Sharing data on DNA transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery: Arguments for harmonization and standardization

Kokshoorn, Bas; Aarts, Lambertus H. J.; Ansell, Ricky; Connolly, E. Sander; Drotz, Weine; Kloosterman, A.; McKenna, Louise; Szkuta, Bianca; Oorschot, Roland A.H. van

doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.09.006

Cited by 39 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…'Background DNA' can have different meanings [42,[70][71][72][73]: a) The DNA present on the surface prior to the deposit of interest being placed on the surface during the action of interest; b) The DNA of sources present within a sample other than the person of interest (POI); c) The DNA present within the sample derived from unknown individuals. Meanings 'b' and 'c' of background DNA may be inclusive of DNA from other sources that may have been deposited during the same action of interest, and/or pre-and/or post-action of interest.…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Assessing the impact of interpretation guidelines may be difficult when relevant details of the suites of methodologies applied in relevant studies are not available or clear. It is thus desirable for future publications of DNA-TPPR related data to be inclusive of relevant details of the methods, protocols and thresholds applied to generate the data presented [73].…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is thus a need to consider the potential value of having a quality controlled open access depository of relevant DNA-TPPR information, which can be easily mined for the various purposes that it could accommodate. Furthermore, if deemed of potential value to an array of stakeholders, then consideration of the potential means of establishing such a depository/database/portal is required [73].…”

Section: Accessibility and Sharing Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

DNA transfer in forensic science: A review

Oorschot

Szkuta

Meakin³

et al. 2019

Forensic Science International: Genetics

Self Cite

227

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the variables impacting DNA transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery (DNA-TPPR) has become increasingly relevant in investigations of criminal activities to provide opinion on how the DNA of a person of interest became present within the sample collected. This review considers our current knowledge regarding DNA-TPPR to assist casework investigations of criminal activities. There is a growing amount of information available on DNA-TPPR to inform the relative probabilities of the evidence given alternative scenarios relating to the presence or absence of DNA from a specific person in a collected sample of interest. This information should be used where relevant. However, far more research is still required to better understand the variables impacting DNA-TPPR and to generate more accurate probability estimates of generating particular types of profiles in more casework relevant situations. This review explores means of achieving this. It also notes the need for all those interacting with an item of interest to have an awareness of DNA transfer possibilities post criminal activity, to limit the risk of contamination or loss of DNA. Appropriately trained forensic practitioners are best placed to provide opinion and guidance on the interpretation of profiles at the activity level. However, those requested to provide expert opinion on DNA-related activity level issues are often insufficiently trained to do so. We advocate recognition of DNA activity associated expertise to be distinct from expertise associated with the identification of individuals. This is to be supported by dedicated training, competency testing, authorisation, and regular fit for purpose proficiency testing. The possibilities for experts to report on activity-related issues will increase as our knowledge increases through further research, access to relevant data is enhanced, and tools to assist interpretations are better exploited. Improvement opportunities will be achieved sooner, if more laboratories and agencies accept the need to invest in these aspects as well as the training of practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Accessibility and Sharing Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

DNA transfer in forensic science: A review

Oorschot

Szkuta

Meakin³

et al. 2019

Forensic Science International: Genetics

Self Cite

227

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One such study demonstrated near negligible differences in the range of LRs generated by four laboratories following evaluations given activity level propositions, despite each using a different suite of methodologies (Steensma et al, 2017). Likewise, this was also the case in an exemplar using previously published research data (Kokshoorn et al, 2018). With both studies only representing a portion of the combination of different methods, from sample recovery through to DNA profile interpretation, documented in the literature, further research on their impact is needed.…”

Section: Types Of Data Available For Usementioning

confidence: 95%

Evaluating forensic DNA evidence: Connecting the dots

Meakin

Kokshoorn

Oorschot

et al. 2020

WIREs Forensic Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technological developments within the field of forensic genetics have enhanced the sensitivity and specificity of DNA testing tremendously and have broadened the applications of biological evidence in criminal investigations.Evaluation and communication of the evidential findings within criminal cases have not maintained the same pace, which has largely stemmed from a failure to adopt a standardized approach within and across the various fields of forensic science. Within forensic biology, this has led to unjustified opinions on the weight of the evidence and occurrences of the association fallacy, when the weight of evidence given propositions at one level of the hierarchy of propositions is inappropriately transposed to a higher level. We further define the association fallacy to include the terms, "source level fallacy" and "activity level fallacy," to enable the forensic science community to better identify and address issues in biological evidence evaluation. It is important to understand these concepts and their causes, and in doing so, identify potential avenues to avoid these fallacies in forensic science casework. These avenues include training and education of forensic and legal professionals, as well as research into transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery (TPPR) of DNA and biological evidence in general.

show abstract

“…As with other types of trace evidence, activity level interpretation of the finding of DNA is required for crime reconstruction and needs consideration of TPPR, increased research to generate the required data from empirical studies, and a database to facilitate sharing of these data (Kokshoorn et al, 2018;van Oorschot et al, 2019). Furthermore, such interpretation of DNA requires recognition as a distinct area of expertise from that associated with subsource and source level interpretation (van Oorschot et al, 2019), and further research and discussion to establish how best to use DNA data (e.g., quantities and/or profile information) to inform such interpretation.…”

Section: Value and Challenges Within Forensic Caseworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crime reconstruction and the role of trace materials from crime scene to court

Morgan

Meakin

French

et al. 2019

WIREs Forensic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crime reconstruction takes place in a complex ecosystem and needs to be responsive to the context of each case. For accurate, reproducible and transparent crime reconstructions to take place, a holistic approach is needed that considers the different stakeholders, different types of trace material, integral human decision-making and interconnected nature of the forensic science process. For robust reconstruction, there needs to be a consideration of both the distinctive types of trace material that can contribute to the reconstruction, and an understanding of the interplay of human decision-making within reconstruction approaches. In addition, it is also necessary to consider source attribution of a trace material in addition to the activities that led to the generation, identification, transfer, and persistence of the trace. This requires explicit and tacit forms of knowledge, and an incorporation of the inherent uncertainty and risk in the reconstruction approach. The communication of conclusions reached in a crime reconstruction that address what the evidence means is also an important consideration given the different requirements of intelligence and evidence. Therefore, undertaking a crime reconstruction within a holistic framework that seeks to incorporate the complexity of the forensic science ecosystem is valuable for achieving a problem solving approach that offers reproducible, transparent reconstructions with a clear articulation of risk and uncertainty that can be of value to investigators and the courts.

show abstract

Sharing data on DNA transfer, persistence, prevalence and recovery: Arguments for harmonization and standardization

Cited by 39 publications

References 40 publications

DNA transfer in forensic science: A review

DNA transfer in forensic science: A review

Evaluating forensic DNA evidence: Connecting the dots

Crime reconstruction and the role of trace materials from crime scene to court

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About