So much for DNA fingerprinting...

[purplecthulhu]

The NYT is reporting the demonstration that DNA fingerprinting evidence can now be faked. A small sample of someone's DNA can be amplified and used to fake a crime scene. Worse still, a DNA profile alone can also be used to produce fake DNA evidence

Comments

[dr_bob]

First, I'd argue that anyone with proper training in laboratory sterile techniques and access to a biology lab could do this, rather than any undergrad. Biology undergrads could understand some of the principles (and probably misunderstand others, thereby screwing up) but judging by this years' MSc students, there's no way they could do it without training

[kriste]

All that needs to happen though is a mixup in the samples (oops, I took the ovine sample instead of the bovine ...) and you've been convicted of rape or maybe exterminated for being a mutant. And then there's malicious tampering.

Sterile lab techniques aren't difficult - even if undergraduates don't seem to be able to manage them reliably.

and for a few thousand pounds ...
your very own ebay pcr

by the time they've sorted it all out and figure you are innocent, I expect you've spent a fair bit of time away, as well as the stress. Personally, I'd not like to run the risk.

[purplecthulhu]

Quite - it's the false positives that really bugger people up, and if the system is as reliant on DNA identification as the magic bullet as the Home Office seems to want to be, then there'll be a lot of unhappy innocent victims out there.

I feel that the Scottish system for confessions should be applied to DNA evidence as well - a confession is only accepted if corroborated by other evidence. The English legal system, and the Home Office have always resisted this.