Although some of the initial controversy surrounding DNA profiling has been resolved, courts have been misled about the strength of DNA evidence.
Enjoying our latest content?
Log in or create an account to continue
- Access the most recent journalism from Nature's award-winning team
- Explore the latest features & opinion covering groundbreaking research
or
References
Lander, E. Nature 339, 501–505 (1989).
Lewontin, R. C. & Hartl, D. L. Science 254, 1745 (1991).
Roberts, L. Science 254, 1721–1723 (1991).
Anderson, C, Nature 355, 753–754 (1992).
Roberts, L. Chance 5, 60–66 (1992).
National Research Council DNA Technology in Forensic Science (National Academy, Washington, DC, 1992).
Macllwain, C. Nature 367, 101 (1994).
Koehler, J. J. Jurimetrics 34, 21–39 (1993).
Anderson, C. Nature 359, 349 (1992).
Thompson, W. C. Judicature 77, 57 (1993).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Balding, D., Donnelly, P. How convincing is DNA evidence?. Nature 368, 285–286 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1038/368285a0
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/368285a0
This article is cited by
-
Genetics in geographically structured populations: defining, estimating and interpreting FST
Nature Reviews Genetics (2009)
-
Scientist vs the law
Accreditation and Quality Assurance (2003)
-
The effect of relatedness on likelihood ratios and the use of conservative estimates
Genetica (1995)
-
Match probability calculations for multi-locus DNA profiles
Genetica (1995)
-
Dutch Caucasian population data on the loci LDLR, GYPA, HBGG, D7S8, and GC
International Journal of Legal Medicine (1995)
