DNA Profiling: The Lynda Mann And Dawn Ashworth Case

Throughout the years, forensic technology has evolved from using photography to fingerprint identification in order to help identify criminals. Without hesitation, it is easy to believe that lots of crimes have been solved due to advanced technology rather than be dismissed as another unsolved case. An example of advanced technology that should be recognized is the use of DNA evidence. Though, the idea of DNA profiling being an accurate tool to solve cases is still a matter to be discussed. It is safe to assume that the technology used for DNA profiling is important to the methods of forensic sciences because it provides better evidence (as opposed to eyewitness testimony), it helps discover criminals of past unsolved crimes, and it helps

The Lynda Mann & Dawn Ashworth case is proof of this, for both females were raped, murdered, and found in the same area; the only difference between the victims is the 3-year time difference in which these women were sexually assaulted and killed. The main suspect in this crime was Richard Buckland, an acquaintance of Ashworth, who also happened to have knowledge of details of the case that hasn’t been released to the public. Under interrogation, he would admit to the crime but then deny having anything to do with the rape & murder. Eventually, he was charged and taken to court, where he remained persistent of not committing the crimes, especially not Mann. The police were certain that Buckland was the perpetrator, but still needed solid evidence that he was the one. The police contacts Alec Jeffreys, who made an accidental discovery that individuals can be identified with great precision, to assist with the case. “Jeffreys agreed to carry out tests on Buckland’s blood and on semen taken from the dead girls’ bodies and worked through the night to finish the work. When he took the film from the developing tank, he could see immediately that the girls had been raped by the same man – and also that Buckland’s DNA was completely different. He had to tell the police that although they were correct in their belief that one man had raped and murdered both girls, not only had Buckland not

Roy Criner was accused and sent to jail for about 100 years for the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl. Years later, he submitted to DNA testing which excluded him from being the rapist from the sperm evidence found in the girl, but he remained in prison because the majority of the appeals judges had no confidence that DNA evidence would have weight over witness testimony. After further investigation, judges had no right to make such conclusion and had Criner set