(Saferstien, 2011). This form of testing has taken precedence when processing a crime scene due to the precise results in identifying who it belongs to. When DNA is found it also gives insight of the persons who have or have not been a part of the crime committed. In the forensic investigation field, finding this type of evidence is also the most useful. When debating how the crime was committed and determining the location in which the point of contact began DNA can be very useful. For example, if there was a homicide that transpired and the scene consisted of an abundance of blood, we would be able to determine who the blood belongs to through DNA analysis. Looking at the different impacts that were created with the blood spatter, this would also help determine what spatter doesn’t correspond. When DNA is found, multiple samples are taken, analyzed and compared to avoid discrepancies. Although DNA can be found …show more content…
There are different types of evidence that can be collected but would only create a nexus to crime. Often these types of evidence can’t lead to a conviction. With DNA analysis it is very exact, it cannot be exactly the same as another person. There are possibilities that identical twins can carry the same DNA (same genetic code) (Ruters, 2015) when this happens there are other forms of identification that can indicate which twin was involved, such as fingerprints. DNA have genetic information that can be broken down to determine the identification of a person. (Saferstien, 2011). For example, hair fibers are a great form of evidence but if the strand of hair does not contain the follicular tissue, only comparisons can be made. Hair fibers do not contain DNA if this is not present. Although hair fibers do carry some evidentiary value, DNA is the most effective method in the Forensic