I don't know if this will be helpful or not, but I thought I'd ask AI about this issue. (I used Copilot for the first time; I've only used ChatGPT before. Didn't see any difference, if you're interested!)The lab report would definitely show bovine DNA and human DNA and any other DNA they found. Lab reports NEVER disregard any element of something they are testing because there can be unexpected results.
"National standards exist for reporting DNA analysis, however, laboratories may include additional information in the analytical report. Basic elements that commonly appear in reports include the following:
Reports may contain the results of any additional non-DNA tests performed to locate and characterize the type of biological evidence present."
- Administrative information on the case, such as agency, file number, evidence item numbers, and suspect name.
- Date of the report and the name and signature of the reporting analyst
- Types of evidence items examined, and type of methodology or technique used to examine the evidence.
- Results of the examination and/or conclusions.
- Interpretation of the resultant data.
- Disposition of evidence.
Hopefully the defense has received ALL of this information which is the national standard for any court case with any DNA evidence.
Principles of Forensic DNA for Officers of the Court | Basic Elements of a Forensic DNA Laboratory Report
Learn more about the principles of forensic DNA, with an emphasis on understanding the basic elements of a forensic DNA laboratory report.nij.ojp.gov
JMO
And I'm a few pages behind in the thread, so by the time you read this, you may already have moved on from this topic or whatever, so sorry if this isn't relevant anymore! I'm catching up!)
So here's the conversation we had:
------------------------------------------------
me:Well, I had a question about forensics.
Forensics can be a fascinating and complex field! What specific question do you have about forensics? Are you interested in crime scene investigation, forensic science techniques, digital forensics, or something else? Let's dive into the details you're curious about.
me:This is pretty specific... if a piece of evidence in a murder case is made of leather, and they test it for DNA, will the results returned ever include bovine DNA?
Yes, it's possible for DNA testing of leather evidence to include bovine DNA. Leather is often made from animal hides, including those of cows (bovine)1. When forensic scientists test leather for DNA, they might indeed find bovine DNA, especially if the leather comes from cowhide.
However, the type of DNA that survives in leather is usually mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) rather than nuclear DNA, as mtDNA is more resilient and can be amplified for testing. This means that while bovine DNA can be detected, it might be limited to mitochondrial DNA rather than the full genetic profile1.
Does this help clarify your question, or is there something more specific you'd like to know about forensic testing of leather?
me:Would the results ever mention bovine DNA that might have been found, when they release and publish the results? Or would they not mention it because it's irrelevant to a murder case in which no cows are suspected?
In most cases, the forensic report would focus on human DNA evidence that's relevant to the investigation. However, if bovine DNA were detected during the testing process, it might be mentioned in the technical details or the methodology section of the report to ensure transparency and accuracy in the documentation. This information could be important for understanding the source and condition of the evidence.
That said, if bovine DNA is deemed irrelevant to the case (i.e., no cows are involved in the murder), it would likely not be highlighted as a significant finding in the conclusions or summaries of the report.
Forensic scientists strive to provide clear and relevant information to assist in legal proceedings, so they would prioritize evidence that directly pertains to the case.
Is there a specific scenario or detail you're curious about in relation to this? I'd be happy to dive deeper into the topic.
me:So if bovine DNA is not mentioned in the published results, that shouldn't mean they didn't actually find any?
Correct, the absence of a mention in the published results does not necessarily mean that bovine DNA wasn't detected. The focus of forensic reports is usually on evidence directly relevant to the case. If bovine DNA is considered irrelevant to the investigation, it might not be highlighted in the summary or conclusions of the report. However, it could still be documented in the technical details or methodology section.
Forensic scientists aim to provide a comprehensive and clear picture of the evidence that directly impacts the case. So, if bovine DNA doesn't contribute to solving the crime, it might not make it to the final report's main findings.
Are you curious about a specific case, or is this more of a general inquiry? I'm here to help with any other questions you might have!
me:It's the Kohberger quadruple murder case from Idaho, where the state claims they found his DNA on a knife sheath found under a victim's dead body.
Ah, the Bryan Kohberger case. It's a high-profile investigation involving the tragic deaths of four University of Idaho students. The prosecution claims they found Kohberger's DNA on a knife sheath at the crime scene2. The defense is challenging the use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) to identify Kohberger as a suspect, arguing that it violated his constitutional rights2.
In this context, if bovine DNA were found on the knife sheath, it might not be mentioned in the published results unless it was relevant to the case. The focus would be on the human DNA evidence that ties Kohberger to the crime scene.
