Archive for the ‘DNA’ Category

PostHeaderIcon An April Fools Crime-Solving Puzzle: How Sharp Is Your Protagonist?

Detectives Slim N. None and Frank Lee Iduncare caught the case of their careers when Captain I. Giterdun assigned them to investigate the murder of one of Savannah’s most popular ghost tour managers, I.C. Spooks.

The two top cops arrived on the scene and found Ms. Spooks’ body (her friends call her Ida, they’d learned) lying in a cobblestone alley just off River Street, near the entrance to the Gulp ‘Em Down Oyster Bar and Rot Gut Drink Emporium.

No witnesses and no obvious clues. No weapon and no sign of injury or open wounds. Not even so much as a chipped fingernail. No footprints on the stones. Not a single thing to go on. Well, except for a tiny dot of something reddish brown on the tip of the victim’s right index finger. None said the drop certainly looked like blood. To be certain, though, they’d have to wait for the autopsy report, hoping the M.E. would come up with the impossible. In the meantime, the detectives did what they do best…knocked on doors and asked a lot of questions. In other words, they pestered people until they either talked or slammed the door in the eager faces of the two detectives. The latter being the more common occurrence.

Turns out that it was DNA that solved the Spooks murder case. Below are the possible findings of Savannah detectives and medical examiner Y. N. Sizion. Nine of the things listed could be true scenarios. One, however, is not. Do you have what it takes to spot the April Fools finding? Well, let’s see if your protagonist really knows her DNA, or, if her knowledge was gained from watching Castle reruns.

The List

1. After developing a list of ten perfectly possible perpetrators, a positive match to suspect number ten was discovered by matching DNA from the crime scene to the DNA found in a recently-formed dental mold (the suspect was fitted for a new crown the day prior to the murder).

2. The suspect was identified by matching DNA found at the crime scene to DNA found on the mouth opening of a seriously shrunken ski mask located in a overflowing and lopsided clothes basket in the suspect’s apartment.

3. The medical examiner found a single foreign hair (no root) lodged deep in the throat of the victim. DNA found in the hair matched the DNA of one of the suspects.

4. The killer had forced oral copulation on the victim prior to her death. The victim’s DNA matched DNA swabbed from the suspect’s “private part.” The comparison was made several hours after the offense.

5. DNA found on a cigarette butt lying near the victim’s body matched the DNA of one of the ten suspects. Faced with the DNA evidence linking him to the crime scene, he, suspect number seven, confessed to the murder.

6. Detective Iduncare found a crumpled postcard wedged between the north side trolley rail and a loose cobblestone. DNA found on the back of the card’s postage stamp was a positive match to suspect number four.

7. None and Iduncare were pleased and positively elated when the lab identified suspect number five by matching the DNA found at the crime scene to the DNA extracted from the suspect’s red blood cells.

8. A scientist from the lab called Iduncare to deliver the news he’d been waiting to hear…yes, the scientist had indeed discovered DNA on Spooks’ body, but what she’d found was a mixture, meaning there could have been more than one suspect. She went on to say that since her discovery was a mixture, she would not and could not positively include or exclude any one person as a suspect in the crime.

9. Detective None interviewed the Gulp ‘Em Down bartender and learned the poor woman had a nasty cold. She also said that, out of curiosity, she’d walked over to have a look at the body where she engaged in one of the worst coughing and sneezing fits of her entire 27 years on the planet. And, yes, she probably sprayed the corpse with quite a bit a spittle in the process. “That wasn’t a problem, was it?” the pink and green-haired woman asked while using a wadded bar napkin to mop the end of her dripping nose. Detective None learned from the folks at the lab that blowing cold remnants on a dead body could indeed compromise whatever DNA they found.

10. During the testing, scientists found the DNA of several people on the victim’s body, including that of None and Iduncare, who should have worn gloves while processing the crime scene.

After the lab results finally came back, and all was sorted through and pawed at by a team of prosecutors, None and Iduncare were finally able to slap the cuffs onto the wrists of their suspect(s).

And, future ghost tours were proud to boast of a brand new spirit, the recently departed I.C. Spooks, whose her ghost could often be seen peering out at tourists from behind the windows of various businesses and storefronts along the riverfront.

*Top photo – Savannah-Chatham Metro Police Department

* Bottom photo – I.C. (Ida) Spooks

PostHeaderIcon DNA Testing: Is It Really All That Complicated?

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

DNA testing is a great tool for law enforcement. It’s been used to convict criminals in a wide variety of cases, including, murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and even blackmail. DNA testing is also used as a means to exonerate the innocent.

DNA testing is pretty darn accurate as long as investigators and scientists handle crime-scene evidence properly, without contaminating it. Something as simple as sneezing on a piece of evidence can ruin a detective’s chances of solving a homicide.

Every cell in the human body has DNA except red blood cells; therefore, almost anything a suspect handled could contain DNA. Even a hairbrush or hat can contain a murderer’s dandruff. Keeping that in mind, crime scene investigators locate and collect items they think a suspect may have touched—cigarette butts, bloody clothing, weapons, paper, drinking glass, etc. The evidence is then turned over to a forensic lab and its scientists for testing.

At the lab, items are logged in and then they wait on a shelf until their time “on the bench” rolls around. Could be days, weeks, or even months. Wait time depends on the backlog of cases. Of course, some high-profile or other urgent cases warrant a move to the front of the line.

The time to conduct the actual testing is pretty quick, not including prep time, no troubles with equipment, etc.

The first step in the testing process is to extract DNA from the evidence sample. To do so, the scientist adds chemicals to the sample, a process that ruptures cells. When the cells open up DNA is released and is ready for examination.

extract-dna.jpg

DNA is actually visible to the naked eye. The slimy glob in the center of the circle below is DNA.

new-picture-11.jpg

DNA is tested in devices like the one below. They’re called genetic analyzers.

new-picture-1.jpg

DNA is loaded into wells inside the genetic analyzer. There are 96 wells in the gray, rectangular block shown below (inside the analyzer).

new-picture-2.jpg

An electric current separates the DNA, sending it from the wells through narrow straw-like tubes called capillaries. During its journey through the analyzer, DNA passes by a laser. The laser causes the DNA loci (a gene’s position on a chromosome) to fluoresce as they pass by, which allows a tiny camera to capture their images.

The image below shows DNA’s path through the genetic analyzer.

new-picture-3.jpg

Capillaries

new-picture-4.jpg

Doctor Smith points to the row of eight capillaries, one for each well in the corresponding line of wells (12 rows of 8 wells).

At the end of the testing, the equipment produces a graph/chart called an electropherogram.

Peaks on the graph depict the amount of DNA strands at each location. It is this unique pattern of peaks and valleys that scientist use to match or exclude suspects.

Or, in the case of paternity testing, to include or exclude someone as a parent.

The image below is an electropheragram showing the DNA of a strawberry.

new-picture-8.jpg

Another method of obtaining DNA results is to “run a gel.” This procedure, like it’s modern day counterpart the genetic analyzer, separates and measures DNA strands.

DNA testing by electrophoresis (gel testing)

mix-gel.JPG

Weighing the agar gel (powder at this stage).

mix-gel-2.JPG

Mixing the gel with water.

gel.JPG

Gel in chamber. After mixing with water the gel “sets” to the consistency of Jell-O.

Gels are like flat sponges, with many tiny holes, nooks, and crannies.

inject-dna.JPG

Injecting DNA into the gel. Pre-formed wells are in place to receive the DNA.

attach-eles.JPG

Attaching positive and negative electrodes to the chamber.

Electrical current is the force that causes the DNA strands to move across and through the gel.

gel-and-elec.JPG

Introducing electric current to the gel.

Short strands move quicker and farther than longer strands. Strands of the same or similar lengths wind up grouped together.

gel-illuminator.JPG

Staining the DNA groups makes them visible on the gel. After staining, the completed gel is placed onto an illuminator for viewing.

read-gel.JPG

Gels are then photographed for later use, possibly in criminal or civil trials.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

*Above and below photos courtesy of world renowned DNA expert Dr. Dan Krane. Some of you will remember Dr. Krane from his wonderful presentation at the WPA.

DNA is introduced to the testing equipment which then moves through the processes to produce a visible result. It’s not a series of steps where someone could stop, take a look at the incomplete process, and then make a guess as to whether or not someone could be included or excluded as a suspect.

It’s not until the entire process is complete that experts will be able to compare DNA results—suspect DNA to DNA found at a crime scene. Or, to compare test results to human DNA for the purpose of excluding someone as a suspect. There is no midway “make-a-guess-and-leak-to-the-press” point. When it’s done, it’s done.

Below are the DNA test results of a rape victim and two suspects. Obviously, neither of the suspects’ DNA matches that of the victim. However, suspect number two is a perfect match for the DNA found on the victim’s body.

New Picture

It’s true that excluding someone as a suspect is an often quicker process than identifying the bad guy. This is so because officers already know the identities of some of these people and have collected their DNA samples for testing/comparison.

However, the killer’s identity is probably an unknown at this point because police have not been able to obtain “matchable” evidence from the actual perpetrator. Therefore investigators must begin their quest for a DNA match by conducting good old-fashioned police work—interviewing witnesses and suspects, lifting fingerprints, collecting and identifying physical evidence, and knocking on doors and talking to neighbors, friends, family, etc. Whatever it takes to lead them to the killer and his DNA.

Of course, there’s always the possibility that the killer’s DNA is already tucked away in a computer database, such as CODIS. A quick run-through in the computer system will bring up several close matches, or a positive ID. Remember, though, if the DNA is not in the database investigators must rely on basic investigative skills (please re-read the paragraph preceding this one).

In short, DNA testing is, well, DNA testing. There is no point in the middle of the of the procedure that would allow investigators to exclude anyone as a suspect. The process must run its course to be of use.

*My thanks to Dr. Stephanie Smith for allowing me to hang out in her lab to take the above photos.

 

Did you know DNA is used to…

Determine pedigree in livestock.

Authenticate caviar and wine.

Identify endangered and protected wildlife species (to prosecute poachers).

Hot New Release!
Hot New Release!
Visit This Blog!
Hot New Release!
Hot New Release!
Hot New Release!
Buy This Book!
Web Hosts