Requirements:
APA format
APA supported
we need to agree and or disagree and why
the paragraph needs to be minimum of 4 sentences.

POST 1 - Brittany

One of the main issues with DNA fingerprinting is that the DNA sample can be ruined easily. Small pieces of genetic trach can render the samples useless. DNA fingerprinting requires a large amount of DNA for resting but with the method of PCR a smaller portion of DNA can be used. PCR can use very small samples and produce results much faster, but that means the sample is more likely to be contaminated. Following the correct lab procedures while handling the evidence can reduce the rate of contamination as well as ensuring workspace is clean as well as the person working with the sample has gloved hands.

There are three possible sources of contamination when using the testing method PCR. Contamination of the sample can occur from genomic DNA that is from the environment, contamination from other samples during the preparation and contamination from a sample that was tested previously with PCR. Contamination that deals with the environment is dependent on the way the sample was collected at the crime scene as well as how it was stored later in the process. This type of contamination can be monitored by substrate controls. The other two sources of contamination can be potentially eliminated by following lad procedures and working in designated areas.

An example of a case that dealt with contamination was a case in Tacoma Washington. The case dealt with child rape and the forensic scientist who was on the case “failed to change gloves between handling evidence in two cases. He notices contamination in chemical solution.” (2004). The defendant in the case was convicted of child rape and was sent to prison based on the DNA evidence presented at the trial. Another example of a case that dealt with contamination of samples was a case in Spokane Washington. The case dealt with child rape again and the forensic scientist who was on the case “contaminated one of four vaginal swabs with semen from a positive control sample corrected report issued almost two years later in March 2004. Yakima prosecutors offered plea deal during the trial, with defendant pleading guilty to two gross misdemeanors.” (2004). The forensic scientist Turpin’s mistake was a factor in the trial according to the defense.

When I am done with college I would like to work in the laboratory that deals with the testing of evidence for cases, but reading these examples of court cases does scare me a bit. I’m sure that if the lab procedures are followed like they should be then the contamination of a sample would be significantly reduce but there is still the possibility of contamination in the lab. I would hate if I was the one working on a case that dealt with DNA evidence and the evidence was somehow contaminated and an innocent person was convicted of the crime or a guilty person was let go because of the labs mistake. It is something that worries me that something so small can have so much impact on a case as well as the decision of the case. It makes me think about how many cases dealt with contamination of evidence and how many cases never found out the evidence was contaminated. DNA evidence is significant to modern cases because forensic evidence if collected processed and teste properly is solid proof that can connect a person to a crime scene. Unlike witnesses, forensic evidence proves without a doubt that something occurred or someone was at the crime scene which can lead to a confession or even an exoneration of an individual. DNA testing has become the new go to evidence to determine innocence or guilt of a crime.

POST 2 - Katrina

Several things should be possible to maintain a strategic distance from sullying with regards to DNA proof. The principal thing that should be possible is to secure the wrongdoing scene. Just permit vital work force into the territory. There ought to be no smoking eating and drinking. Use expendable instruments when conceivable to gather DNA proof, if this isn't possible utilize legitimately sanitized apparatuses. Additionally guarantee that the proof is appropriately bundled (National Institute of Justice, 1999).

Several things should be possible to stay away from pollution in terms of DNA evidence. The principal thing that should be possible is to secure the crime scene. Just permit key staff into the range. There ought to be no smoking eating and drinking. Use expendable apparatuses when conceivable to gather DNA evidence, if this isn't possible utilize appropriately cleaned devices. Additionally guarantee that the evidence is legitimately bundled (National Institute of Justice, 1999).

It is extremely import that the crime scene is a controlled domain. The crime scene not being controlled is the best reason for sullying. On the off chance that superfluous faculty are permitted into the crimes scene there is an extraordinary possibility of pollution. The individuals who are permitted into the crime scene ought to lead fitting evidence gathering techniques and take insurances not to defile evidence (Schiro, 2015).

In 2013 in San Jose was dropped against Lurid Monte because of DNA evidence defilement. This was not by any means the only cases in which DNA evidence was not permitted it court after a lab specialist was charged in a lab outrage. Bellamy was discharged from jail in the wake of serving 35 years in jail after it was resolved that the lab couldn't focus from which bit of dress the evidence originated from.

Requirements: APA format APA supported we need to agree and or...