Sir, I share Krane et al.’s concern about the potential danger of antisuspect bias in forensic DNA analysis, and I agree that ‘‘interpretation of an evidentiary DNA profile should not be influenced by information about a suspect’s DNA profile.’’ However, judging by their letter, the incidence of such bias is unknown. It appears that we do not know that there is a problem, and, if Krane et al.’s...

The paperwork associated with evidentiary collection and analysis is a highly repetitive and time-consuming process which often involves duplication of work and can frequently result in documentary errors. Electronic entry of evidencerelated information can facilitate greater accuracy and less time spent on data entry. This manuscript describes a general framework for the implementation of an e...

With the U.S. Supreme Court's 1996 decision in Jaffee v. Redmond, all U.S. jurisdictions have now adopted some form of evidentiary privilege for confidential statements by patients to psychotherapists for the purpose of seeking treatment. The majority of states, following the decision of the Supreme Court of California in Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, have also adopted so...

Forensic evidentiary samples routinely contain DNA from multiple contributors. The interpretation of these mixtures can be a challenging task for the DNA scientist. Several approaches are discussed (no calculationqualitative statement; probability of exclusion; likelihood ratio estimates; presumptive genotype assignment based on peak heights), which have been employed to assess the significance...