Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis

John Buckleton, Jo-Anne Bright, Duncan Taylor, Ian Evett, Tacha Hicks, Graham Jackson, James M. Curran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Bayesian paradigm is the preferred approach to evidence interpretation. It requires the evaluation of the probability of the evidence under at least two propositions. The value of the findings (i.e., our LR) will depend on these propositions and the case information, so it is crucial to identify which propositions are useful for the case at hand. Previously, a number of principles have been advanced and largely accepted for the evaluation of evidence. In the evaluation of traces involving DNA mixtures there may be more than two propositions possible. We apply these principles to some exemplar situations. We also show that in some cases, when there are no clear propositions or no defendant, a forensic scientist may be able to generate explanations to account for observations. In that case, the scientist plays a role of investigator, rather than evaluator. We believe that it is helpful for the scientist to distinguish those two roles.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)258-261
Number of pages4
JournalScience & Justice
Volume54
Issue number4
Early online date19 Mar 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2014

Fingerprint

Evaluation
Paradigm
Evaluator

Cite this

Buckleton, J., Bright, J-A., Taylor, D., Evett, I., Hicks, T., Jackson, G., & Curran, J. M. (2014). Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis. Science & Justice, 54(4), 258-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.007
Buckleton, John ; Bright, Jo-Anne ; Taylor, Duncan ; Evett, Ian ; Hicks, Tacha ; Jackson, Graham ; Curran, James M. / Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis. In: Science & Justice. 2014 ; Vol. 54, No. 4. pp. 258-261.
@article{d8d4c777f1d3488a94cd1ac652e6e802,
title = "Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis",
abstract = "The Bayesian paradigm is the preferred approach to evidence interpretation. It requires the evaluation of the probability of the evidence under at least two propositions. The value of the findings (i.e., our LR) will depend on these propositions and the case information, so it is crucial to identify which propositions are useful for the case at hand. Previously, a number of principles have been advanced and largely accepted for the evaluation of evidence. In the evaluation of traces involving DNA mixtures there may be more than two propositions possible. We apply these principles to some exemplar situations. We also show that in some cases, when there are no clear propositions or no defendant, a forensic scientist may be able to generate explanations to account for observations. In that case, the scientist plays a role of investigator, rather than evaluator. We believe that it is helpful for the scientist to distinguish those two roles.",
author = "John Buckleton and Jo-Anne Bright and Duncan Taylor and Ian Evett and Tacha Hicks and Graham Jackson and Curran, {James M.}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.007",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "258--261",
journal = "Science and Justice - Journal of the Forensic Science Society",
issn = "1355-0306",
publisher = "Forensic Science Society",
number = "4",

}

Buckleton, J, Bright, J-A, Taylor, D, Evett, I, Hicks, T, Jackson, G & Curran, JM 2014, 'Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis', Science & Justice, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 258-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.007

Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis. / Buckleton, John; Bright, Jo-Anne; Taylor, Duncan; Evett, Ian; Hicks, Tacha; Jackson, Graham; Curran, James M.

In: Science & Justice, Vol. 54, No. 4, 07.2014, p. 258-261.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis

AU - Buckleton, John

AU - Bright, Jo-Anne

AU - Taylor, Duncan

AU - Evett, Ian

AU - Hicks, Tacha

AU - Jackson, Graham

AU - Curran, James M.

PY - 2014/7

Y1 - 2014/7

N2 - The Bayesian paradigm is the preferred approach to evidence interpretation. It requires the evaluation of the probability of the evidence under at least two propositions. The value of the findings (i.e., our LR) will depend on these propositions and the case information, so it is crucial to identify which propositions are useful for the case at hand. Previously, a number of principles have been advanced and largely accepted for the evaluation of evidence. In the evaluation of traces involving DNA mixtures there may be more than two propositions possible. We apply these principles to some exemplar situations. We also show that in some cases, when there are no clear propositions or no defendant, a forensic scientist may be able to generate explanations to account for observations. In that case, the scientist plays a role of investigator, rather than evaluator. We believe that it is helpful for the scientist to distinguish those two roles.

AB - The Bayesian paradigm is the preferred approach to evidence interpretation. It requires the evaluation of the probability of the evidence under at least two propositions. The value of the findings (i.e., our LR) will depend on these propositions and the case information, so it is crucial to identify which propositions are useful for the case at hand. Previously, a number of principles have been advanced and largely accepted for the evaluation of evidence. In the evaluation of traces involving DNA mixtures there may be more than two propositions possible. We apply these principles to some exemplar situations. We also show that in some cases, when there are no clear propositions or no defendant, a forensic scientist may be able to generate explanations to account for observations. In that case, the scientist plays a role of investigator, rather than evaluator. We believe that it is helpful for the scientist to distinguish those two roles.

U2 - 10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.007

DO - 10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.007

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 258

EP - 261

JO - Science and Justice - Journal of the Forensic Science Society

JF - Science and Justice - Journal of the Forensic Science Society

SN - 1355-0306

IS - 4

ER -

Buckleton J, Bright J-A, Taylor D, Evett I, Hicks T, Jackson G et al. Helping formulate propositions in forensic DNA analysis. Science & Justice. 2014 Jul;54(4):258-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2014.02.007