Abstract

I read with alarm the discussion by Thompson et al., of the significance of DNA evidence in forensic casework. I was struck by the authors' description of a 1995 case in the jurisdiction in which I practice law. The authors state: "In 1995, Cellmark Diagnostics admitted that a similar sample-switch error had caused it to report, incorrectly, that a rape defendant's DNA profile matched DNA found in vaginal aspirate from a rape victim."

Author Information

Clarke, GW
, San Diego, California
Pages: 1
Price: $25.00
Related
Reprints and Permissions
Reprints and copyright permissions can be requested through the
Copyright Clearance Center
Details
Stock #: JFS2003059
ISSN: 0022-1198
DOI: 10.1520/JFS2003059