National Academies Press: OpenBook

The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence (1996)

Chapter: References

« Previous: Acknowledgments
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 226

References2

AABB. 1994. Standards for parentage testing laboratories. Bethesda, MD: Am Assoc Blood Banks.

Aickin M, Kaye D. 1983. Some mathematical and legal considerations in using serological tests to prove paternity. In: Walker RH, editor. Inclusion probabilities in parentage testing. Arlington, VA: Am Assoc Blood Banks. p 155-168.

Aitken CGG. 1995. Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists. Chichester, England: J Wiley.

Aitken CGG, Stoney DA, editors. 1991. The use of statistics in forensic science. New York: Ellis Harwood.

Aldous DJ. 1989. Probability approximations via the Poisson clumping heuristic. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Allen R, Balding D, Donnelly P, Friedman R, Kaye D, LaRue L, Park R, Robertson B, Stein A. 1995. Probability and proof in State v Skipper: an internet exchange. Jurimetrics J 35: 277-310.

Anonymous. 1892. Review of ''Finger Prints" by Francis Galton. The Athenaeum, December 24, p 893.

Annotation. 1984. Right of accused in state courts to have expert inspect, examine or test physical evidence in possession of prosecution. Modern cases. ALR 4th 27: 1188-1255.

ANSI/ASQC A3-1978. Quality systems terminology. Milwaukee: Am Soc Qual Control.

2 For an extensive list of relevant literature, see Weir (1995).

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 227

Armour JAL, Jeffreys AJ. 1992. Biology and applications of human minisatellite loci. Curr Opinion Genet Dev 2: 850-856.

ASCLD. 1987. Guidelines for forensic laboratory management practices. Crime Lab Dig. 14: 39-46.

Balazs, I. 1993. Population genetics of 14 ethnic groups using phenotypic data from VNTR loci. In: Pena SDJ, Chakraborty R, Epplen JT, Jeffreys AJ, editors. DNA fingerprinting: state of the science. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag. p 193-210.

Balazs I, Baird M, Clyne M, Meade E. 1989. Human population genetic studies of five hypervariable DNA loci. Am J Hum Genet 44: 182-190

Balding DJ, Donnelly P. 1994a. How convincing is DNA evidence? Nature 368: 285-286.

Balding DJ, Donnelly P. 1994b. The prosecutor's fallacy and DNA evidence. Crim Law Rev 1994: 711-721.

Balding DJ, Donnelly P. 1995. Inference in forensic identification. J Roy Stat Soc Ser A 158: 21-53.

Balding DJ, Donnelly P, Nichols RA. 1994. Comment: some causes for concern about DNA profiles. Stat Sci 9: 248-251.

Balding DJ, Nichols RA. 1994. DNA profile match probability calculations: how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands. Forensic Sci Int 64: 125-140.

Balding DJ, Nichols RA. 1995. A method for quantifying differentiation between populations at multi-allelic loci and its implications for investigating identity and paternity. In: Weir B, editor. Human identification: the use of DNA markers. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Acad. p 3-12.

Ballantyne J, Sensabaugh G, Witkowski J. 1989. Banbury Report 32: DNA technology and forensic science. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Lab Pr.

Bar-Hillel M. 1980. The base-rate fallacy in probability judgements. Acta Psychologica 44: 211-233.

Barnes WM. 1994. PCR amplification of up to 35-kb DNA with high fidelity and high yield from l bacteriophage templates. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 2216-2220.

Berger M. 1994. Evidentiary framework. In: Reference manual on scientific evidence. Washington DC: Federal Judicial Center. p 37-117.

Berry D. 1991a. Inferences using DNA profiling in forensic identification and paternity cases. Stat Sci 6: 175-205.

Berry D. 1991b. Rejoinder. Stat Sci 6: 202-205.

Berry DA, Evett IW, Pinchin R. 1992. Statistical inference in crime investigations using desoxyribonucleic acid profiling (with discussion). J Roy Stat Soc Ser C 41: 499-531.

Beyth-Marom R, Fischhoff B. 1983. Diagnosticity and pseudodiagnosticity. J Pers Soc Psychol 45: 1185-1195.

Bever RA, Creacy S. 1995. Validation and utilization of commercially available

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 228

STR multiplexes for parentage analysis. In: Fifth international symposium on human identification 1994: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 61-68.

Blake E, Mihalovich J, Higuchi R, Walsh PS, Erlich H. 1992. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification and human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DQa oligonucleotide typing on biological evidence samples: casework experience. J Forensic Sci 37: 700-726.

Brace CL. 1995. Region does not mean "race"—reality versus convention in forensic anthropology. J Forensic Sci 40: 171-175.

Brenner C, Morris JW. 1990. Paternity index calculations in single locus hypervariable DNA probes: validation and other studies. In: International symposium on human identification 1989: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 21-53.

Buckleton J, Walsh KJ, Triggs CM. 1991. A continuous model for interpreting the positions of bands in DNA locus-specific work. J Forensic Sci Soc 31: 353-363.

Budowle B, Baechtel FS, Adams DE. 1991. Validation with regard to environmental insults of the RFLP procedure for forensic purposes. In: Farley MA, Harrington JJ, editors. Forensic DNA technology. Chelsea, MI: Lewis. p 83-91.

Budowle B, Baechtel FS, Giusti AM, Monson KL. 1990. Data for forensic matching criteria for VNTR profiles. In: International symposium on human identification 1989: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 103-115.

Budowle B, Baechtel FS, Smerick JB, Presley KW, Giusti AM, Parsons G, Alevy MC, Chakraborty R. 1995. D1S80 population data in African Americans, Caucasians, southeastern Hispanics, southwestern Hispanics, and Orientals. J Forensic Sci 40: 38-44.

Budowle B, Giusti AM, Waye JS, Baechtel FS, Fourney RM, Adams DE, Presley LA, Deadman HA, Monson KL. 1991. Fixed-bin analysis for statistical evaluation of continuous distributions of allelic data from VNTR loci for use in forensic comparisons. Am J Hum Genet 48: 841-855.

Budowle B, Lindsey JA, DeCou JA, Koons BW, Giusti SM, Comey CT. 1995. Validation and population studies of the loci LDLR, GYPA, HBGG, D7S8, and Gc (PM loci), and HLA-DQa using a multiplex amplification and typing procedure. J Forensic Sci 40: 45-54.

Budowle B, Monson KL, Anoe K, Baechtel K, Bergman D. 1991. A preliminary report on binned general population data on six VNTR loci in Caucasians, Blacks and Hispanics from the United States. Crime Lab Dig 18: 9-26.

Budowle B, Monson KL, Giusti AM. 1994. A reassessment of frequency estimates of PvUII-generated VNTR profiles in a Finnish, an Italian and a general US Caucasian database: no evidence for ethnic subgroups affecting forensic estimates. Am J Hum Genet 55:533-539.

Budowle B, Monson KL, Giusti AM, Brown BL. 1994a. The assessment of frequency estimates of Hae III-generated VNTR profiles in various reference databases. J Forensic Sci 39: 319-52.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 229

Budowle B, Monson KL, Giusti AM, Brown BL. 1994b. Evaluation of Hinf I-generated VNTR profile frequencies determined using various ethnic databases. J Forensic Sci 39: 988-1008.

Cavalli-Sforza LL, Menozzi P, Piazza A. 1994. The history and geography of human genes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ Pr.

Cecil JS, Willging TE. 1994. Court appointed experts. In: Reference manual on scientific evidence. Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center. p 525-573.

Chakraborty R 1991. Statistical interpretation of DNA typing data. Am J Hum Genet 49: 895-897.

Chakraborty R. 1992. Sample size requirements for addressing the population genetic issues of forensic use of DNA typing. Hum Biol 64: 141-159.

Chakraborty R 1993. Analysis of genetic structure of populations: meaning, methods, and implications. In: Majumder PP, editor. Human population genetics: a centennial tribute for JBS Haldane. NewYork: Plenum. p 189-206.

Chakraborty R, Danker-Hopfe H. 1991. Analysis of population structure: a comparative study of different estimators of Wright's fixation indices. In: Rao CR, Chakraborty R, editors. Handbook of statistics 8: statistical methods in biological and medical sciences. Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland. p 203-254.

Chakraborty R, de Andrade M, Daiger SP, Budowle B. 1992. Apparent heterozygote deficiencies observed in DNA typing data and their implications in forensic applications. Ann Hum Genet 56: 45-57.

Chakraborty R, Jin L, Zhong Y, Deka R. 1995. Intra- and Inter-population variation at VNTR, short tandem repeat and polymarker loci and their implications in forensic and paternity analysis. In: Fifth international symposium on human identification 1994: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 29-41.

Chakraborty R, Jin L, Zhong Y, Srinivasan M, Budowle B. 1993. On allele frequency computation from DNA typing data. Int J Legal Med 106: 103-106.

Chakraborty R, Kidd KK. 1991. The utility of DNA typing in forensic work. Science 254: 1735-1739.

Chakraborty R, Srinivasan MR, Daiger SF. 1993. Evaluation of standard error and confidence interval of estimated multilocus genotype probabilities and their implications in DNA forensics. Am J Hum Genet 52: 60-70.

Cockerham CC. 1969. Variance of gene frequencies. Evolution 23: 72-84.

Cockerham CC. 1973. Analysis of gene frequencies. Genetics 74: 679-700.

Cohen J. 1990. DNA fingerprinting for forensic identification: potential effects on data interpretation of subpopulation heterogeneity and band number variability. Am J Hum Genet 46: 358-368.

Cohen J. 1992. The ceiling principle is not always conservative in assigning genotype frequencies for forensic DNA testing. Am J Hum Genet 51: 1165-1168.

Collins A, Morton NE. 1994. Likelihood ratios for DNA identification. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 6007-6011.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 230

Comey CT, Budowle B, Adams DE, Baumstark AL, Lindsey JA, Presley LA. 1993. PCR amplification and typing of the HLA DQa gene in forensic samples. J Forensic Sci 38: 239-249.

Cosso S, Reynolds R. 1995. Validation of the AmpliFLPTM D1S80 PCR amplification kit for forensic casework analysis according to TWGDAM guidelines. J Forensic Sci 40: 424-434.

Cox DR, Snell EJ. 1989. Analysis of binary data. New York: Chapman and Hall.

Crow JF, Denniston C. 1993. Population genetics as it relates to human identification. In: Fourth international symposium on human identification 1993: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 31-6.

Developments. 1995. Confronting the new challenges of scientific evidence. Harvard Law Rev 108: 1481-1605.

Devlin B, Krontiris T, Risch N. 1993. Population genetics of the HRAS1 minisatellite locus. Am J Hum Genet 53: 1298-1305.

Devlin B, Risch N. 1992. Ethnic differentiation at VNTR loci, with special reference to forensic applications. Am J Hum Genet 51: 534-548.

Devlin B, Risch N, Roeder K. 1990. No excess of homozygosity at loci used for DNA fingerprinting. Science 249: 1416-1420.

Devlin B, Risch N, Roeder K. 1992. Forensic inference from DNA fingerprints. J Am Stat Assoc 87: 337-350.

Devlin B, Risch N, Roeder K. 1993. Statistical evaluation of DNA fingerprinting: a critique of the NRC's report. Science 259: 748-749, 837.

Devlin B, Risch N, Roeder K. 1994. Comments on the statistical aspects of the NRC's report on DNA typing. J Forensic Sci 39: 28-40.

Diamond SS. 1994. Reference guide on survey research. In: Reference manual on scientific evidence. Washington DC: Federal Judicial Center. p 221-271.

Edwards A, Hammond HA, Jin L, Caskey CT, and Chakraborty R. 1992. Genetic variation at five trimeric and tetrameric tandem repeat loci in four human population groups. Genomics 12: 241-253.

Edwards W, von Winterfeldt D. 1986. Cognitive illusions and their implications for the law. S Cal Law Rev 59: 225-276.

Ellman I, Kaye D. 1979. Probabilities and proof: Can hla and blood group testing prove paternity? NYU Law Rev 54: 1131-1162.

Evett IW. 1991. Comment. Stat Sci 6: 200-201.

Evett IW. 1992. Evaluating DNA profiles in the case where the defense is it was my brother. J Forensic Sci Soc 32: 5-14.

Evett IW, Buffery C, Willott G, Stoney D. 1991. A guide to interpreting single locus profiles of DNA mixtures in forensic cases. J Forensic Sci Soc 31: 41-47.

Evett IW, Gill PD, Scranage JK, Weir BS. 1996. Establishing the robustness of short-tandem-repeat statistics for forensic applications. Am J Hum Genet 58: 398-407.

Evett IW, Pinchin R. 1991. DNA single locus profiles: tests for the robustness

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 231

of statistical procedures within the context of forensic science. Int J Legal Med 104: 267-272.

Evett IW, Scranage J, Pinchin R. 1992. An efficient statistical procedure for interpreting DNA single locus profiling data in crime cases. J Forensic Sci Soc 32: 307-326.

Evett IW, Scranage J, Pinchin R. 1993. An illustration of the advantages of efficient statistical methods for RFLP analysis in forensic science. Am J Hum Genet 52: 498-505.

Faigman DL, Baglioni AJ. 1988. Bayes' theorem in the trial process: instructing jurors on the value of statistical evidence. Law Hum Behav 12: 1-17.

FBI. 1990. Procedures for the detection of restriction fragment length polymorphisms in human DNA. mimeographed. 31 p.

FBI. 1993a. The application of forensic DNA testing to solve violent crimes. Washington, DC: US Dept Justice.

FBI. 1993b. VNTR population data: a worldwide survey. 5 vol. Quantico, VA: FBI Academy.

Federal Judicial Center. 1994. Reference manual on scientific evidence. Washington, DC: Federal Judicial Center.

Fienberg SE, editor. 1989. The evolving role of statistical assessments as evidence in the courts. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Fienberg SE. 1992. Comment: the increasing sophistication of statistical assessments as evidence in discrimination litigation. J Am Stat Assoc 77: 784-787.

Finkelstein MO, Fairley WB. 1970. A Bayesian approach to identification evidence. Harvard Law Rev 83: 489-517.

Finkelstein MO, Levin B. 1990. Statistics for lawyers. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Fisher, RA. 1951. Standard calculations for evaluating a blood group system. Heredity 5:95-102.

Fong G, Krantz D, Nisbett R. 1986. The effects of statistical training on thinking about everyday problems. Cog Psychol 18:253-292.

Galton F. 1892. Finger prints. London: Macmillan.

Geisser S, Johnson W. 1992. Testing Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium on allelic data from VNTR loci. Am J Hum Genet 51: 1084-1088.

Geisser S, Johnson W. 1993. Testing independence of fragment lengths within VNTR Loci. Am J Hum Genet 53: 1103-1106.

Giannelli PC. 1991. Criminal discovery, scientific evidence, and DNA. Vanderbilt Law Rev 44: 791-825

Giannelli P, Imwinkelried EJ. 1993. Scientific evidence. 2nd ed. Charlottesville, VA: Michie.

Gill P, Evett I. 1995. Population genetics of short tandem repeat (STR) loci. In: Weir B, editor. Human identification: the use of DNA markers. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Acad. p 69-87.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 232

Goodman J. 1992. Jurors' comprehension and assessment of probabilistic evidence. Am J Trial Advoc 16: 361-389.

Haldane JBS. 1949. The association of characters as a result of inbreeding and linkage. Ann Eugen 15: 15-23.

Hammond HA, Jin L, Zhong Y, Caskey CT, Chakraborty R. 1994. Evaluation of 13 short tandem repeat loci for use in personal identification applications. Am J Hum Genet 55: 175-89.

Harris DA. 1992. The constitution and truth seeking: a new theory on expert services for indigent defendants. J Crim Law Criminol 83: 469-525.

Hartl DL, Clark AG. 1989. Principles of population genetics. 2nd ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.

Hartmann J, Keister R, Houlihan B, Thompson L, Baldwin R, Buse E, Driver B, Kuo M. 1994. Diversity of ethnic and racial VNTR RFLP fixed-bin frequency distributions. Am J Hum Genet 55: 1268-1278.

Helmuth R, Fildes N, Blake E, Luce MC, Chimera J, Gorodezky C, Stoneking M, Schmill N, Klitz W, Higuchi RM, Erlich HA. 1990. HLA-DQa allele and genotype frequencies in various human populations, determined by using enzymatic amplification and oligonucleotide probes. Am J Hum Genet 47:515-523.

Herrin G Jr. 1993. Probability of matching RFLP patterns from unrelated individuals. Am J Hum Genet 52: 491-497.

Herrin G, Fildes N, Reynolds R. 1994. Evaluation of the Amplitype® PM DNA test system on forensic case samples. J Forensic Sci 39: 1247-1253.

Hogarth RM, Reder MW, editors. 1987. Behavioral foundations of economic theory. Chicago, IL: Univ Chicago Pr.

Huang NE, Budowle B. 1995. Fixed bin population data for the VNTR loci D1S7, D2S44, D4S139, D5S110, and D17S79 in Chinese from Taiwan. J Forensic Sci 40: 287-290.

Imwinkelried EJ. 1990. The applicability of the attorney-client privilege to nontestifying experts: reestablishing the boundaries between the attorney-client privilege and the work product protection. Wash Univ Law Quart 68: 19-50.

Jacoby J, Handlin AH. 1991. Non-probability sampling designs for litigation surveys. Trademark Rep 81: 169-179.

Jakubaitis JL. 1991. Note, "genetically" altered admissibility: legislative notice of DNA typing. Clev St Law Rev 39: 415.

James G, James RC. 1959. Mathematics dictionary. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.

Jeffreys AJ, MacLeod A, Tamaki K, Neil D, Monckton D. 1991. Minisatellite repeat coding as a digital approach to DNA typing. Nature 354: 204-209.

Jeffreys AJ, Pena DJ. 1993. Brief introduction to human DNA fingerprinting. In: Pena DJ, Chakraborty R, Eppelen JT, Jeffreys AJ. DNA fingerprints: state of the science. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag. p 1-20.

Jonakait R. 1991. Forensic science: the need for regulation. Harvard J Law Technol 4:109-191.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 233

Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. 1982. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ Pr.

Kass R, Raftery A. 1995. Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc 90: 773-795.

Kaye DH. 1988a. Introduction: What is Bayesianism? In: Tillers P, Green EC, editors. Probability and inference in the law of evidence: the uses and limits of Bayesianism. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Acad. p 1-19.

Kaye DH. 1988b. Plemel as a primer on proving paternity. Willamette Law J 24: 867-883.

Kaye DH. 1989. The probability of an ultimate issue: the strange cases of paternity testing. Iowa Law Rev 75: 75-109.

Kaye DH. 1990a. Improving legal statistics. Law Soc Rev 24: 1255-1275.

Kaye DH. 1990b. DNA paternity probabilities. Family Law Quart 24: 279-304.

Kaye DH. 1990c. Presumptions, probability and paternity. Jurimetrics J 30: 323-349.

Kaye DH. 1991. The admissibility of DNA testing. Cardozo Law Rev 13: 353-360.

Kaye DH. 1993. DNA evidence: probability, population genetics, and the courts. Harvard J Law Technol 7: 101-172.

Kaye DH. 1995a. The forensic debut of the NRC's DNA report: population structure, ceiling frequencies and the need for numbers. Genetica 96:99-105.

Kaye DH. 1995b. The relevance of matching DNA: Is the window half open or half shut? J Crim Law Criminol 85: 676-695.

Kaye DH, Freedman DA. 1994. Reference guide on statistics. In: Reference manual on scientific evidence. Washington DC: Federal Judicial Center. p 331-414.

Kaye DH, Kanwischer R. 1988. Admissibility of genetic testing in paternity litigation: a survey of state statutes. Family Law Quart 22: 109-115.

Kaye DH, Koehler JJ. 1991. Can jurors understand probabilistic evidence? J Roy Stat Soc 154A: 21-39.

Kidd JR, Pakstis AJ, Kidd KK. 1993. Global levels of DNA variation. In: Fourth international symposium on human identification 1993: Proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 21-30.

Kirby LT. 1992. DNA fingerprinting: an introduction. New York: WH Freeman.

Klimpton CP, Gill P, Walton A, Urquhart A, Millican ES, and Adams M. 1993. Automated DNA profiling employing multiplex amplification of short tandem repeat loci. PCR Meth Applic 3: 13-22.

Koehler JJ. 1993a. Error and exaggeration in the presentation of DNA evidence at trial. Jurimetrics J 34: 21-39.

Koehler JJ. 1993b. DNA matches and statistics: important questions, surprising answers. Judicature 76: 222-229.

Koehler JJ, Chia A, Lindsey S. 1995. The random match probability (RMP) in DNA evidence: irrelevant and prejudicial? Jurimetrics J 35 : 201-219.

Krane DE, Allen RW, Sawyer SA, Petrov DA, Hartl DL. 1992. Genetic differ-

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 234

ences at four DNA typing loci in Finnish, Italian, and mixed Caucasian populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89: 10583-10587.

Kreiling KR. 1993. DNA technology in forensic science. Jurimetrics J 33: 449-487.

Krontiris TG. 1995. Minisatellites and human disease. Science 269: 1682-1683.

Lander ES. 1989. DNA fingerprinting on trial. Nature 339: 501-505.

Lander ES, Budowle B. 1994. DNA fingerprinting dispute laid to rest. Nature 371: 735-738.

Latter BHD. 1980. Genetic differences within and between populations of the major human subgroups. Am Nat 116: 220-237.

Lee H, Gaensslen R, editors. 1990. DNA and other polymorphisms in forensic science. Chicago, IL: Year Book Medical.

Lempert R. 1977. Modeling relevance. Mich Law Rev 75: 1021-1057.

Lempert R. 1991. Some caveats concerning DNA as criminal identification evidence: with thanks to the Reverend Bayes. Cardozo Law Rev 13: 303-341.

Lempert R. 1993. DNA, science, and the law: two cheers for the ceiling principle. Jurimetrics J 34: 41-57.

Lewontin RC. 1972. The apportionment of human diversity. Evol Biol 6: 381-398.

Lewontin RC, Hartl DL. 1991. Population genetics in forensic DNA typing. Science 254: 1745-1750.

Li W-H, Sadler LA. 1991. Low nucleotide diversity in man. Genetics 129: 513-523.

Liebeschuetz J. 1991. Statutory control of DNA fingerprinting in Indiana. Indiana Law Rev 25: 204-223.

Mange EJ, Mange AP. 1994. Basic human genetics. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.

McCormick. 1992. McCormick on evidence. 4th ed. Strong J, editor. St Paul, MN: West.

Maringer EF. 1993. Note. Witness for the prosecution: prosecutorial discovery of information generated by non-testifying defense psychiatric experts. Fordham Law Rev 62: 653-683.

Meaney JR. 1995. From Frye to Daubert: Is a pattern emerging? Jurimetrics J 34: 191-199.

Meyer E, Wiegand P, Brinkmann B. 1995. Phenotype differences of STRs in 7 human populations. Int J Legal Med 107: 314-322.

Moenssens AA, Starrs JE, Henderson CE, Inbau FE. 1995. Scientific evidence in civil and criminal cases. 4th ed. Westbury NY: Foundation.

Monckton DG, Tamaki K, MacLeod A, Neil DL, Jeffreys AJ. 1993. Allele-specific MVR-PCR analysis at minisatellite D1S8. Hum Mol Genet 2: 513-519.

Monson KL, Budowle B. 1993. A comparison of the fixed bin method with the floating bin and direct count methods: effect of VNTR profile frequency estimation and reference population. J Forensic Sci 38: 1037-1050.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 235

Montoya J. 1995. A theory of compulsory process clause discovery rights. Indiana Law J 845: 880-884.

Morton NE. 1992. Genetic structure of forensic populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89: 2556-2560.

Morton NE. 1994. Genetic structure of forensic populations. Am J Hum Genet 55: 587-588.

Morton NE. 1995. Alternative approaches to population structure. Genetica 96: 139-144.

Morton NE, Collins A, Balazs I. 1993. Kinship bioassay on hypervariable loci in blacks and Caucasians. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90: 1892-1896.

Mosteller F, Youtz C. 1990. Quantifying probabilistic expressions. Stat Sci 5: 2-34.

Mosteller R. 1986. Discovery against the defense: tilting the adversarial balance. Cal Law Rev 74: 1567-1685.

Mourant AE, Kopeac AC, Domaniewska-Sobczak K. 1976. The distribution of the human blood groups and other polymorphisms. London: Oxford Univ Pr.

Mudd JL, Baechtel FS, Duewer DL, Currie LA, Reeder DJ, Leigh SD, Liu HK. 1994. Interlaboratory comparison of autoradiographic DNA profiling measurements. 1. Data and summary statistics. Anal Chem 66: 3303-3317.

Nagylaki T. 1993. The evolution of multilocus systems under weak selection. Genetics 134: 627-647.

Nei M. 1965. Variation and covariation of gene frequencies in subdivided populations. Evolution 19: 256-258.

Nei M. 1973. Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70: 3321-3323.

Nei M. 1977. F-statistics and analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Ann Hum Genet 41: 225-233.

Nei M. 1987. Molecular evolutionary genetics. New York: Columbia Univ Pr.

Nei M, Li WH. 1973. Linkage disequilibrium in subdivided populations. Genetics 75: 213-219.

Nesson CR. 1979. Reasonable doubt and permissive inferences: the value of complexity. Harvard Law Rev 92: 1187-1199.

Nesson C. 1985. The evidence or the event? On judicial proof and the acceptability of verdicts. Harvard Law Rev 98: 1357-1392.

Neufeld PJ, Colman N. 1990. When science takes the witness stand. Sci Am 262: 46-53.

Nisbett RE, Krantz D, Jepson C, Kunda Z. 1983. The use of statistical heuristics in everyday inductive reasoning. Psychol Rev 92: 339.

Nisbett RE, Ross L. 1980. Human inference: strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

NRC. 1992. DNA technology in forensic science. Washington, DC: National Acad Pr.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 236

O'Brien JP. 1994. Note. DNA fingerprinting: the Virginia approach. Wm Mary Law Rev 35: 767.

Olaisen B, Bekkemoen M, Hoff-Olsen P, Gill P. 1993. Human VNTR mutation and sex. In: Pena SDJ, Chakraborty R, Eplen JT, Jeffreys AJ, editors. DNA fingerprinting: state of the science. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag. p 63-69.

Palmerini M. 1993. The illusion of knowing. Chichester, England: J Wiley.

Pena R, Chakraborty R, Epplen JT, Jeffreys AJ, editors. 1993. DNA fingerprinting: state of the science. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag.

Perkin Elmer Corp. 1995. Forensic DNA technology implementation update, forensic forum: updates on PCR in casework and research. Norwalk, CT: Perkin Elmer.

Poulton EC. 1989. Bias in quantifying judgements. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Promega. 1995. Fifth international symposium on human identification 1994: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega.

Reeves T, Lockhart R. 1993. Distributional versus singular approaches to probability and errors in probabilistic reasoning. J Exper Psychol Gen 122: 207-226.

Risch NJ, Devlin B. 1992. On the probability of matching DNA fingerprints. Science 255: 717-720.

Rivas F, Cerda-Flores R, Zhong Y, Chakraborty R. 1995. Intra- and inter-population genetic diversity at the HLA-DQA locus and their implications for parentage analysis and human identification. Am J Hum Genet 55: A163.

Robertson A, Hill WG. 1984. Deviations from Hardy-Weinberg proportions: sampling variances and use in estimation of inbreeding coefficients. Genetics 107: 703-718.

Roeder K. 1994. DNA fingerprinting: a review of the controversy. Stat Sci 9: 222-278. (Comments by Balding, Berry, Lempert, Lewontin, Sudbury, Thompson, and Weir and rejoinder by Roeder.)

Roeder K, Escobar M, Kadane JB, Balazs I. 1995. Measuring heterogeneity in forensic databases using hierarchical Bayes models. Biometrika (submitted).

Saferstein R, editor. 1993. Forensic science handbook, Vol III. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents/Prentice Hall.

Sajantila A, Budowle B, Strom M, Johnsson V, Lukka M, Peltonen L, Ehnholm C. 1992. PCR amplification of alleles at the DS180 locus: comparison of a Finnish and a North American Caucasian population sample, and forensic casework evaluation. Am J Hum Genet 50: 816-825.

Saks MJ, Koehler JJ. 1991. What DNA ''fingerprinting" can teach the law about the rest of forensic science. Cardozo Law Rev 13: 361-372.

Scheck BC. 1994. DNA and Daubert. Cardozo Law Rev 15: 1959-1997.

Schwarzer W. 1994. Management of expert evidence. In: Reference manual on scientific evidence. Washington DC: Federal Judicial Center. p 7-35.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 237

Sensabaugh GF. 1987. Genetic typing of biological evidence. Comments for the Cooper amicus brief. Cal Assoc Crim Newsl, July 1987, p 11-17.

Sensabaugh GF, Northey D. 1985. What can be learned from the proficiency trials? An analysis of the electrophoretic typing results, 1975-1983. In: International Symposium on Forensic Applications of Electrophoresis: proceedings. Washington, DC: GPO. p 184.

Shaviro D. 1989. Statistical-probability evidence and the appearance of justice. Harvard Law Rev 103: 530-554.

Slimowitz JR, Cohen JE. 1993. Violations of the ceiling principle: exact conditions and statistical evidence. Am J Hum Genet 53: 314-323.

Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. 1981. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: WH Freeman.

Stigler SM. 1995. Galton and identification by fingerprints. Genetics 140: 857860.

Stoney DE, Thornton JI. 1986. A critical analysis of quantitative fingerprinting individuality models. J Forensic Sci 33: 11-13.

Sullivan PJ. 1992. DNA fingerprint matches. Science 256: 1743-1744.

Sutherland GR, Richards RI. 1995. Simple tandem DNA repeats and human genetic disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92: 3636-3641.

Symposium. 1991. Decision and inference in litigation. Cardozo Law Rev 13: 253-1079.

Therman E, Susman M. 1993. Human chromosomes: structure, behavior, and effects. 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Thompson WC. 1993. Evaluating the admissibility of new genetic identification tests: lessons from the "DNA war." J Crim Law Criminol 84: 22-104.

Thompson WC. 1995. Subjective interpretation, laboratory error, and the value of forensic DNA evidence: three case studies. Genetica 92: 153-168.

Thompson WC, Ford S. 1989. DNA typing: acceptance and weight of the new genetic identification tests. Virginia Law Rev 75: 45-108.

Thompson WC, Ford S. 1991. The meaning of a match: sources of ambiguity in the interpretation of DNA prints. In: Farley M, Harrington J, editors. Forensic DNA technology. Chelsea, MI: Lewis. p 93-152.

Thompson WC, Schumann EL. 1987. Interpretation of statistical evidence in criminal trials: the prosecutor's fallacy and the defense attorney's fallacy. Law Hum Behav 11: 167-187.

Tribe L. 1971. Trial by mathematics: precision and ritual in the legal process. Harvard Law Rev 84: 1329-1393.

TWGDAM. 1989. Guidelines for a quality assurance program for DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. Crime Lab Dig 16: 40-59.

TWGDAM. 1990a. Guidelines for a proficiency testing program for DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. Crime Lab Dig 17: 50-60.

TWGDAM. 1990b. Statement of the working group on statistical standards for DNA analysis. Crime Lab Dig 17: 53-58.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 238

TWGDAM. 1991. Guidelines for a quality assurance program for DNA analysis. Crime Lab Dig 18: 44-75.

TWGDAM. 1993. A guide for conducting a DNA quality assurance audit. Crime Lab Dig 20: 8-18.

TWGDAM. 1994a. Notes from the Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods. Crime Lab Dig 21: 9-13.

TWGDAM. 1994b. Notes from the Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods. Crime Lab Dig 21: 69-74.

TWGDAM. 1994c. The Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (TWGDAM) consensus approach for applying the "ceiling principle" to derive conservative estimates of DNA profile frequencies. J Forensic Sci 39: 899-904. (Also Crime Lab Dig 21: 21-25.)

TWGDAM. 1995. Guidelines for a quality assurance program for DNA analysis. Crime Lab Dig 22: 21-50.

Walker RH, editor. 1983. Inclusion probabilities in parentage testing. Arlington, VA: Am Assoc Blood Banks.

Wallsten S, Budesco DV. 1990. Comment. Stat Science 5: 23-26.

Weir BS. 1990. Genetic data analysis: methods for discrete population genetic data. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.

Weir BS. 1992a. Population genetics in the forensic DNA debate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89: 11654-11659.

Weir BS. 1992b. Independence of VNTR alleles defined as floating bins. Am J Hum Genet 51: 992-997.

Weir BS. 1992c. Independence of VNTR alleles defined as fixed bins. Genetics 130: 873-887.

Weir BS. 1993a. Forensic population genetics and the National Research Council (NRC). Am J Hum Genet 52: 437-440.

Weir BS. 1993b. Independence tests for VNTR alleles defined as quantile bins. Am J Hum Genet 53: 1107-1113.

Weir BS. 1993c. DNA fingerprinting report. Science 260: 473.

Weir BS. 1994. The effects of inbreeding on forensic calculations. Annu Rev Genet 28: 597-621.

Weir BS. 1995a. A bibliography for the use of DNA in human identification. In: Weir BS, editor. Human identification. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Acad. p 179-213.

Weir BS, editor. 1995b. Human identification: the use of DNA markers. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Acad.

Weir BS, Cockerham CC. 1984. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38: 1358-1370.

Weir BS, Gaut BS. 1993. Matching and binning DNA fragments in forensic science. Jurimetrics J 34: 9-19.

Weir BS, Hill WG. 1993. Population genetics of DNA profiles. J Forensic Sci 33: 219-226.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

Page 239

Weir BS, Triggs CM, Starling L, Stowell LI, Walsh KAJ, Buckleton EST. 1996. Interpreting DNA mixtures. J Forensic Sci (submitted).

Wilson MR, Holland MM, Stoneking M, DiZinno JA, Budowle B. 1993. Guidelines for the use of mitochondrial DNA sequencing in forensic science. Crime Lab Dig 20: 68-77.

Wong Z, Wilson V, Patel I, Povey S, and Jeffreys AJ. 1987. Characterization of a panel of highly variable minisatellites cloned from human DNA. Ann Hum Genet 51:269-288.

Wooley JR. 1995. Why we will never all agree about DNA testing in criminal cases. In: Fifth international symposium on human identification: proceedings. Madison, WI: Promega. p 1-4.

Wright S. 1951. The genetical structure of populations. Ann Eugen 15: 159-171.

Wrogemann K, Biancalana V, Devys D, Imbert G, Trottier Y, Mandel J-L. 1993. Microsatellites and disease: a new paradigm. In: Pena SDJ, Chakraborty R, Epplen JT, Jeffreys AJ, editors. DNA fingerprinting: state of the science. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verlag. p 141-152.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×

There was a problem loading page 240.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 226
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 227
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 228
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 229
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 230
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 231
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 232
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 233
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 234
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 235
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 236
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 237
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 238
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 239
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1996. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5141.
×
Page 240
Next: Index »
The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $55.95 Buy Ebook | $44.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

In 1992 the National Research Council issued DNA Technology in Forensic Science, a book that documented the state of the art in this emerging field. Recently, this volume was brought to worldwide attention in the murder trial of celebrity O. J. Simpson. The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence reports on developments in population genetics and statistics since the original volume was published. The committee comments on statements in the original book that proved controversial or that have been misapplied in the courts. This volume offers recommendations for handling DNA samples, performing calculations, and other aspects of using DNA as a forensic tool—modifying some recommendations presented in the 1992 volume. The update addresses two major areas:

  • Determination of DNA profiles. The committee considers how laboratory errors (particularly false matches) can arise, how errors might be reduced, and how to take into account the fact that the error rate can never be reduced to zero.
  • Interpretation of a finding that the DNA profile of a suspect or victim matches the evidence DNA. The committee addresses controversies in population genetics, exploring the problems that arise from the mixture of groups and subgroups in the American population and how this substructure can be accounted for in calculating frequencies.

This volume examines statistical issues in interpreting frequencies as probabilities, including adjustments when a suspect is found through a database search. The committee includes a detailed discussion of what its recommendations would mean in the courtroom, with numerous case citations. By resolving several remaining issues in the evaluation of this increasingly important area of forensic evidence, this technical update will be important to forensic scientists and population geneticists—and helpful to attorneys, judges, and others who need to understand DNA and the law. Anyone working in laboratories and in the courts or anyone studying this issue should own this book.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!