@derekdg Said 
Thought about it Unicorn...and I need to think about it a wee bit more.
...but one thing does spring to mind..Judges {certainly NOT in the UK} are not required to be academically conversant in techniques of DNA profiling at any stage during the process. Yet more cases in a Court are "Determined" by this method more than any other..even the presenting PF/DA is not academically able to "scrutinise" evidence in this form
.
However "profiling" has been shown to work...under the most exacting environments {what the cops call "frontline investigations".
Is this an easier dicipline to master?i.e. Can the Court Officials become legally conversant enough for it to find it's way into the "everday/caseload" scrutiny?
I would say ...NOT...certainly at this stage...it would be too much like introducing Tarot Cards to determine Guilt or Innocence. How e.g. would you read the body language of a CP sufferer..or a Paraplegic...their condition would not automatically exlclude them from the perpetuation/colusion of/in a criminal act
Very good point made about the physical and mental disabilities of someone impeding the process and correct profiling of someone.
In Australia we have many unbalanced mental patients who cannot fit into the institions so no matter what age sometimes as young as 30 are placed in old people's retirement homes and unfortunatley sometimes quite viscious attacks take place,but how would you determine the motives of such a case-nearly impossible it would seem.
Also I think the point you make about alot of cases being decided on DNA evidence but the judge or jury not having any education and understanding of how these things work is appalling and IMO is an injustice against the accused, esp. in the case of someone who is living with the victim so their DNA would be all over the place-most perplexing!
Aug 10, 2009 @ 09:50:50
