On the Identification of Body Fluids and Tissues: A Crucial Link in the Investigation and Solution of Crime
- PMID: 34828334
- PMCID: PMC8617621
- DOI: 10.3390/genes12111728
On the Identification of Body Fluids and Tissues: A Crucial Link in the Investigation and Solution of Crime
Abstract
Body fluid and body tissue identification are important in forensic science as they can provide key evidence in a criminal investigation and may assist the court in reaching conclusions. Establishing a link between identifying the fluid or tissue and the DNA profile adds further weight to this evidence. Many forensic laboratories retain techniques for the identification of biological fluids that have been widely used for some time. More recently, many different biomarkers and technologies have been proposed for identification of body fluids and tissues of forensic relevance some of which are now used in forensic casework. Here, we summarize the role of body fluid/ tissue identification in the evaluation of forensic evidence, describe how such evidence is detected at the crime scene and in the laboratory, elaborate different technologies available to do this, and reflect real life experiences. We explain how, by including this information, crucial links can be made to aid in the investigation and solution of crime.
Keywords: DNA methylation; activity level; body fluid; forensic; identification; mRNA; organ; review; tissue.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
-
- Meakin G.E., Kokshoorn B., Oorschot R.A.H., Szkuta B. Evaluating Forensic DNA Evidence: Connecting the Dots. WIREs Forensic Sci. 2021;3:e1404. doi: 10.1002/wfs2.1404. - DOI
-
- Gill P., Hicks T., Butler J.M., Connolly E., Gusmão L., Kokshoorn B., Morling N., van Oorschot R.A.H., Parson W., Prinz M., et al. DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics: Assessing the Value of Forensic Biological Evidence—Guidelines Highlighting the Importance of Propositions: Part I: Evaluation of DNA Profiling Comparisons given (Sub-) Source Propositions. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2018;36:189–202. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.07.003. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Gill P., Hicks T., Butler J.M., Connolly E., Gusmão L., Kokshoorn B., Morling N., van Oorschot R.A.H., Parson W., Prinz M., et al. DNA Commission of the International Society for Forensic Genetics: Assessing the Value of Forensic Biological Evidence—Guidelines Highlighting the Importance of Propositions. Part II: Evaluation of Biological Traces Considering Activity Level Propositions. Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. 2020;44:102186. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2019.102186. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Jackson G., Biedermann A. “Source” or “Activity” What Is the Level of Issue in a Criminal Trial? Significance. 2019;16:36–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-9713.2019.01253.x. - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
