Answered

Westonci.ca is the ultimate Q&A platform, offering detailed and reliable answers from a knowledgeable community. Discover in-depth answers to your questions from a wide network of professionals on our user-friendly Q&A platform. Connect with a community of professionals ready to help you find accurate solutions to your questions quickly and efficiently.

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 choosing our service. We're dedicated to providing the best answers for all your questions. Visit us again. We appreciate your visit. Our platform is always here to offer accurate and reliable answers. Return anytime. Get the answers you need at Westonci.ca. Stay informed with our latest expert advice.