Answered

Find the best answers to your questions at Westonci.ca, where experts and enthusiasts provide accurate, reliable information. Connect with professionals ready to provide precise answers to your questions on our comprehensive Q&A platform. Get immediate and reliable solutions to your questions from a community of experienced professionals on our platform.

Counsel in a trial are arguing that a DNA analysis isn’t proof that a particular person was at the scene of a crime. As a DNA analyst, you’ve identified a point that clearly matches the DNA sample and the suspects DNA. What should your response as an expert witness be?

A.
Agree with the lawyer that one matching point is likely to be a coincidence

B.
Argue that the DNA, combined with other testimony, makes the suspect likely to have been there

C.
Argue that even one point of similarity in a DNA profile means the chances of a mistake are one in a billion

D.
Argue that the suspect is clearly guilty, and the DNA analysis is irrelevant

Sagot :

bosh33
B argue that the DNA combined
aryadtonnes

Answer:

B.  Argue that the DNA, combined with other testimony, makes the suspect likely to have been there

Explanation:

If the subject's DNA was at a crime scene, they are likely to have been there. However, this doesn't automatically mean they are guilty; they could have just been a bystander. You also have to take into account where the DNA sample was found and other testimonies.

Thank you for your visit. We are dedicated to helping you find the information you need, whenever you need it. We hope this was helpful. Please come back whenever you need more information or answers to your queries. Thank you for trusting Westonci.ca. Don't forget to revisit us for more accurate and insightful answers.