TrueAllele in Indiana courts

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Forensic DNA Inference ICFIS 2008 Lausanne, Switzerland Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Joseph B Kadane, PhD Robin W Cotton, PhD Cybergenetics ©
Advertisements

Finding Truth in DNA Mixture Evidence Innocence Network Conference April, 2013 Charlotte, NC Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA.
How TrueAllele ® Works (Part 3) Kinship, Paternity and Missing Persons Cybergenetics Webinar December, 2014 Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics,
Preventing rape in the military through effective DNA computing Forensics Europe Expo Forensics Seminar Theatre April, 2014 London, UK Mark W Perlin, PhD,
DNA Forensics MUPGRET Workshop. “DNA evidence…offers prosecutors important new tools for the identification and apprehension of some of the most violent.
Forensic Statistics From the ground up…. Basics Interpretation Hardy-Weinberg equations Random Match Probability Likelihood Ratio Substructure.
Revolutionising DNA analysis in major crime investigations The Investigator Conferences Green Park Conference Centre May, 2014 Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire.
No DNA Left Behind: When "inconclusive" really means "informative" Schenectady County District Attorney’s Office January, 2014 Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD,
Challenging DNA Evidence The Fifth Judicial District of Pennsylvania Criminal Division February, 2015 Pittsburgh, PA Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics,
How TrueAllele ® Works (Part 2) Degraded DNA and Allele Dropout Cybergenetics Webinar November, 2014 Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh,
TrueAllele ® Genetic Calculator: Implementation in the NYSP Crime Laboratory NYS DNA Subcommittee May 19, 2010 Barry Duceman, Ph.D New York State Police.
Cybergenetics Webinar January, 2015 Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics © How TrueAllele ® Works (Part 4)
Sgt. Kevin McKinney Investigations Division Elko County Sheriff’s Office.
Cross examination Is the DNA a mixture of two or more people? How did you calculate the match statistic? What is the scientific basis of that calculation?
Unleashing Forensic DNA through Computer Intelligence Forensics Europe Expo Forensic Innovation Conference April, 2013 London, UK Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD,
Human Fallability Cheng JieCHIK Yi ShinLEE Wei ZhengTEO EugeneTOH.
Murder in McKeesport October 25, 2008 Tamir Thomas.
When Good DNA Goes Bad International Conference on Forensic Research & Technology October, 2012 Chicago, Illinois Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics,
Open Access DNA Database Duquesne University March, 2013 Pittsburgh, PA Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Cybergenetics ©
Death Row Inmates 2005 BLACK 41.7% HISPANIC 10.4% WHITE 45.5% OTHER 2.3%
Objective DNA Mixture Information in the Courtroom: Relevance, Reliability & Acceptance NIST International Symposium on Forensic Science Error Management:
Death Needs Answers: The DNA Evidence Cybergenetics © Andrea Niapas Book Launch Pittsburgh, PA May, 2013 Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics,
Separating DNA Mixtures by Computer to Identify and Convict a Serial Rapist Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA Garett Sugimoto,
When DNA alone is not enough: exoneration by computer interpretation
Pathology Informatics Summit Association for Pathology Informatics
Science & Sorcery in Forensic DNA Evidence
Four person DNA mixture
DNA: TrueAllele® Statistical Analysis, Probabilistic Genotyping
The Triumph and Tragedy of DNA Evidence
A Match Likelihood Ratio for DNA Comparison
Forensic Stasis in a World of Flux
Validating TrueAllele® genotyping on ten contributor DNA mixtures
Pioneers of Forensic Science
How to Defend Yourself Against DNA Mixtures
Error in the likelihood ratio: false match probability
Explaining the Likelihood Ratio in DNA Mixture Interpretation
DNA identification pathway
Criminal Law and Appeals
PCAST report • DNA mixture limits 3 contributors 20% fraction
Distorting DNA evidence: methods of math distraction
On the threshold of injustice: manipulating DNA evidence
“Using Computer Technology to Overcome Bottlenecks in the Forensic DNA Testing Process and Improve Data Recovery from Complex Samples”
Machines can work it out: Automated TrueAllele® workflow
Solving sexual assault cases using DNA mixture evidence
Suffolk County TrueAllele® Validation
TrueAllele for DNA Mixtures
Solving Crimes using MCMC to Analyze Previously Unusable DNA Evidence
Investigative DNA Databases that Preserve Identification Information
DNA Identification: Inclusion Genotype and LR
New York State Police TrueAllele® Validation
Mark W Perlin, PhD, MD, PhD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
DNA Identification: Biology and Information
Forensic match information: exact calculation and applications
No information from mixture
severed carotid artery
Question What is a threshold? Cybergenetics ©
DNA identification pathway
2018 AAFS Annual Scientific Meeting February 22, 2018
Genotype Information Criteria for Forensic DNA Databases
The Triumph and Tragedy of DNA Evidence
Probabilistic Genotyping to the Rescue for Pinkins and Glenn
Forensic validation, error and reporting: a unified approach
DNA Identification: Biology and Information
DNA Identification: Mixture Interpretation
Exonerating the Innocent with Probabilistic Genotyping
Testifying about probabilistic genotyping results
David W. Bauer1, PhD Nasir Butt2, PhD Jeffrey Oblock2
Using probabilistic genotyping to distinguish family members
Reporting match error: casework, validation & language
Presentation transcript:

TrueAllele in Indiana courts State of Indiana v. Malcolm Wade August, 2016 Bloomington, IN Daubert hearing Darryl Pinkins v. State of Indiana April, 2016 Merrillville, IN DNA exoneration Cybergenetics © 2016

Pinkins case 1989 – 5 men raped an Indiana woman Darryl Pinkins and 2 others misidentified 1991 – wrongfully convicted, 65 year sentence 2001 – DNA mixture evidence 2 contributors found, not the accused but 5 were needed, post-conviction relief denied

into sperm and nonsperm #1. Jacket evidence Lab separates DNA into sperm and nonsperm major J sperm mixture minor nonsperm (victim V)

Match table 1 References V Pinkins J -15.39 -18.00

into sperm and nonsperm #2. Sweater evidence Lab separates DNA into sperm and nonsperm major S sperm mixture minor nonsperm fraction (victim)

Match table 2 References V P J -15.39 -18.00 S -15.17

#3. Hair evidence Roosevelt Glenn case DNA analysis H

Match table 3 References V P Glenn J -15.39 -18.00 S -15.17 H

Different evidence genotypes? Evidence vs. evidence Different evidence genotypes? J S H 11.07 1.21 4.15 10.22 -2.39 10.31

Similar genotypes Jacket Sweater Hair

Kinship analysis father mother person sibling

XY male genotype, so three brothers Sibling vs. evidence sibling of J S H 6.67 4.85 5.08 4.70 6.01 3.34 5.78 4.18 5.55 XY male genotype, so three brothers

Match table 3 References V P G J S H -15.39 -18.00 11.07 1.21 4.15 -15.17 10.22 -2.39 10.31

Examine multiple experiments simultaneously #4. Joint jacket 10% minor Examine multiple experiments simultaneously

Match table 4 References V P G J S H JJ -15.39 -18.00 11.07 1.21 4.15 -6.19 -15.17 10.22 -2.39 -5.81 10.31 -3.52 -2.78 -8.50 -8.43 7.05

#5. Jacket + sweater joint 5% minor Locus D5S818 JJ JS

Match table 5 References V P G J S H JJ JS -15.39 -18.00 11.07 1.21 4.15 -6.19 -7.66 -15.17 10.22 -2.39 -5.81 -8.09 10.31 -3.52 -5.80 -2.78 -8.50 -8.43 7.05 -1.49 -10.47 -5.79 -12.60 8.06

TrueAllele Pinkins findings 1. compared evidence with evidence 2. calculated exclusionary match statistics 3. revealed 5% minor mixture contributor 4. jointly analyzed DNA mixture data 5. showed three perpetrators were brothers found 5 unidentified genotypes, defendants not linked to the crime Search CODIS?