Charlotte Cagliostro

Forensics

C Odd / Current Event 12

12/13/19

Murphy, Heather. “The Case of a Man With Two Sets of DNA Raises More Questions.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 12 Dec. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/12/12/science/chimera-bone-marrow-dna-semen.html. 

In her New York Times article, “The Case of a Man With Two Sets of DNA Raises More Questions,” Heather Murphy explains the mysterious story of Chris Long. That man received a bone marrow transplant, and soon after, scientists discovered that his semen had his donor’s DNA. This is a groundbreaking case, and scientists do not have many answers. They suspect that with future research, a conclusion can be made regarding why it is exactly that Chris’s semen no longer expresses his genetic makeup. Scientists hypothesize that white blood cells could be a factor; “The two most common types of cells in semen are sperm cells and white blood cells… Because he had a vasectomy, all that’s left is the white cells.” The author explains that since Chris had a vasectomy, a procedure that prevents sperm from reaching semen, his semen is largely composed of white blood cells, which are composed of the donor’s DNA. In the coming months, new studies and tests will be performed to pinpoint the exact root of this anomaly. 

While Chris Long is the first person to have this type of condition, he will not be the last. Other individuals with vasectomies and bone marrow transplants could present their donor’s genetic makeup in their semen. It is important to note that Chris, along with others who could be affected, will not be able to pass on their donor’s DNA through their offspring, since the foreign genetics are isolated to the white blood cells. It is incredibly interesting to think about the ramifications of this discovery and the research it has inspired.

Heather Murphy wrote a fantastic article explaining Chris’s story. She articulated her ideas in a very sophisticated yet accessible manner that engages her readers. In her article, she summarized the main ideas associated with this case and spoke to the subject’s relevance, which I appreciated. I do wish that she had elaborated on some of her ideas, however, but overall, I thoroughly enjoyed reading her piece.

Eve Balseiro

12/11/2019

Shanahan, Ed. “A Father and Son, Brutally Murdered. 32 Years Later, an Arrest.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 10 Dec. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/12/10/nyregion/dna-cold-case-connecticut.html.

My current event article, “A Father and Son, Brutally Murdered. 32 Years Later, an Arrest” by Ed Shanahan, covers a recently solved double homicide from 1987 in Hamden, Connecticut. Father and son Fred and Greg Harris had been bound and stabbed in their home on a night in late August. Though confessed to in 1996 by Willie McFarland, the police still did not have enough evidence to charge him. 32 years later, thanks to advancements in forensic science, that all changed. The state’s crime lab reported that the results of testing on a glove confirmed McFarland’s confession. 

Though this crime was commited 32 years ago, it remains very revelant to today’s society. “This year alone, DNA evidence has led to arrests in more than a half-dozen unsolved murders going back 20 years or more, including in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Colorado, and California”. Recently advancements in forensic science has lead to make unsolved murders being solved. Most famously, the Golden State Killer was caught in 2018 after committing 13 murders, 50 rapes, and 120 burglaries at least. This shows that even though someone may not initially get caught, forensic science can still catch you 30+ years later.

Though this article maintained a formal tone and had a cohesive, well-written summary, I feel there is definitely room for improvement. More detail would have brough this article to the next level. Especially surrounding the recently solved cases. I felt that that section was swept over very quickly without providing many details. Also, I found it peculiar that the author chose not to mention the names of the victim’s until halfway through the piece. 

Randle, Aaron. “Why the N.Y.P.D.'s DNA Database Has Some People Worried.” The New York Times,The New York Times, 16 Aug. 2019, 

www.nytimes.com/2019/08/16/nyregion/newyorktoday/nypd-dna-database.html#commentsContainer.

The New York Times offered an interesting article

titled “Why the N.Y.P.D.’s DNA Database Has Some 

People Worried”. It explains public concerns with 

using genetic databases to store people’s DNA without

 consent. The article states that “There are 82,473 genetic 

profiles in the city’s database, known as the Local DNA Index

System” which, police say, are highly effective. They aid

in the identification of criminals and resolving crimes, but many

feel that the system is violating privacy rights. After receiving a vast

amount of criticism, the police countered by explaining that they aren't

 indiscriminately collecting peoples DNA. They mentioned how “DNA

had helped solve 270 cases, including sexual assaults and homicides”, 

proving that the database is being used effectively. 

This article is pertinent to daily crimes ranging from minor to serious. 

While many people feel their privacy is being attacked, others argued that if

 everyone had data on file, it wouldn't be discriminatory. This piece is shining 

a light on the voice of the public and their opinions on “forensic/scientific topics” 

that deal with their personal lives. 

This article was very well written and concise. I enjoyed the fact that the

 author explained both perspectives of the situation and provided great evidence 

to back up each point. I, however, would have liked to see additional mention of

 crimes where the DNA system helped/did not help the case in order to get a better

 understanding of its operation.

Finn Seibold

Forensic Science 

December 13th, 2019

Current Event 11

Indianapolis School of Science. “Forensics: New Tool Predicts Eye, Hair and Skin Color from a DNA Sample of an Unidentified Individual.” ScienceDaily, ScienceDaily, 14 May 2018, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180514083926.htm

    Thanks to the hard work of an international team of scientists working from the School of Science at IUPUI and Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam in the Netherlands, a revolutionary new forensic tool related to DNA has been developed. This new tool, called the HIrisPlex-S DNA test system, involves the inputting of relevant genetic data by law enforcement in order for the web based system to predict pigmentations for hair, eye and skin color of the suspect in question. Often, especially for the skin color, the system will be able to categorize the suspects trait into several predetermined categories (EX for skin: Very Pale, Pale, Intermediate, Dark, Very Dark). Although in the past other tools have existed that have allowed for the simple determination of eye and hair color, determining skin color has been more difficult, yet has nonetheless been accomplished. 

    There are various factors which suggest that this is an important breakthrough, especially in the world of forensic science. Often, when genetic material is found at a crime scene, it is only really of use to investigators if they have something to compare it to. While this is still very effective, it is limited to a pool of suspect’s whose entic information is known in some law enforcement database. The HIrisPlex-S DNA test system would allow investigators to make determinations from the genetic material they find even if they do not have a reference to compare it to, making a significantly more universally applicable tool for forensic investigation. Another reason why this tool in particular is helpful is because of the specific qualities it can describe. Most eyewitnesses will remember, gender, skin, eye and hair color as the most prominent physical characteristic of a person, so this tool could also be very useful for law enforcement to verify eyewitness accounts of crimes. 

    While the article was certainly well written in a sophisticated manner that effectively conveyed the information of the subject in question, there are a few things that they could have improved. Firstly, I felt that the authors could have elaborated on the specific challenges associated with each specific trait determination. For example, I was left wondering whether there is some particular genetic reason why skin color is harder to determine from a DNA sample. Another thing I thought the author could have added was a more detailed background discussion on how DNA evidence is commonly used today in order to then contrast this with the potentially revolutionary changes the HIrisPlex-S DNA test system could bring. 

Madison Meehan

12/4/19

Forensics D Odd

Current Event 10

Hill, Kashmir. “Imagine Being on Trial. With Exonerating Evidence Trapped on Your Phone.” 

New York Times, 22 Nov. 2019, 

www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/business/law-enforcement-public-defender-technology-ga

p.html.

This article is about the evidence brought to a trial after a woman accused her ex of confronting her on the street with a gun. The fight was said to be over who would get possession of their apartment. The man already had a protective order placed on him and the police arrested him and charged him with assault. John, her ex, claimed he was at work and couldn’t have been there at that time, pleading innocent. In order to dig up more information, technology has to be searched. This is where the forensic technology comes in. Digital forensics has started to play a role in many more cases due to the increased use of technology. For this case, they used the Touch2 which is a universal forensic extraction device. This device “is able to pull data from almost any gadget and preserve it in a format that courts will accept as evidence”. This evidence from John’s phone qualified that he was in fact 5 miles away from the scene when it was said to have happened. 

I learned a lot about a different field of forensics in this article that I didn’t know had such a big impact on so many cases. Forensic technology had advanced so much over the past years and is continuously being worked on. There are so many forensic devices on the market that will help in investigations worldwide. With the progression of technology today, forensic technology will be extremely beneficial. As Hill said in the article, “Forensics experts have helped law enforcement acquire even the most daunting digital evidence.”

This article was extremely interesting as it included an intense trial in which forensics was used. The author did a great job including the topic of forensic technology in the article and made sure to thoroughly explain it. However, I thought he could have explained the ending of the trial in more detail as the conclusion was a little vague. Overall, I learned about a new field of forensics from this well written article and hope to learn more about it in upcoming current events. 

Angie Pearson
Forensics D Odd
Dec 4, 2019

Harvard University. "Detecting tiny amounts of fentanyl." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 12 November 2019. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/11/191112160223.htm>.

Researchers in the lab of George Whitesides, have designed a new device that can identify smaller concentrations of drug powders than any other device. It is portable, cost-effective, and simple to use. This technology can provide law enforcement officers and forensic chemists a quick and accurate way to identify unknown, potentially dangerous, substances, such as fentanyl which killed more than 28,000 individuals in the United States in 2017.
Christoffer Abrahamsson and Michael Fink describe how their device, called Magneto-Archimedes Levitation (or MagLev), separates substances based on density. "The thermos-sized MagLev has two brick-like magnets above and below a retractable, clear container. Inside, a magnetic gasoline-like solution made from something called a gadolinium chelate complex pushes foreign objects -- bubbles, sugar, or heroin -- into layers of neat, identifiable clouds." In my opinion, This is much more trust-worthy than quick-test options like immunoassays and colorimetric tests that change color depending on the chemical, due to the unreliability of if they pick up more than one substance, the colors can blend, sometimes making the test unreliable. The MagLev device has can separate seven different substances at a time, which is extremely useful for forensic chemists and law enforcement because street drugs usually mixtures of several different drugs. Usually, when new drugs are analyzed in a forensic laboratory, it can take more than a day to identify the chemicals. But with MagLev, the compounds can be separated in 5 to 25 minutes.
This article was well written and emphasized the importance of this new technology. The author had several different small paragraphs, which separated ideas about the device itself as well as the benefits it can provide, giving the article a good flow. They also talked about the dangers of street drugs and how this device can help, which gave this new device an extremely appealing look.

Current Event Review #10

Inès Saad Munchenbach

Forensics (C Odd)

December 4, 2019

Hudgins, Victoria. “Still Scarce, Digital Forensics Crawls Into Public Defenders' Offices.” Legaltech News,
Law.Com, 4 Dec. 2019,
www.law.com/legaltechnews/2019/12/04/still-scarce-digital-forensics-crawls-into-public-defenders-offices/?slreturn=20191104175441. 

As the use of technology and social media becomes increasingly rampant, Big Law corporations and private
attorneys have taken social media and online data repositories as one of their largest evidence banks. Oftentimes,
the access they have to digital forensics software can completely crush and outcompete local public defenders,
who are usually underfunded. Technology and social media has exploded over the course of the last few decades:
school shooters post warnings online, terrorists document their crimes on livestream services, and criminals
frequently use text messages and location trackers, leaving evidence behind. The availability of digital forensics
resources is indispensable, and can lead to major discoveries and verdicts. However, public attorneys are notoriously
underfunded — even if they were given access to digital forensics software, it would be nearly impossible for them
to be able to utilize it on their own, and there is usually not enough money for public defenders to be able to hire
external experts.

This article is extremely pertinent to our current criminal justice system, which is already inherently biased against
racial minorities and the lower class. The fact that Big Law and, essentially, white, upper-class criminal clientele has
such greater access to a "gold mine" for forensic evidence, is an injustice in itself. Those who utilize public defenders
usually do it because they cannot afford a private lawyer: depriving those who need public aid the most of evidence
that could further their case is beyond bias: it is class discrimination. Additionally, considering that most of those
who need public defense are people of color, it is shameful that they would be so overtly discriminated against in
the criminal justice system. The system has been flawed for a long time, and sadly, it seems as though it is just
getting worse.

Frankly, there was little to criticize in Hudgins' article. It provided quotes from experts and sources of facts states.
Although the article was fairly strong in its explanation of the issue, it did offer a somewhat linear analysis of the
problem in the grand scheme of society. The consequence of this issue is much greater than we anticipate it to be,
but Hudgins chose to report on a limited scope.

Sophia Prior 

Forensics 

Mr. Ippolito 

December 4, 2019 

Wee, Sui-lee, and Paul Mozur. “China Uses DNA to Map Faces, With Help From the West.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 3 Dec. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/12/03/business/china-dna-uighurs-xinjiang.html.

Using DNA in order to form faces digitally

After reading an article by the New York Times by Sui Lee Wee and Paul Mozur called “China Uses DNA to Map Faces, With Help From the West”, it discusses blood samples found from hundreds of ethnic Uighurs and how they will use the DNA to create an image of a person’s face. This process of technology is used in many countries around the world including the United Staes. In this process, they are able to develop rough drafts of what an individual may look like in order to narrow down a specific suspect list. The process is called DNA phenotyping and they can analyze the race, eye color, and ancestry of the person. In Tumxux China their authorities are using this technique they stated, “In Tumxuk, at least, there is a partial answer: Chinese scientists are trying to find a way to use a DNA sample to create an image of a person’s face”(p.1). 

However helpful this process may be, there is some controversy about how the DNA was taken because a lot of the blood was taken without consent. In Xinjiang, the people have no choice against their government taking their blood under a mandatory health check program. In addition, the people who are in Tumxux also do not have a lot of choice in their blood being taken. In addition, phenotyping could raise ethical issues because the information that is discovered in this process is quite broad and many different people or ethnic groups can look like the suspect. The detention camps these people have been taken too in China are described as prisonlike conditions. However, this process has been used to catch murder victims. 

This article was written well with a good amount of information on the pros and cons of DNA phenotyping. The authors broke up their article in different sections such as mapping faces, the scientific community, and the question of consent. Therefore, this was very helpful in order to make the article easier to follow. They also used statics to back up their claims and their article was very intriguing. 

Molly Palma's review of "Modern forensics solves Stone Age murder mystery after 33,000 years" by Ruby Prosser Scully

Molly Palma

Mr. Ippolito 

Current Event #10 

Due December 5th 

Scully, Ruby Prosser. “Modern Forensics Solves Stone Age Murder Mystery after 33,000 Years.”

New Scientist, 3 July 2019,

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2208455-modern-forensics-solves-stone-age-mur

er-mystery-after-33000-years/

33,000 years ago, a Cioclovina man died from an unknown cause. The skull has been preserved ever since 1941 when miners were searching for phosphate in Romanian caves and came across it. There have been several theories about the cause of death that have been recently ruled out with the application of ‘modern forensic techniques’. Elena Kranioti at the University of Crete determined that the death was no accident. This is because there were depressed fractures that were shown on the CT scan, which are usually indicative of blunt force. In addition, the death would not have been caused by falling rock debris since the “fragments of bone flecked backwards into the skull.” It had to have been face-to-face conflict according to Kranioti and her colleagues. 

Scully’s article is relevant for a multitude of reasons. First, it talks about the evolution of forensic science. In 1941 forensic scientists were unable to determine the cause of death just by having the skull. Usually forensic scientists looked at the body to evaluate the sequence of events, which they didn’t have from a victim from 3300 decades ago ago. Now, there doesn’t have to be a body to make conclusions, because there are generalizations that are internalized. In this, a CT scan and group of professionals were able to agree on what likely happened. This article is important not just to forensic science, but to history. Scully summarizes Stanley Serafin at the University of New South Wales, identifying new questions asked “about whether this violence was committed by someone of the same species, or whether it was perhaps caused by these modern humans migrating into areas where Neanderthals may have still lived.” Now historians are going to be tempted to dig up more information regarding this predicament. Maybe we will be able to piece together information that can tell the untold story of the past.

It was great how Scully organized her article. She started with a summary providing context about time regarding the victim’s death and when the skull was found, the confusion created about what happened to the victim, and the professionals looking into it. She had subtopics labelled ‘Bat Attack’, ‘Face-to-face’, and ‘Lethal Injuries’ which she neatly laid out her information. This not only kept the reader engaged but made it easier for them to understand the case especially if they are not forensic scientists. I did not like how short the paragraphs were for ‘Bat Attack’ and ‘Face-to-face’. The last paragraph under ‘Lethal Injuries’ had quotes and ideas taken from a new forensic scientist which kept a tone of professionalism in it. In order to keep that tone throughout, Scully should cite more experts or explain the generalized techniques that those experts use more. Otherwise the article was concise, intriguing, and relevant.

Ruby Howell Current Event #9

Ruby Howell 

Forensics Current Event #9

Mr. Ippilitto 

November 24th, 2019

O’Brien, Stephen. “DNA Evidence Used to Protect the Rhinoceros from Extinction.” 

ScienceDaily, ScienceDaily, 8 Jan. 2018, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180108105929.htm.

This article discusses how research done at Nova Southeastern University has led to the creation of a genetic database that has the power to help solve cases regarding the accusation of poaching, specifically of rhinoceros. Doctor Stephen O'brien, a scientist at Nova Southeastern, has intelligently used outside research to better support their creation, as he collaborated with University of Pretoria's Veterinary Genetics Laboratory for their report on the illegal killing of rhinoceros in Africa, to later sell to southeast Asia markets. As the numbers of rhinoceros being poached just continues to grow, so does the profit, and its consequences were highly unknown, until the new study titled Robust forensic matching of confiscated horns to individual poached African rhinoceros. This study was conducted through the results of a “database of individual rhinos' composite short-term repeat-STR (also called microsatellite) genotypes so they could match confiscated tissue-DNA to real time crime scenes for prosecution” (Obrien, 2019). Through the collection of blood stained evidence and recovered horns, this study has connected multiple people to be convicted of poaching the endangered species, and will hopefully implement further investigations regarding the illegal poaching of other species.

Doctor O'brien hopes that this database will influence the poaching market enough to make the consequences and risks just not worth it for smugglers. This Article provided incredible studies and information regarding not only forensic science, but also discussed problems regarding Animal Rights and protections throughout the world. The collection of a multitude of data on rhinoceros to create the database and its findings are just one example of the power of Forensic science. 

Your DNA Profile Is Private? A Florida Judge Just Said Otherwise

Ellie Dessart

Mr. Ippolito

Forensics C Odd

13 December 2019

Current Event 11

Citation:

Hill, Kashmir, and Heather Murphy. “Your DNA Profile Is Private? A Florida Judge Just Said

Otherwise.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 5 Nov. 2019,

www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/business/dna-database-search-

warrant.html. 

Hill and Murphy’s article discusses the controversy over whether or not law enforcement should have access to private DNA profiles. In the past, sites such as Ancenstry.com, 23andMe, and GEDmatch have “long pledged to keep their users’ genetic information private,” but recently, for the first time, a Florida judge granted an investigator a warrant to search GEDmatch’s full database of 1.2 million users. DNA policy experts anticipate a surge in similar warrant requests in the near future as a result of this court decision, which would jeopardize people’s genetic privacy. This could affect not only users of these sites, but also those who have never taken a DNA test before, since “the emerging forensic technique makes it possible to identify a DNA profile through distant family relationships” already entered in the database. Before GEDmatch changed its policy (police previously had access to search the site without a warrant), in April 2018, California law enforcement found a match for the man they believed to be the infamous Golden State Killer. Since then, investigators have turned to genetic genealogy to identify suspects and criminals. Unfortunately, while accessing genealogy sites could solve “hundreds and hundreds of cases solved overnight,” police must be wary of privacy concerns as the debate continues.

This article delves into the complex relationship between science and society. As technology advances and forensic scientists adopt new techniques and methods, potential breakthroughs arise, and while that alone should be celebrated (yay science!), new issues, such as privacy concerns, often emerge. The controversy described in the article is complicated because we, as humans, value both privacy and justice. Forensic science helps law enforcement convict criminals and protect the people, but if it requires unwanted database searches, doesn’t that infringe on the very protection it was supposed to ensure? What contributions to science are we obligated to make, if any? Such questions can only be answered with time and future developments. 

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the article. Firstly, the piece was concise and simple to follow, as opposed to past lengthy New York Times posts I’ve read. The authors structured it well by first giving some context, then detailing the Florida court ruling, and finishing with a discussion of the issue’s prevalence in recent years since the Golden State Killer arrest. Additionally, the article compelled me to consider the rights I most value and question the extent to which I’m willing to give them up. However, the authors fell short on some minor aspects. Firstly, they failed to define ‘genetic genealogy.’ If they had provided a brief explanation of the term, it would have helped younger readers, like myself, to better understand the subject matter. Secondly, while the article does a nice job focusing on the scientific complexities of the controversy, it could have made some additional, broader connections to society as a whole. For example, I found it particularly interesting how the investigators and genetic profiling companies share the same argument, same goal, but different viewpoints. The police want access to the profiles so they can do their job (protect the people), and the companies want to deny such access so they can do the same (protect the people)! Can the two sides reach a compromise, or is such a clash inevitable? It’s an interesting dynamic, and to create more depth to the article, I’d consider adding some of these observations.