« November 2006 | Main | January 2007 »
This will be my last posting for a few days, as I spend the time with my family over Christmas.
I'd like to thank all my readers and fellow bloggers for visiting my weblog and wish you all a very Merry Christmas!
As Tiny Tim says, God bless us everyone!
Modified 12/24/06 3:18pm
Point of View II 
The latest news to come out about the Duke Lacrosse case, since DA Mike Nifong dropped the rape charges, is that the prosecution is continuing with the sexual assault and kidnapping charges against the three Duke Lacrosse players.
It's now being speculated that the sexual assault was committed either by digital penetration or with objects. It's my opinion that either one of these scenarios is improbable.
Accuser's Memory Problems
First of all, it's a fact that real rape victims are traumatized. In this enlightened day and age, I don't think anyone, with a shred of common sense, is going to question that.
It's also been established, through numerous studies, that real rape victims can have some trouble with memory, especially if they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol. That's a given.
However, as we have seen in this case, there has to be a limit somewhere. In this particular case, I don't know which changes more often - the weather or the accuser's story.
It's a huge leap to go from explicitly saying she was penetrated orally, vaginally, and rectally to suddenly not being sure what body part actually penetrated her!
I can't speak to any other FNE's experience. I can only speak about my own. For the most part, my patients usually have pretty good memories.
Of course, they may have some problems with small details now and then, especially if the assault occurred in the dark, they were impaired at the time, or it was a Blitzkrieg type of assault.
They may come back later in the exam with something like, "Oh, I just remembered ...", and that's OK. That's normal. Even remembering small details later to the police is an expected response.
In any traumatic event, most people are often so overwhelmed with emotion that they can't remember all the details all at once.
But we're talking small details here. Not HUGE ones - like, ugh, whether there were 5, 20, or just 3 assailants - or even whether they were actually raped or not. That is a biggie!
Most patients are able to tell me that right up front. And if they're not sure, they tell me so. Right away. They will say something like, " I'm not sure if I was even raped." I've had patients actually express surprise when I've found injuries because they were so unsure.
When they were unsure, it's usually been because they were impaired. Either a date rape drug was used or the patient was bombed.
However (except for the date rape drug victims), I've had patients who were practically falling off the exam table, yet they were still able to tell me whether they had been penetrated or not - with what and by how many assailants.
Quite often, they are still able to identify the alleged perpetrator, either by name or by description.
The majority of my patients are able to be very specific. They can tell me how many assailants. They can tell me if they were known or unknown. They can tell me where they were fondled, kissed, licked, bitten, hit, kicked, etc.
They can tell me me if they were penetrated or not. They can tell me which orifices were penetrated and by what. They can tell me what was said and by whom. We ask many detailed, intimate questions and they are usually able to answer most, if not all of them.
Sexual assault with an object is rare. In fact, I can't recall a single patient of mine who has claimed violation with an object. Most rapes are committed by persons known to the victim, often a date, or a former boyfriend or husband. They usually don't use objects.
If they penetrate, it's usually with the penis. Digital penetration can also occur along with penile penetration. Those injuries are much easier to spot.
Except for the sadistic type, stranger rapists usually don't use objects either. The sadistic type of rapist likes using objects to torture their victims.
The anger retaliatory type will usually use his fists and most of those injuries are going to be on the upper body, such as the face.
Patterned Injuries
Since I've covered patterns of injuries associated with sexual assault in previous posts, I won't go into too much detail here. For those interested, please check the archives.
However, since there is now speculation that digital or object penetration may have occurred, I'd like to focus on expected injuries from that type of assault.
Rape does not always leave genital injuries. It often doesn't. Just because there are no genital injuries, does not mean there was no rape. However, objects used in assaults cause immediate damage.
It's hard to get around that fact. Objects injure skin and tissue. In fact, studies done have shown that significant anal-genital injuries are more often caused by objects, than by penile penetration.
When the outer skin and inner tissue are injured, not only is there an inflammatory response from the body, but that injury is likely to be very visible.
When objects are used, they damage the epithelial lining of the outer skin or inner tissue, and break fragile blood vessels, causing redness, swelling, bruising, lacerations (tears), and abrasions.
Large injuries, like lacerations, can usually be seen with the naked eye. Tiny, micro-abrasions can be seen with the culposcope. Abrasions will ooze and often bleed. They can help determine the type and direction of the object used.
We are talking about extreme force being applied to sensitive tissue with an inanimate object. Even without tears or abrasions, significant redness, bruising, and swelling, of the outer genitalia, can usually be seen.
Inner vaginal injuries rarely occur with rape. Because the vaginal walls are very elastic, the penis doesn't usually cause any injury to the walls or the cervix, situated at the end of the vaginal vault. That is not the case though if digital or object penetration has occurred.
Forceful digital penetration of the vagina can cause scratches and tears to the outer vaginal area, as well as to the inner vaginal walls. Blunt force trauma from an object can cause significant tears, abrasions, redness, swelling, and often noticeable bleeding.
Both can cause injury to the cervix, with visible abrasions being spotted. I have had spontaeous bleeding occur just from gently touching the cervix with a cotton swab. How much easier would it be for blunt force trauma from an object or fingernails to cause cervical injury and bleeding?
Anal penetration by an object ( or even by a penis) can cause a great deal of injury. Not only will we see redness and swelling but the tears and abrasions are usually larger, encircling the rectal opening, very visible to the naked eye. The anal sphincter is often affected too as delayed sphincter closing can be seen.
DNA: With forceful digital penetration, vaginal epithelial cells can be obtained from beneath the fingernails of the suspect. A swabbing of the suspected object (s) can show the female's epithelial cells as well.
Epithelial cells are those cells which are shed from the skin and also which line the orifices, as well as other parts of the body.
Up until now, it wasn't possible to differentiate the types of skin, oral, and vaginal epithelial cells.
Now a process has been developed by a doctoral student, by staining the epithelial cells to determine which part of the body they came from.
Recent research has also shown that now DNA can be extracted from epithelial cells of the suspects hands, transferred to the skin of the victim.
If taken within 48 hours of an alleged assault, penile swabs can show vaginal epithelial cells of the victim on the shaft of the suspect's penis. In fact, it's now recommended that penile swabs be a routine part of every suspect exam within 48 hours.
Did the three defendants, all crammed into that tiny bathroom, by any chance happen to leave a group of shoeprints in the bathroom? Impressions made in dust and dirt can be lifted, using the same techniques as with fingerprints.
DNA can now be retrieved from the insoles of shoes. Shoe prints collected from crime scenes that match a suspects shoe can link a shoe to the crime scene.
A DNA profile from inside the shoe can link a wearer to a shoe thus increasing the evidential value of the forensic evidence.
With the advance in DNA and forensic crime lab technology, the general consensus is that it's almost impossible now not to pick up something left behind at the crime scene by a criminal.
So my question is, where is all the evidence that should have been left behind by the Duke defendants - both on this woman, her clothes, or in the bathroom?
Did the suspect exam include fingernail scrapings to see if there were any vaginal epithelial cells present?
With three guys crammed into a tiny bathroom, were there any shoe print impressions left in the dirt and dust?
Imprints that may have indicated whether an assault had really occurred or not? Were any suspected objects swabbed?
How many photos were taken by the SANE nurse? This is important. The number of shots correspond to the number of injuries noted. The more injuries, the more shots taken.
With a victim being viciously assaulted in a frenzied 5 minute attack, by either digital or object means, I would expect there to be a significant number of injuries and photos.
Injuries other than some diffuse vaginal wall edema. And, once again, how do we get inner injuries without getting outer injuries first? The outer area is going to be the area of most resistance. So I would expect to see the primary injuries there.
Personally, like everything else that has come out about this case, I seriously question this type of hypothesis. Sexual assault by objects, or by digital penetration, tend to leave far more injuries than rape alone.
Modified 12/29/06 9:31 pm
DURHAM, N.C. (Dec. 22) - 
Prosecutors dropped rape charges Friday against three Duke University lacrosse players accused of attacking a stripper at a team party, but the three still face kidnapping and sexual offense charges, a defense attorney said.
Point of View
While I was very pleased to see the rape charges dropped in the Duke laCrosse case, I was shocked that the prosecution has no plans to drop the kidnapping and sexual assault charges.
Their reasoning? While the accuser now claims that she can't be certain that she was penetrated vaginally, she's still claiming she was still penetrated with - something.
However, it appears, at this point anyway, that she can't recall exactly what that something is!
So, let me get this straight. First, the accuser claims she was raped - then not raped, then - oh, yeh, I'm sure this time - raped at a Duke LaCrosse party last Spring.
This was after having left the scene with a second stripper, Kim Roberts, who stated the accusation was a crock, then decided maybe it wasn't a crock, then, finally, oh yeh, it definitely was a crock.
The same Miss Roberts, who later described to the media that the two had left the party "Happy", before the accuser had demanded for Kim to put marks on her.
"Happy". Hmm, what an odd choice of words to use by someone who supposedly had engaged in a hostile verbal exchange with the players, after being accused of cheating them out of their money.
An odd choice of words to be used after the accuser was supposedly viciously assaulted and raped.
Of course, then the accuser had trouble keeping her stories straight, followed by extreme difficulty identifying her assailants.
So much trouble in fact, that the police had to play Spin The Bottle - doing all but pointing a finger and saying, Pick him ... and him ... and him!
Naturally, we can't forget to mention the minor little detail that there was no DNA evidence, of any kind, linking the 3 Duke boys to the alleged rape. There was no transfer of evidence either, as far as I'm aware.
There were no injuries noted by the SANE nurse, only some diffuse inner vaginal wall edema. Considering the amount of multiple DNA, apparently deposited close to the time of the party, and later found by the crime lab, that's not surprising.
And of course a couple of weeks ago, Cousin Jakkie is letting his / her (?) tears fly on TV, while implying that the accuser is pregnant as a result of being raped by the Duke laCrosse players.
So now they would have us believe that, after stating specifically what each defendant supposedly did to her, even making an addendum to her own written statement, by saying that one had ejaculated in her mouth, now ... NOW she can't testify as to that having actually occurred?
However. She's still absolutely certain she was assaulted with something. Not sure with what, Folks, but it was definitely something!
Well, let's give her a few more months, then maybe she'll figure out what that something was!
And then, to further insult our intelligence, we are expected to believe that this latest bout is the result of the accuser's having been so traumatized that she's still having memory problems?
Ooohhhkkkkk. Well, if anyone else really buys into this story ... ugh ... I have this bridge in the desert ... dirt cheap!
Part II coming up later tonight or early tomorrow morning.
Modified 12/27/06
From News & Observer:
John Francis Dye, 48, of Durham, was tracked down in San Francisco De Macoris, D.R., by officials monitoring his e-mails, said Kammie Michael, a Durham police spokeswoman.
He was returned to Miami on Monday and will be extradited to Durham to face six felony counts, Michael said, including second-degree rape, incest and intercourse by a guardian.
Investigators say they think Dye raped the girl for more than a year before his wife caught him in the act Sept. 24, according to a search warrant.
The girl’s mother filed a police report, and police said Dye agreed Sept. 29, through his attorney, to surrender, the warrant said. He was working at Nazareth College in Rochester, N.Y., Michael said.
The next day Dye’s attorney called authorities to say he had been “unhired” and he didn’t know what became of Dye, Michael said.
Immigration records show Dye entered Haiti on Oct. 3, the warrant said.
I am a member of several professional forensic Listservs. I opened up my email this morning and found some interesting posts, by colleague Brent E. Turvey, regarding yesterday's exposure of Dr. Meehan's unprofessional behavior.
Brent Turvey, of Forensic Solutions LLC, is a forensics scientist, criminal profiler, and consultant. He is the author of several forensics books including, Criminal Profiling, Rape Investigation Handbook, Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis, and Crime Reconstruction.
I contacted Brent after reading his posts and requested further comments. He has kindly given me permission to copy his comments to this blog. I thought readers might be interested in seeing what a fellow forensic scientist has to say about Dr. Meehan's behavior.
No matter what field we are in, when colleagues fail to follow standard protocols and / or behave in an unethical or unprofessional manner, it sheds a bad light on all of us. The rest of us have worked too long and hard to create and maintain standards of protocol, to maintain our credibility, and our professionalism.
Those in the forensics field don't appreciate having a profession they take pride in being placed in an unfair light or subjected to scorn and ridicule because a small number choose to forget what professionalism is all about.
Brent Turvey, MS - Forensic Science:
" '... the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination with a
bad
history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what we
present
to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest.' "
-
Crichton, M. (2004) State of Fear, New York: Harper-Collins
Publisher;
p.638
Website: http://www.dnasi.
This lab is
also ASCLD certified. The lab director, Meehan, testified that
he did not
follow his own protocols when failing to reveal this exculpatory
evidence to
the defense. Surely now we can expect an investigation by ASCLD?
Or are they
keeping their heads down on this one?"
Brent E. Turvey, MS - Forensic
Science
Forensic Solutions, LLC
bturvey@forensic-
http://www.forensic
"Kathleen ... State prosecutorial agencies, and those in their employ, have a duty
to
disclose ALL potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense, per Brady
v.
Maryland. What Dr. Meehan has admitted to, under oath, is that he
personally
conspired with prosecutors to conceal actual exculpatory findings
from the
defense. He has further testified that this is a violation of his
own lab's
policies - policies that he would have written. There is no good
reason for
such conduct, and there can be no excuses for such conduct.
Moreover, Dr.
Meehan has admitted to contaminating suspect samples with his
own DNA. In
other words, his house is not in order from a scientific
perspective. A full
investigation by ASCLD, the agency that certifies his
lab, is warranted.
This is no small matter for Dr. Meehan, or the private
forensic lab
industry. Dr. Meehan's conduct in this case has single-handedly
demonstrated
that privately funded and operated forensic labs are just as
easily
influenced by zealous prosecutors as their government lab
counterparts. And
to the question "Have you ever willfully conspired with the
prosecution to
conceal evidence that you to be exculpatory?" - he must
forever answer yes,
while under oath in future cases. For many in the
forensic science
community, this would be a career headshot."
Brent
From Fox News Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong said Friday
that the stripper accusing three Duke University
lacrosse players of raping her is in fact pregnant, but that she become pregnant
at least two weeks after the party where she says she was raped. Nifong, who said the baby is not due until the first week of February,
bluntly contradicted family members of the accuser who earlier said she had
already given birth. The judge in the case on Friday approved a paternity test
for the baby when it is born. Meanwhile, the head of a private DNA laboratory said under oath
during court proceedings in Durham, N.C., Friday that he and Nifong agreed not
to report DNA results favorable to the Duke players charged with rape, reported
the News &
Observer. Point of View I'm glad the news articles are now making it clear that this pregnancy is not as a result of any alleged rape that supposedly occurred. Unlike the Fox News interview with the accuser's cousin. I sat there watching that non-believable interview Jakki gave, just shaking my head at the absurdity of it. Her insinuations were almost as ridiculous as what I read about that Victoria Peterson person declaring that the DNA in the Duke case must have been tampered with at the hospital. No offense, but I think someone needs to educate those two women. Just to make it clear, all patients over 13 who are treated at the sexual assault units have a pregnancy test done and are offered the option of taking the morning after pills. The pills are given two at a time, times two doses 12 hours apart. Our patients are given full information regarding the medication, including any potential side effects (which are rare). Once given the information, patients have to sign a consent form before they're given the medication. Patients are told that the morning after pills are intended to bring on menses within 3-30 days. According to the Fox news, the Duke accuser's due date is around February 1st. Which means her conception date should have been somewhere around May 12th* - not March 13th - NOT nine months to the day. DNA Tampering While I'm on the subject of ridiculous statements, I read about the claim that the DNA had to have been tampered with. I just shook my head and laughed at that one! I'm sure that remark stems back to the OJ case and alleged evidence tampering. People have been making remarks like that ever since his so-called trial. I would strongly suggest people read some in depth accounting of that case, to understand what really happened. Meanwhile, of course, I guess OJ stopped searching for his wife's killer on the golf courses long enough to write his hypothetical confession book. As far as DNA tampering, let me set the record straight. Here's our procedure for evidence collection and packaging: First of all, we collect the evidence. We wear gloves during the whole process, in order to avoid any contamination and we change our gloves in between collecting the different specimens, in order to avoid cross contamination. We collect fingernails scrapings, comb pubic hair, and take swabs from all over the patient's body. Fingernails scrapings are scraped onto a special paper supplied by the crime lab. Pubic hair is combed onto the same type of paper. Each of these papers are folded and taped together to prevent loss of evidence. I always use a stamped label with the patient's name on it. Then they're placed in an outer envelope, and sealed with another stamped label. Each wet swab is collected, numbered, labeled, and placed in the drier to dry. I usually leave them in about an hour to make sure they're good and dry. Once dry, if there is any semen, etc. on the swab, it's on there. We do not cut, alter, or remove evidence material in any way. After drying, each swab is placed in a crime lab envelope and sealed with another stamped label. I use labels on everything, just to make sure there is no question as to the identity of the patient. The clothes are collected separately, with each piece going into a separate paper bag. All of our specimens are placed in paper bags. On the outside of the bags are labels requiring the patient's name, the complaint number, the description of the evidence, and the exact time of collection. Each of the clothing bags are sealed with two special "criminal evidence" tapes. These are special tapes designed to prevent evidence tampering. The first one is a wide white evidence tape - very heavy and extremely sticky. It's pulled off a roller and attached to the top of the bag, sealing it. On top of that tape, goes a second blue "evidence" tape. This is a thin blue tape that's very difficult deal with, as it can break apart in our hands quite easily. We have to be careful while peeling off the backing. Once the backing is off, we attach it over top of the white tape. Once applied to the white tape, the blue tape surprisingly sticks like glue. It's almost impossible to break the seal without actually cutting it. Over top of the blue tape, we use a magic marker to write the date, complaint number, and our names, in a diagonal fashion across the back of the bag. This is done to prevent tampering. If anyone breaks the sealed tape, it's noticeable right away. The blue tape can also be examined under special lighting to detect any signs of tampering if need be. Once I take care of packaging the clothing, I package the swabs from the drier. Each one goes into its own envelope supplied by the crime lab, sealed with a stamped label, signed, and placed into the large, package type envelope also supplied by the crime lab. Once a copy of the medical exam is also put inside, the envelope is first sealed with a red "crime Lab" tape, then sealed again with the blue tape, then signed over top of the blue tape. Another copy of the medical exam is stapled to the front of the envelope. This copy is to go to the Sex Offense Unit. Once I have everything packaged and ready to go, the evidence is ready to be locked up in the evidence collection locker. Then I call security. We both have to witness the placing of the evidence. We both have to sign the log, which is the start of the chain of custody. Once finished, he locks the locker. The detective from the Sex Offense Unit will arrive later to pick the evidence up. He also signs the log, along with the hospital security officer. Then the detective will carry the evidence back to the unit, where it again is locked in a special evidence collection room. That room is supervised by a police officer who maintains the chain of custody while the evidence is in possession of the police. The evidence due to go to the crime lab will be picked up, and signed out by crime lab personnel, or signed out by police and delivered to the lab. Once at the lab, the chain of custody is still maintained. The chain of custody log has to be signed by every single person handling the evidence and has to be maintained clear up until trial. Believe me, every necessary precaution is taken to ensure that integrity of the evidence is maintained. Will I claim that mistakes don't happen? No. Of course they do. People are only human. However, we rarely receive any complaints from the lab regarding either our collection or handling of the evidence. Can contamination happen? Yes, it can. Very easily. One of the rare complaints we did receive from our lab, informed us that (presumably) some of the nurses' DNA was showing up on some blood card evidence. After investigation, it was determined that some of the new nurses probably weren't wearing gloves when packaging the blood DNA card - handling it instead by the ends of the card when folding and sealing it. That caused extra DNA to get on the cards. Everyone was quickly reminded of protocol and there were no more complaints. I hope this helps to explain our collection and packaging procedure and to dispel ideas of DNA tampering. While it's easy to accidentally get extra DNA on a piece of evidence - like lack of using gloves at all times. It's actually very difficult to remove any existing DNA obtained when the swabbings were first done Update 12/17/06: It appears that Jakki is not a woman after all - but a guy in drag??? According to Liestoppers, the family spokesperson's name, who gave the Fox news interview with Greta, is Clyde Young. Can this case get any stranger?
*Modified 12/17/06
Yesterday Fox News released the following statement in a report about the Duke Lacrosse case:
"On April 8, 9 and 10, DNA Security found DNA from multiple males on the panties
and from rape-kit swabs..... and that not only did the DNA not match the three defendants, but that it also did not belong to any of their
lacrosse teammates or anyone else who submitted DNA samples"
In light of that, I'd like to explain a bit about DNA, semen analysis and Y-Chromosome testing.
Basic DNA
There are approximately 60 trillion cells in the human body. Each of these cells carry material called chromosomes. Along those chromosomes are about 100,000 genes. The gene is what carries our heredity.
It determines everything from our eye and hair color to our risk for diseases like heart disease and diabetes. Inside each gene is Deoxyribonucleic Acid - DNA - whose purpose is to carry out a single function.
"DNA is a polymer,a molecule, made up of a large number of atoms, arranged in repeating units called nucleotides." ( Criminalistics, Saferstein, Richard, 2001) Nucleotides are then strung together to form thew DNA strand.
There are four bases attached to the backbone of the DNA strand: adenine, cytosine, guanine, thymine. The DNA strand can go on forever containing millions of bases.
Double Helix
There are actually two DNA strands called a double Helix. They resemble two wires twisted around each other.
The two strands are connected by the four bases, adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine ( A,C,G,T).
The pairing of the bases has to go in a certain pattern. Although there can be different sequences, A must attach to T and G must attach to C:
A........T
G........C
C........G
A........T
T........A
C........G
This is called base pairing. Although this is the way the bases must be paired together, there is no limit on how the bases are sequenced on the strand. So there are limitless possibilities of sequencing.
Each strand of DNA has the same information. It's how the bases are sequenced that determines our unique genetic heredity, including any predisposition to certain diseases.
All the human chromosomes contain about three billion base pairs. This is referred to as the genetic code. An individualized code that is as unique to each of us as our fingerprints, except in the case of identical twins.
DNA Analysis
In order to analyze a person's DNA, it must first be replicated, then run through certain machines and processes. Replicating DNA starts with unwinding the DNA strands in the double helix. This is done in order to make new DNA from existing DNA.
Then the double helix is re-created, pairing the bases A,C,G, and T correctly along the strands. The result is now two identical copies of the DNA strands instead of one.
This process is called Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). Small quantities of DNA found at a crime scene can be replicated by copying the DNA strands in a machine called a DNA Thermal Cycler.
Each cycle of of the PCR causes the DNA strand to be duplicated and within a matter of hours, DNA can be duplicated a million fold. Once the scientists have enough DNA copies on hand, they can then analyze them.
DNA Typing
Each chromosome has two DNA double helix strands and contains the repeating base sequence, T - A - G. These repeating sequences are inherited from our parents. One parent might contribute two repeating sequences, another four.
How many times the base sequences are repeated is the key to our hereditary factors. With the technique, restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP), enzymes are used to cut up the chromosomes into multiple fragments, some containing the repeated sequences.
Once that's done, the fragments are then separated by electrophoresis. DNA is then put in a gel and placed in an electric field.
During electrophoresis, the DNA fragments will migrate across the plate. The smaller fragments will move faster than the slower ones. Once this is done, the strands are chemically treated so they stay separated.
The strands are then transferred to a nylon material, which is treated radioactively in order to visualize them.
Next the nylon sheet is exposed by x-ray for several days. Afterwords, visible bands show up.(Saferstein) The bands sets are then compared to see if they match up.
For example, comparing a suspect semen stain, taken from a crime scene, to the victim's blood.
The RFLP has since been replaced by newer techniques, which are more sensitive and require less DNA material. The PCR is able to use only one billionth of a gram for analysis and only needs tiny quantities of body fluids, such as blood, saliva, or semen.
Another advantage is that PCR can analyze even degraded samples which RFLP couldn't do. PCR can duplicate a DNA strand many millions of times in a short period of time.
Short Tandem Repeats (STR)
" STR's are locations (loci) on the chromosome that contain short sequence elements that repeat themselves within the DNA molecule."
These strand are much shorter than those used in the RFLP procedure and are less susceptible to degradation, so they can be taken from decomposed bodies.
"The ability to copy an STR means that extremely small amounts of the molecule can be detected and analyzed." The human genes contain hundreds of different types of STR's.
The more STR"s present, the smaller the population which can carry them, and the greater the probability of identification.
Nuclear & Mitochondrial DNA
A human cell contains two types of DNA: Nuclear and Mitochondrial. Nuclear DNA has 23 pairs of chromosomes within the nuclei of the cell. Each parent contributes to half the genetic make up of the chromosomes.
Mitochondria DNA is inherited only from the mother and is found outside the nucleus of the cell, as opposed to the one nuclear DNA within the nucleus of the cell.
Each cell contains hundreds of thousands of mitochondria and one nuclear DNA. Mitochondria (MtDNA) DNA is helpful if forensic scientists have degraded or skeleton specimens, or specimens with a low nuclear DNA. However, MtDNA is more costly and time consuming to analyze.
Collection of Biological Evidence
Since the early 1990's, DNA has has changed the way the criminal justice system looks at biological evidence. In the past, crime labs were able only to do an ABO typing from blood. Now with one billionth of a gram of DNA, they are able to identify "genetic fingerprints".
If readers will check my archives, you'll find Crime Scene Investigation, which explains the collection of evidence, so I won't repeat that here.
In 1982, a woman was raped in a park, as she walked away from her husband, heading to their car.The woman was white and she said the offender was black.
Vincent Jenkins, a 43 year old black man, was picked up four months later. The victim was asked to identify the accused via a one way mirror.
She said she couldn't identify him as the man who had raped her. Then the police showed her a four year old photo and said it was a current picture of the man.
She looked at it for a long time, then said that he was the man who had raped her. The court ruled that the photo identification was "unconstitutionally suggestive", so the evidence was excluded from trial.
The jury still convicted Jenkins, even though the physical description differed widely from the accuser's initial description. Jenkins was convicted and served almost 17 years in jail before being exonerated by newer DNA testing methods.
The new testing showed a surprise. The testing showed two different sets of DNA. However, It not only cleared Jenkins, it also excluded the victim's husband. Even after being cleared by the DNA, the DA fought the release.
The prosecutor tried to develop different hypotheses to explain why Jenkins's DNA was excluded, yet he could still be the rapist. The prosecution came up with a gang rape theory, in which three rapists were involved.
" Those hypotheses, born of desperation, are contradicted by the victim, who said ... that she had been raped by one man and that he had ejaculated." According to the DNA, Jenkins was not that man.
Bob Herbert, NYT: "DNA tests have ruled out Mr. Jenkins as the man who attacked and raped a woman in a nature preserve in Buffalo in 1982. But it is easier to learn to fly by flapping one's arms than it is to get a district attorney to admit having sent an innocent person to prison. "
Vincent Jenkins was finally freed in September, 1999. I can't help but wonder what he would have to say about being falsely accused and convicted.
* Story originally published 1999 in NYT
Forensic Characterization of Semen
The average male ejaculate contains anywhere from 2 - 6 milliliters of seminal fluid and about 100 million sperm. In order to analyze semen, the evidence must first be determined to be semen. This involves two steps:
Acid Phosphatase
Acid phosphatase is an enzyme that secreted in seminal fluid, as well as other bodily fluids, such as vaginal secretions. However, the concentration of Acid Phosphatase is up to 400 times greater in semen than in any other body fluid.
It can be detected by its reaction to a special acidic chemical compound. A quick purple color is indicative of a positive acid phosphatase reading.
There are some fruit and vegetable juices which also have acid phosphatase, but they will not react as quickly as Acid Phosphatase in seminal fluid. A reaction time of less than 30 seconds indicates (+) semen.
Another absolute indicator of semen is sperm. You can have semen without sperm, but you can't have sperm without semen. When sperm are located under the microscope, a stain is definitely (+) for semen.
Sperm are long, with both a head and a tail. The head carries the genetic material and the tail helps to spur it along upstream towards the cervix. Even with the large number of sperm in seminal fluid, it's not unusual to have difficulty spotting them under the microscope.
Not only are sperm bound tightly to cloth but, once dried, they become very brittle and easily disintegrate when washed or rubbed against something.
Another reason is that sexual assaults often involve men with an abnormally low sperm count. This is known as Oligospermia. Some offenders have no sperm count at all. This is called Aspermia.
A third reason is the increasing use of condoms by the offenders. They are getting smarter. Until last year, the nurses in my unit took swabbings for a sperm check down to the lab after each exam. It was rare that any sperm showed up under the microscope.
If no sperm can be detected, yet the scientists still believe the evidence to be semen, a test known as the Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA or P30) can be carried out. This test is specific to seminal plasma.
When it is isolated an injected into a rabbit, it produces antibodies ( anti-P30).
The serum is then used to check the semen stain. If it tests positive for P30, then the stain is seminal. Once the evidence is proven to be semen, the next step is to link the evidence to an individual through DNA fingerprinting.
Collection and Dating Evidence
Saferstein states, " The finding of seminal constituents ... is important evidence for substantiating that sexual intercourse has taken place ... but their absence does not necessarily mean that a rape did not occur." He goes on to say, " Physical injuries such as bruises or bleeding tend to confirm that a violent assault did take place.
Furthermore, there is a distinct possibility that the forceful contact between victim and assailant will result in a transfer of physical evidence."
To protect the evidence, all garments and evidence must be collected according to strict protocols.
"The persistence of seminal constituents in the vagina may become a factor when trying to ascertain the time of an alleged sexual attack."
It's important to note that motile sperm only live up to 4-6 hours in the vaginal canal. The acidic environment of the vagina decreases the motile sperm count rapidly.
Non motile sperm may normally be found up to 3 days after intercourse, and sometimes up to 6 days later in the cervix. Intact sperm (with tails) aren't usually found after 16 hours post intercourse but have been found up to 72 hours.
Seminal Acid Phosphatase substantially decreases with time in the vagina. It's not usually found in the vagina after 48 hours. Another indicator of recent sexual activity is the P30 test. P30 is not usually found in the vagina after 8-9 hours post intercourse.
As far as the Duke case goes, I realized this morning that I had made a mistake in judgment. For some reason, I had thought that semen had been found originally. If semen had been found, that would indicate a (+) P30 test and P30 only lasts in the vaginal canal about 8 hours; Acid Phosphatase lasting only 48 hours.
Those results would indicate a much more recent sexual activity than the accuser stated. According to the motion filed by the defense, that is not true. However, there is more to that which will be discussed below. I believe the findings by the crime lab reported last night are even better for the Duke Lacrosse players.
If there was complete ejaculation, as the accuser claimed, then there should have been high levels of Acid Phosphatase and P30, and possibly motile sperm, left by the offenders, in her vagina and on her underwear.
A few years back, I kept close tabs on the Kobe Bryant case as well. I especially remembered when the scientist Dr. Elizabeth Johnson testified. I even took notes.
I'm including a link to that testimony. In her testimony, Dr. Johnson testifies specifically as to how much Acid Phosphatase, P30, and sperm should still be present after a recent assault.
I find it very interesting, considering that such a vicious attack (with ejaculation)supposedly occurred, and a SANE exam was done shortly afterwords, how come no Acid Phosphatase, no P30, and no sperm is connected back to any of the three Duke players charged?
Excerpt, Dr. Johnson's Testimony:
"1 was ejaculation internally or not. I mean, we've seen 2 plenty of instances in
case work where there was penetration 3 without ejaculation, we don't find any
or many sperm. We 4 don't find P30. It depends on how the sex occurs. I mean, 5
it can be very -- 6
Q. But if there is ejaculation, then generally you're 7
going to find a lot of sperm? 8 A. If it's internal, yes. If it's a full
ejaculate 9 internal, yes. If it's partial, no. If it's just 10 penetration, few
to none. 11 Q. Now, what exactly is P30? 12 A. P30 is a protein that is found,
is a prostate -- 13 thought to be a prostate specific protein produced by the 14
prostate gland produced in high levels in the seminal fluid.
15 Q. Are these
only this males, then? 16 A. There have been a few studies using a very 17
sensitive radioimmunassay test in which that has been found 18 in some fluids of
urine of men that have prostate cancer or 19 breast milk from some women, even,
but it's a different type 20 of test they are employing than what we are using
here. 21 Q. So if, I mean, for your testing it is basically a 22 male -- it
comes from the male, P30, for purposes of your 23 testing? 24 A. For the
purposes, yes, here."
This is among the newest of the testing procedures. It's fast and needs little DNA. Since this test is specific for only the male Y chromosome, it's very useful for determining the number of male donors, in a mixed specimen, such as with a sexual assault. It can be tested on sperm as well as epithelial cells.
"We have exemplified the potential utility of MPI and MPII in operational casework by their ability to dissect out the full 19 locus male haplotype in vaginal swabs taken up to 48 hours after intercourse. Partial profiles can be obtained 85 hours after intercourse. A judiciously chosen eleven-locus subset of our nineteen Y-STR loci is able to obtain a male donor profile 4 days after intercourse. "
Again, they have developed the ability to determine recent sexual intercourse. As stated above, male halotypes can be extracted within just 48 hours post intercourse. This is important in cases such as the Duke Lacrosse case when the evidence, once again, appears to contradict the accuser's statements.
Modified 12/14/06
From Fox News :
DURHAM, N.C. — Buried in thousands of documents handed over to
defense lawyers by the district attorney in the Duke rape case was a stunning
report from a private lab hired by the prosecution that found DNA from multiple
males in the accuser's body — but none that belonged to the accused players,
according to a defense motion filed Wednesday. The lab, DNA Security of Burlington, found during tests performed last April
that not only did the DNA not match the three defendants, but that it also did
not belong to any of their lacrosse teammates or anyone else who submitted DNA
samples to police, including the accuser's boyfriend. Those findings were not
turned over to the defense until October, when District Attorney Mike Nifong's
office turned over thousands of case-related documents. "This is strong evidence of innocence in a case in which the accuser denied
engaging in any sexual activity in the days before the alleged assault, told
police she last had consensual sexual intercourse a week before the assault, and
claimed that her attackers did not use condoms and ejaculated," lawyers for the
three accused players said in the motion.
From:
The Sewickley Herald
Kristina Serafini,
Staff Writer
Thursday, November 30,
2006.
If you commit murder in America, you have a 50 percent chance of getting away with it.
That startling fact was presented by James Fisher, a former FBI agent, author and longtime professor of criminal investigation, criminal law and forensic science at Edinboro University.
Fisher was the guest speaker at the Woman's Club of Sewickley Valley meeting on Monday. "If you're going to commit a crime and hope to get away with it, America would probably be the place to do it.
"In a modern industrial society that's outrageous," he said during the program, "Forensic Evidence You Didn't See on 'CSI'".
"There are a few areas where they have very good criminal homicide detectives, but for the most part, they're truly arrogant and actually incompetent, and in many cases, corrupt."
In most cases, Fisher said, people end up in jail due to drug violations because those crimes don't require a lengthy investigation. "They're not in there because they're murderers, or they're pedophiles or they're arsonists or they're serial burglars or they're thieves. They're in there because they got caught possessing something the law says they can't possess."
In America, Fisher said, we don't have highly trained professional police detectives. They only exist in fiction.
From: 
MSNBC
By Kristin Kalning
Games Editor
MSNBC
Can video games make kids more violent? A new study employing state-of-the-art
brain-scanning technology says that the answer may be yes.
Researchers at the Indiana University School of Medicine say that brain scans of kids who played a violent video game showed an increase in emotional arousal – and a corresponding decrease of activity in brain areas involved in self-control, inhibition and attention.
From:
The News & Observer
Published: Dec 08, 2006 12:30 AM
Modified: Dec 08, 2006 05:32 AM
Speaker Jim Black let the program's coordinator retire, and he later hired her as House historian
|
Former state House Page Coordinator Ann Lassiter admits she made a serious mistake when she arranged for teenage pages to stay with her son, a felon with a history of drug and alcohol problems.
But after her mistake became known to House Speaker Jim Black, he allowed her to retire from the position in April 2005 and then hired her back a month later as House historian, a position he created.
Lassiter now makes $50,627 a year, but has no office, is rarely seen at the legislature and says she is unlikely to produce her major project -- a report on the history of the House -- before her temporary position runs out at the end of the year.
Lassiter, 61, a career state employee, said her work as historian has turned out to be more than she expected.
"I started out with big dreams for it," she said. "But it's like a lot of things -- you get into it and you can get bogged down."
BY RAY GRONBERG : The Herald-Sun
gronberg@heraldsun.com
Dec 7, 2006 :
11:42 pm ET
DURHAM -- The early returns of a controversial
gang study suggest that Durham's crime problems aren't really any worse
than those of other cities in the state and the country, one of the
consultants leading the effort said Thursday.
It's also raising questions about the use of the Durham Police
Department's gang unit, and about the funding of a gang prosecutor in
District Attorney Mike Nifong's office, the consultant, Deborah Lamm
Weisel, told the City Council.
Durham's gang unit is bigger than those of most comparable cities, but
its size masks the fact that the department uses it for many things
that go beyond its basic mission, like prostitution stings, Weisel
said.
"Having a unit devoted to gangs and other things, it makes it look like
those people are devoted full-time to gangs, and in the Police
Department, they're not," she said.
From:
Medical News Today
Poor Bridget Jones. At the beginning of the first film about her diary and life, the character, played by actress Renee Zellweger, is fat and alone in her apartment where she mimes one of the great self-pitying song hits of all time: "All by Myself." But Bridget's problem may be more than skin deep.
In new research, reported in the current online issue of the journal Social Neuroscience, researchers from the University of Georgia and San Diego State University report for the first time that social exclusion actually causes changes in a person's brain function and can lead to poor decision-making and a diminished learning ability.
"Our findings indicate that social rejection can be a powerful influence on how people act," said W. Keith Campbell, a psychologist who led the research. The new research is the first to examine subjects' brain patterns following social exclusion using the magnetoencephalography (MEG) technique.
Other authors of the paper include Jean Twenge of San Diego State University; Brett Clementz and Jennifer McDowell, also psychology faculty members at UGA; and UGA graduate students Elizabeth Krusemark, Kara Dyckman and Amy Brunnell.
Researchers have known for a long time that there is a link between social exclusion and the failure of self-control. For instance, people who are rejected in social situations often respond by abusing alcohol, expressing aggression or performing poorly at school or work. (Bridget Jones chooses "vodka and Chaka Khan.")
The new study, however, is the first to use MEG to show that there are actual changes inside the brain when test subjects are manipulated to feel socially excluded. MEG is an imaging technique that measures the magnetic fields produced by electrical activity in the brain. It is most often used by physicians to localize brain tumors prior to surgery or to study the brain function of patients with epilepsy.
The subjects in the current study were 30 women undergraduates in a psychology course at UGA. Each one was asked to complete a written personality questionnaire. The team leading the experiment then said they would "feed the answers into a computer," which was, in fact, untrue. Instead, half of the sample, selected randomly, was told their answers showed they would "end up alone" later in life. The others were given a more neutral assessment of their social interactions.
"At this point, we gave each of the subjects a series of simple mathematical problems, taking 25 minutes, to solve on a computer screen in front of them while they were in the MEG machine," said Campbell. "We presented participants with 180 problems, and what we found was surprising."
The MEG data revealed that those in the social-exclusion group had clear differences in activity in the brain's occipital, parietal and prefrontal cortex regions. Those in the social-exclusion group also performed more poorly on the math questions. The inference is that social exclusion actually affects the brain's neural circuitry.
The parietal cortex is involved in attention, while the prefrontal cortex helps support so-called "executive functioning" processes such as working memory and other behaviors that may support self control.
"We found that there was a direct link between social exclusion, brain activity and performance," said Campbell.
One of the advantages of the MEG technique is that brain changes can be recorded in milliseconds, not in seconds, as some research of this kind may take. MEG actually has more advantages than other brain-imaging methods when it is used to look at real-time activity during a task.
The study may indicate why those who are never picked for athletic teams in pickup games tend to stay in that group and why those socially excluded sometimes react with inappropriate behavior or even violence.
The subjects in the UGA-San Diego State study didn't have clear or obvious reactions when they were told they would be alone later in life. Campbell said none of them seemed obviously upset or wept, for instance. At the end of the project, researchers told the subjects that it was completely untrue that their personality inventories showed that some of them would be alone later in life.
Bridget Jones winds up with her dream lover, as always happens in romantic comedies. The new research, however, shows that those who are socially excluded are more apt to show self-control difficulties, and might even wind up "all by myself."
###
The research was supported in part by a grant from the University of Georgia Research Foundation.
Contact:
Philip Lee Williams
University
of Georgia 
From:
Medical News Today
A person who comes from a broken home is more likely to suffer from schizophrenia and psychotic illnesses than a person who doesn't, say researchers from London, Cambridge, Nottingham and Trinidad. Psychotic illnesses, say the researchers, may be caused by social adversity.
The study will be published in the journal Psychological Medicine.
The team examined data on 780 people from south London, Bristol and Nottingham (UK), all of whom had signs of a psychotic illness.
Here are some of their findings:
-- People of African/Caribbean origin are nine times more likely to suffer from schizophrenia, compared to the British white population
-- People of just black African origin (not Caribbean) are six times more likely to suffer from schizophrenia, compared to the British white population
-- Being separated from one or both parents for over 12 months raised the chances of having a psychotic illness later in life by 150%
-- 31% of African/Caribbean families split up, compared to 18% of white families (in the UK)
The researchers suggest that the high incidence of psychotic illnesses among the Africa/Caribbean population in the UK is partly due to the experience of social adversity early in life. How social adversity may trigger psychological and biological factors is unknown, they say. The researchers added that further research is needed.
Basically, the thrust of this report indicates that psychotic illnesses may not exist purely because of genetics, but social factors may also play a major role. The researchers discarded drug taking as being a factor. Drug taking levels among blacks and whites in the UK is similar.
It is estimated that about 300,000 people suffer from schizophrenia in the United Kingdom.
"Parental separation, loss and
psychosis in different ethnic groups: a case-control study"
CRAIG
MORGAN, JAMES KIRKBRIDE, JULIAN LEFF, TOM CRAIG, GERARD HUTCHINSON, KWAME
McKENZIE, KEVIN MORGAN, PAOLA DAZZAN, GILLIAN A. DOODY, PETER JONES, ROBIN
MURRAY and PAUL FEARON
Psychological Medicine
doi:10.1017/S0033291706009330
Click here to see abstract online
Written by:
Christian Nordqvist
Editor: Medical News Today
Printer Friendly
Email to a Friend
Enlarge Font
Decrease Font
Read previous N&O stories about Jim Black.
Recent Comments