Pros And Cons Of Exoneration

Imagine being assumed guilty just because you're the closest spitting image of someone whose prime was to be a criminal. Over 300 convicts in the US have been acquitted due to post-conviction DNA testing and claimed their freedom. The justice system has no room for mistakes, but now with forensic DNA testing, it's what ultimately leads to conviction. Opponents argue that DNA accuracy doesn't prove anything and that the system is strained from appeals. Also, some prisoners have no possibility for exoneration, which means no choice between life and death. First of all, DNA testing is a form of analyzing that is highly accurate. For example, “DNA is made up of molecules that form about 3 billion base pairs in every cell; just 0.1% of DNA varies from person to person and this is where DNA testing focuses” (DNA Evidence 3). Therefore, the DNA database has exonerated many criminals due to matching the correct DNA together. For detail, DNA is often obliterated by weather conditions and the environment which only further proves that DNA at a crime scene is very punctilious and current. In brief, DNA testing exoneration is a necessary justice technique that has definitely earned its place in the courtroom.
For example, in some states, when prisoners have previously confessed are not available for testing. Furthermore, “according to the Innocence Project, nearly a third of DNA exonerations have included prisoners who have falsely confessed” (DNA Evidence 2). Additionally, some states have laws that appoint limitations on the time after conviction in which inmates can seek DNA tests. With this new DNA discovery, the “innocent until proven guilty” claim should step back for the prisoners who seek freedom. If exoneration by DNA testing was attainable everywhere, DNA evidence would be a more recognized identifying