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 ,Revised 3 September 2007 ,Accepted 9 October 2007.

References 

  1. Gill P, Whitaker JP, Flaxman C, Brown N, Buckleton J. An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA. Forensic Sci. Int. 2000;112:17–40
  2. Buckleton J, Triggs C. Is the 2p rule always conservative?. Forensic Sci. Int. 2006;159:206–209
  3. Tippett CF, Emerson VJ, Fereday MJ, Lawton F, Richardson A, Jones LT, et al. The evidential value of the comparison of paint flakes from sources other than vehicles. J. Forensic Sci. Soc. 1968;8:61–65
  4. Evett IW, Weir BS. Interpreting DNA Evidence. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer; 1998;
  5. Buckleton J, Triggs CM, Walsh SJ. Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2005;
  6. Gill P, Kirkham A, Curran J. LoComatioN: a software tool for the analysis of low copy number DNA profiles. Forensic Sci. Int. 2006;166:128–138
  7. Gill P, Sparkes R, Kimpton C. Development of guidelines to designate alleles using an STR multiplex system. Forensic Sci. Int. 1997;89:185–197
  8. Whitaker JP, Cotton EA, Gill P. A comparison of the characteristics of profiles produced with the AMPFlSTR SGM Plus multiplex system for both standard and low copy number (LCN) STR DNA analysis. Forensic Sci. Int. 2001;123:215–223
  9. NRC . NRC II: The evaluation of forensic DNA evidence. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1996;
  10. Robertson B, Vignaux GA. Interpreting Evidence: Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 1995;
  11. Robertson BW, Vignaux GA. DNA evidence: wrong answers or wrong questions. Genetica. 1995;96:145–152
  12. Curran JM, Gill P, Bill MR. Interpretation of repeat measurement DNA evidence allowing for multiple contributors and population substructure. Forensic Sci. Int. 2005;148:47–53
  13. Evett IW. Interpretation of evidence. Int. Crim. Police Rev. 1993;444:12–17
  14. Evett IW, Gill PD, Scranage JK, Weir BS. Establishing the robustness of short-tandem-repeat statistics for forensic applications. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 1996;58:398–407
  15. Evett IW, Buckleton JS. Statistical analysis of STR data. In:  Carracedo A,  Brinkmann B,  Bär W editor. Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1996;p. 79–86
  16. Neumann C, Champod C, Puch-Solis R, Egli N, Anthonioz A, Bromage-Griffiths A. Computation of likelihood ratios in fingerprint identification for configurations of any number of minutiae. J. Forensic Sci. 2007;52:54–64
  17. Neumann C, Champod C, Puch-Solis R, Egli N, Anthonioz A, Meuwly D, et al. Computation of likelihood ratios in fingerprint identification for configurations of three minutiae. J. Forensic Sci. 2006;51:1255–1266
  18. Buckleton JS, Curran JM, Gill P. Towards understanding the effect of uncertainty in the number of contributors to DNA stains. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2007;1:20–28
  19. Gill P, Kirkham A. Development of a simulation model to assess the impact of contamination in casework using STRs. J. Forensic Sci. 2004;49:485–491
  20. Gill P, Sparkes R, Buckleton JS. Interpretation of simple mixtures when artefacts such as stutters are present—with special reference to multiplex STRs used by the forensic science service. Forensic Sci. Int. 1998;95:213–224
  21. Triggs CM, Curran JM. The sensitivity of the Bayesian HPD method to the choice of prior. Sci. Justice. 2006;46:169–178
  22. Gill P, Sparkes R, Pinchin R, TM C, Whittaker JP, Buckleton J. Interpreting simple STR mixtures using allele peak area. Forensic Sci. Int. 1998;91:41–53
  23. Bill M, Gill P, Curran JM, Clayton T, Pinchin R, Healy M, et al. PENDULUM—a guideline-based approach to the interpretation of STR mixtures. Forensic Sci. Int. 2005;148:181–189
  24. Bieber FR, Brenner CH, Lazer D. Human genetics. Finding criminals through DNA of their relatives. Science. 2006;312:1315–1316

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

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution