Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume 2, Issue 2 , Pages 91-103, March 2008

Interpretation of complex DNA profiles using empirical models and a method to measure their robustness

  • Peter Gill

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Science Service, Trident Court, 2960 Solihull Parkway, Solihull B37 7YN, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
  • ,
  • James Curran

      Affiliations

    • Department of Statistics, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand
  • ,
  • Cedric Neumann

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Science Service, Trident Court, 2960 Solihull Parkway, Solihull B37 7YN, UK
  • ,
  • Amanda Kirkham

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Science Service, Trident Court, 2960 Solihull Parkway, Solihull B37 7YN, UK
  • ,
  • Tim Clayton

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Science Service, Sandbeck Way, Audby Lane, West Yorkshire LS22 7DN, UK
  • ,
  • Jonathan Whitaker

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Science Service, Sandbeck Way, Audby Lane, West Yorkshire LS22 7DN, UK
  • ,
  • Jim Lambert

      Affiliations

    • Forensic Science Service, Sandbeck Way, Audby Lane, West Yorkshire LS22 7DN, UK

Received 3 May 2007; received in revised form 3 September 2007; accepted 9 October 2007.

Abstract 

A new methodology is presented in order to report complex DNA profiles. We have brought together a number of different theories in order to devise a new protocol to interpret complex cases using likelihood ratios. The calculations are designed to be highly conservative and are widely applicable. We apply a low copy number (LCN) interpretation framework, which includes the probabilities of dropout and contamination, to ‘conventional’ DNA cases. In conventional casework, stutters often compromise calculations when they are observed with the same height as a minor contributor to a mixture. Stutters cannot be distinguished from minor alleles. We compensate by treating them as real alleles and including them in the calculation. By increasing the number of potential contributors to the DNA profile, we can account for the extra alleles that result. We propose that the likelihood ratio is qualified with additional robustness parameters to indicate the probability of misleading evidence in favour of the prosecution, under the assumption that a random man was a contributor instead of the suspect. To do this we apply a new kind of case-specific ‘Tippett’ test. Although the method is complex, we suggest a ‘user-friendly’ way to explain the results to a court. The method is easily extended to carry out ranked likelihood ratio (LR) searches for suspects in national DNA databases.

Keywords: Mixtures, Low copy number, Tippett test, Expert system, LoComatioN, Likelihood ratio

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1872-4973(07)00277-3

doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2007.10.160

Forensic Science International: Genetics
Volume 2, Issue 2 , Pages 91-103, March 2008