable for assigning transfer probabilities in cases with features covered by this model (Curran et al, 1998. In the context of DNA, studies have been conducted to examine the rates of transfer, for example between shooters and guns (Polley et al, 2006), but also in more general situations (e.g., Phipps and Petricevic, 2007;Daly et al, 2012;Jones et al, 2016;Samie et al, 2016). So, when a scientist is faced with assigning a probability for finding trace material given the proposition of handling an object by a person of interest (e.g., the activity of discharging a firearm), we do see no harm in referring to studies that have focused on rates of transfer not exactly the same in the alleged circumstances of the case.…”

Section: Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dialogue Between Forensic Scientists, Statisticians and Lawyers about Complex Scientific Issues for Court

2020

Frontiers Research Topics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frontiers is more than just an open-access publisher of scholarly articles: it is a pioneering approach to the world of academia, radically improving the way scholarly research is managed. The grand vision of Frontiers is a world where all people have an equal opportunity to seek, share and generate knowledge. Frontiers provides immediate and permanent online open access to all its publications, but this alone is not enough to realize our grand goals. Frontiers Journal Series The Frontiers Journal Series is a multi-tier and interdisciplinary set of open-access, online journals, promising a paradigm shift from the current review, selection and dissemination processes in academic publishing. All Frontiers journals are driven by researchers for researchers; therefore, they constitute a service to the scholarly community. At the same time, the Frontiers Journal Series operates on a revolutionary invention, the tiered publishing system, initially addressing specific communities of scholars, and gradually climbing up to broader public understanding, thus serving the interests of the lay society, too. Dedication to Quality Each Frontiers article is a landmark of the highest quality, thanks to genuinely collaborative interactions between authors and review editors, who include some of the world's best academicians. Research must be certified by peers before entering a stream of knowledge that may eventually reach the public-and shape society; therefore, Frontiers only applies the most rigorous and unbiased reviews. Frontiers revolutionizes research publishing by freely delivering the most outstanding research, evaluated with no bias from both the academic and social point of view. By applying the most advanced information technologies, Frontiers is catapulting scholarly publishing into a new generation. What are Frontiers Research Topics? Frontiers Research Topics are very popular trademarks of the Frontiers Journals Series: they are collections of at least ten articles, all centered on a particular subject.

show abstract

DNA transfer through nonintimate social contact

Cited by 24 publications

References 6 publications

A review of trace “Touch DNA” deposits: Variability factors and an exploration of cellular composition

A review of trace “Touch DNA” deposits: Variability factors and an exploration of cellular composition

Evaluation of Forensic DNA Traces When Propositions of Interest Relate to Activities: Analysis and Discussion of Recurrent Concerns

The Dialogue Between Forensic Scientists, Statisticians and Lawyers about Complex Scientific Issues for Court

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About