Question

.If DNA from a crime scene must be compared to other DNA patterns to determine whose DNA it is why is it considered to be more accurate that fingerprinting?

Answer 1

ANSWER :-

1. According to me, it should be the Fingerprints which are more reliable than the process of DNA fingerprinting.
2. Fingerprints are being collected by means of using various chemical agents such as cyanoacrylates which are responsible for providing visibility to the fingerprints which are being imprinted at the crime scene. This plays an important role in recording the certain characters of fingers such as the impressions which are specific for every individual and this can be recorded in an electronic format as a record. This when matched along with the probable suspects are being used to determine the character similarity between the two on the basis of which a judgement is being given whether the crime is being committed by the suspect or not.
3. In case of DNA fingerprinting, there are more errors associated as compared to that in terms of fingerprint collection at the crime scene. DNA fingerprints can show certain changes or dissimilarities which is usually expressed in terms of percent similarity. More the similarity, more the chances of finding out the culprit although most courts rely on having similarities more than 96% to proceed to any conclusion. This makes fingerprints more acceptable than the process of DNA fingerprinting.