3 ms·

How would that argument go? As far as I understand it, the DNA of the occupants of said lab may be found. That would mean that the criminal samples may also con

How would that argument go? As far as I understand it, the DNA of the occupants of said lab may be found. That would mean that the criminal samples may also contain DNA of the lab occupants/scientists. Isn’t that the case currently as well and those DNA parts would be omitted?

archerx 2y ago
What if the murderer works in the lab?
- gunian 2y ago
  [dead]
- a_bonobo 2y ago
  The Phantom of Heilbronn! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn
  - archerx 2y ago
    That was interesting story, the ending in hindsight seems obvious. Thank you for sharing.
greenpresident 2y ago
That would ideal, yet we still got things like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn Woman at a cotton swab factory was identified after being considered a serial killer.
yzydserd 2y ago
It’s possibly not the GP’s point, but in general the more DNA that is available the better from a defense perspective. Many wrongful convictions involve a lack of physical evidence. Recent advances like “touch dna” and “m-vac” have led to new DNA evidence used in actual innocence decisions. Too often, a jury convicts a likely suspect on weak circumstantial evidence. Just as with Touch DNA, Air DNA will create new problems with avoiding contamination. The path toward Air DNA has been known for years [0]. Wouldn’t be surprised to learn crime scene investigators have been sampling and storing air in high profile cases ready for the tech to catch up. [0] https://www.science.org/content/article/dna-pulled-thin-air-identifies-nearby-animals https://www.science.org/content/article/dna-pulled-thin-air-...