Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1
From: Sylvia Else (sylvia_at_not.at.this.address)
Date: 09/01/04
- Next message: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Previous message: moreira: "Combinatorial Problem"
- In reply to: Paul Nutteing: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Next in thread: Paul Nutteing: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Reply: Paul Nutteing: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Reply: Greg: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 09:02:15 +1000
Paul Nutteing wrote:
> First point, male mutation rate higher than female.
> Second although mainly between 0.01 and 0.3 percent there are
> 20 such possibilities in each UK DNA profile
>
> At the moment used aa a fudge for prosecuting people
> when there are mismatches between suspect anbd crime scene
> profiles. They do not further test to nail down mutations.
> How more corrupt can you get than that.
There's no reason to assume that further testing will help. For example,
if the crime scene sample is a small clump of skin cells, then the
mutation may be on a very small area somewhere on the suspect's body.
It's hardly practical to go over the entire body surface taking samples
every half millimetre.
Even with 20 matches, the result is simply expressed as a probability.
If there's one mismatch, and given that mutations clearly occur, the
result is just a different (albeit higher) probability that the sample
did not come from the suspect.
So the court has to form a view about whether the probability is low
enough not to constitute reasonable doubt.
Sylvia.
- Next message: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Previous message: moreira: "Combinatorial Problem"
- In reply to: Paul Nutteing: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Next in thread: Paul Nutteing: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Reply: Paul Nutteing: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Reply: Greg: "Re: 640,000,000,000 TO 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|