International Statistical Review

Interpreting DNA Evidence: A Review

L.A. Foreman, C. Champod, I.W. Evett, J.A. Lambert, and S. Pope

Full-text: Access denied (no subscription detected)

We're sorry, but we are unable to provide you with the full text of this article because we are not able to identify you as a subscriber. If you have a personal subscription to this journal, then please login. If you are already logged in, then you may need to update your profile to register your subscription. Read more about accessing full-text


The paper provides a review of current issues relating to the use of DNA profiling in forensic science. A short historical section gives the main statistical milestones that occurred during a rapid development of DNA technology and operational uses. Greater detail is then provided for interpretation issues involving STR DNA profiles, including:

methods that take account of population substructure in DNA calculations;

parallel work carried out by the US National Research Council;

the move away from multiple independence testing in favour of experiments that demonstrate the robustness of casework procedures;

the questionable practice of source attribution `with reasonable scientific certainty';

the effect on the interpretation of profiles obtained under increasingly sensitive techniques, the LCN technique in particular;

the use of DNA profiles as an intelligence tool;

the interpretation of DNA mixtures.

Experience of presenting DNA evidence within UK courts is also discussed. The paper then summarises a generic interpretation framework based on the concept of likelihood ratio within a hierarchy of propositions. Finally the use of Bayesian networks to interpret DNA evidence is reviewed.

Article information

Internat. Statist. Rev., Volume 71, Number 3 (2003), 473-495.

First available in Project Euclid: 21 October 2003

Permanent link to this document

Zentralblatt MATH identifier

Forensic science Interpretation of evidence Likelihood ratio DNA profile DNA mixtures Bayesian networks


Foreman, L.A.; Champod, C.; Evett, I.W.; Lambert, J.A.; Pope, S. Interpreting DNA Evidence: A Review. Internat. Statist. Rev. 71 (2003), no. 3, 473--495.

Export citation


  • [1] Aitken, C.G.G. & Gammerman, A.J. (1989). Probabilistic Reasoning in Evidential Assessment. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 29, 303-316.
  • [2] Aitken, C.G.G., Connolly, T., Gammerman, A., Zhang, G., Bailey, D., Gordon, R. & Oldfield, R. (1996). Statistical Modeling in Specific Case Analysis. Science and Justice, 36, 245-255.
  • [3] Aitken, C.G.G., Taroni, F. & Garbolino, P. (2002). A Graphical Model for the Evaluation of Cross-Transfer Evidence in DNA Profiles. Theoretical Population Biology, in press.
  • [4] Balding, D.J. & Donnelly, P. (1994). The Prosecutor's Fallacy and DNA Evidence. Criminal Law Review, October, pp. 711-721.
  • [5] Balding, D.J. & Nichols, R.A. (1994). DNA Profile Match Probability Calculations: How to Allow for Population Stratification, Relatedness, Database Selection and Single Bands. Forensic Science International, 64, 125-140.
  • [6] Balding, D.J. (1995). Estimating Products in Forensic Identification Using DNA Profiles. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 839-844.
  • [7] Balding, D.J. & Donnelly, P. (1995a). Inferring Identity from DNA Profile Evidence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 92, 11741-11745.
  • [8] Balding, D.J. & Donnelly, P. (1995b). Inference in Forensic Identification. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 158, 21-53.
  • [9] Balding, D.J. & Donnelly, P. (1996). Evaluating DNA Profile Evidence When the Suspect Is Identified through a Database Search. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 41, 603-607.
  • [10] Balding, D.J., Greenhalgh, M. & Nichols, R.A. (1996). Population Genetics of STR Loci in Caucasians. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 108, 300-305.
  • [11] Balding, D.J. (1997). Errors and Misunderstandings of the Second NRC Report. Jurimetrics Journal, 37, 469-476.
  • [12] Balding, D.J. (1999). When Can a DNA Profile Be Regarded as Unique. Science and Justice, 39, 257-260.
  • [13] Balding, D.J. (2000). Interpreting DNA evidence: can probability theory help? In Statistical Science in the Courtroom, Ed. J. Gastwirth, pp. 51-70. Springer-Verlag.
  • [14] Berry, D.A., Evett, I.W. & Pinchin, R. (1992). Statistical Inference in Crime Investigations Using Deoxyribonucleic Acid Profiling. Applied Statistics, 41, 499-531.
  • [15] Buckleton, J.S., Walsh, S. & Harbison, S.A. (2001). The Fallacy of Independence Testing and the Use of the Product Rule. Science and Justice, 41, 81-84.
  • [16] Budowle, B., et al. (1991). Fixed-Bin Analysis for Statistical Evaluation of Continuous Distributions of Allelic Data from Vntr Loci for Use in Forensic Comparisons. American Journal of Human Genetics, 48, 841-855.
  • [17] Budowle, B., Chakraborty, R., Carmody, G. & Monson, K.L. (2000). Source Attribution of a Forensic DNA Profile. Forensic Science Communications, 2, No. 3.\newline $\mathtt{}$.
  • [18] Chakraborty, R. & Kidd, K.K. (1991). The Utility of DNA Typing in Forensic Work. Science, 254, 1735-1739.
  • [19] Clayton, T.M., Whitaker, J.P., Sparkes, R. & Gill, P. (1998). Analysis and Interpretation of Mixed Forensic Stains Using DNA STR Profiling. Forensic Science International, 91, 55-70.
  • [20] Cohen, J.E. (1990). DNA Fingerprinting: What (Really) Are the Odds? Chance: New Directions for Statistics and Computing, 3, 26-32.
  • [21] Cook, R., Evett, I.W., Jackson, G., Jones, P.J. & Lambert, J.A. (1998a). A Hierarchy of Propositions: Deciding Which Level to Address in Casework. Science and Justice, 38, 231-240.
  • [22] Cook, R., Evett, I.W., Jackson, G., Jones, P.P. & Lambert, J.A. (1998b). A Model for Case Assessment and Interpretation. Science and Justice, 38, 151-156.
  • [23] Cooke, G. (2000). Are We Still Mis-Using DNA Evidence? Archbold, News, April, pp. 4-7.
  • [24] Cooke, G. (2001). Fingerprint and DNA Evidence. The Criminal Bar Association Newsletter, June, pp. 13-14.
  • [25] Cowell, R. (submitted). FINEX: A Probabilistic Expert System for Forensic Identification. Forensic Science International.
  • [26] Cowell, R.G., Dawid, A.P., Lauritzen, S.L. & Spiegelhalter, D.J. (1999). Probabilistic Networks and Expert Systems, Eds. M. Jordan, S.L. Lauritzen, J.F. Lawless and V. Nair. New York: Springer.
  • [27] Curran, J.M., Triggs, C.M., Buckleton, J.S. & Weir, B.S. (1999). Interpreting DNA Mixtures in Structured Populations. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44, 987-995.
  • [28] Curran, J.M., Buckleton, J.S., Triggs, C.M. & Weir, B.S. (2002). Assessing Uncertainty in DNA Evidence Caused by Sampling Effects. Science and Justice, 42, 29-37.
  • [29] Dawid, A.P. & Evett, I.W. (1997). Using a Graphical Method to Assist the Evaluation of Complicated Patterns of Evidence. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 42, 226-231.
  • [30] Dawid, A.P., van Boxel, D., Mortera, J. & Pascali, V.L. (1999). Inference About Disputed Paternity from an Incomplete Pedigree Using a Probabilistic Expert System. Bull. Int. Statist. Inst. Contributed Papers, Book 1, 58, 241-242.
  • [31] Dawid, A.P., Mortera, J., Pascali, V. & van Boxel, D. (2002). Probabilistic Expert Systems for Forensic Inference from Genetic Markers. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 29, 577-595.
  • [32] De Forest, P.R. (1999). Recapturing the Essence of Criminalistics. Science and Justice, 39, 196-208.
  • [33] Devlin, B. & Roeder, K. (1990). No Excess of Homozygosity at Loci Used for DNA Fingerprinting. Science, 249, 1416-1420.
  • [34] Devlin, B. (1992). Forensic Inference from Genetic Markers. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 2, 241-262.
  • [35] Devlin, B., Risch, N. & Roeder, K. (1993). Statistical Evaluation of DNA Fingerprinting: A Critique of the NRC's Report. Science, 259, 748-749 and 837.
  • [36] Devlin, B., Risch, N. & Roeder, K. (1994). Comments on the Statistical Aspects of NRC's Report on DNA Typing. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 39, 28-40.
  • [37] Devlin, B. & Roeder, K. (1997). DNA Profiling: Statistics and Population Genetics. In Modern Scientific Evidence, Eds. D.L. Faigman et al., 1, 710-747.
  • [38] Donnelly, P. & Friedman, R.D. (1999). DNA Database Searches and the Legal Consumption of Scientific Evidence. Michigan Law Review, 97, 931-984.
  • [39] Evett, I.W. (1984). A Quantitative Theory for Interpreting Transfer Evidence in Criminal Cases. Applied Statistics, 33, 25-32.
  • [40] Evett, I.W., Buffery, C., Willott, G. & Stoney, D.A. (1991). A Guide to Interpreting Single Locus Profiles of DNA Mixtures in Forensic Cases. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 31, 41-47.
  • [41] Evett, I.W. & Gill, P. (1991). A Discussion of the Robustness of Methods for Assessing the Evidential Value of DNA Single Locus Profiles in Crime Investigations. Electrophoresis, 12, 226-230.
  • [42] Evett, I.W. & Pinchin, R. (1991). DNA Single Locus Profiles: Tests for the Robustness of Statistical Procedures within the Context of Forensic Science. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 104, 267-272.
  • [43] Evett, I.W. (1992). Evaluating DNA Profiles in a Case Where the Defence Is ``It Was My Brother''. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 32, 5-14.
  • [44] Evett, I.W., Pinchin, R. & Buffery, C. (1992). An Investigation of the Feasibility of Inferring Ethnic Origin from DNA Profiles. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 32, 301-306.
  • [45] Evett, I.W., Scranage, J. & Pinchin, R. (1993). An Illustration of the Advantages of Efficient Statistical Methods for RFPL Analysis in Forensic Science. American Journal of Human Genetics, 52, 498-505.
  • [46] Evett, I.W. (1995). Avoiding the Transposed Conditional. Science and Justice, 35, 127-131.
  • [47] Evett, I.W. & Buckleton, J.S. (1996). Statistical Analysis of STR Data. In Advances in Forensic Haemogenetics, Eds. A. Carracedo, B. Brinkmann and W. Bär, Vol. 6, pp. 79-86. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
  • [48] Evett, I.W., Gill, P.D., Scranage, J.K. & Weir, B.S. (1996). Establishing the Robustness of STR Statistics for Forensic Applications. American Journal of Human Genetics, 58, 398-407.
  • [49] Evett, I.W. et al. (1997). Statistical Analysis of Data from Three British Ethnic Groups from a New STR Multiplex. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 110, 5-9.
  • [50] Evett, I.W., Gill, P.D. & Lambert, J.A. (1998). Taking Account of Peak Areas When Interpreting Mixed DNA Profiles. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 43, 62-69.
  • [51] Evett, I.W. & Weir, B.S. (1998). Interpreting DNA Evidence-Statistical Genetics for Forensic Scientists. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc.
  • [52] Evett, I.W., Foreman, L.A., Jackson, G. & Lambert, J.A. (2000a). DNA Profiling: A Discussion of Issues Relating to the Reporting of Very Small Match Probabilities. Criminal Law Review, May, pp. 341-355.
  • [53] Evett, I.W., Jackson, G. & Lambert, J.A. (2000b). More in the Hierarchy of Propositions: Exploring the Distinction between Explanations and Propositions. Science and Justice, 40, 3-10.
  • [54] Evett, I.W., Jackson, G., Lambert, J.A. & McCrossan, S. (2000c). The Impact of the Principles of Evidence Interpretation on the Structure and Content of Statements. Science and Justice 40, 40, 233- 239.
  • [55] Evett, I.W. (2001). Reply to ``Fingerprint and DNA Evidence'' by G. Cooke. Criminal Bar Association Newsletter, October, pp. 8-9.
  • [56] Evett, I.W., Gill, P.D., Jackson, G., Whitaker, J. & Champod, C. (2002). Interpreting Small Quantities of DNA: The Hierarchy of Propositions and the Use of Bayesian Networks. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 47, 520-530.
  • [57] Fenton, N.E. & Neil, M. (2000). The Jury Observation Fallacy and the Use of Bayesian Networks to Present Probabilistic Legal Arguments. Mathematics Today-Bulletin of the IMA, 36, 180-187.
  • [58] Foreman, L.A., Smith, A.F.M. & Evett, I.W. (1997). Bayesian Analysis of DNA Profiling Data in Forensic Identification Applications (with Discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 160, 429-469.
  • [59] Foreman, L.A., Lambert, J.A. & Evett, I.W. (1998). Regional Genetic Variation in Caucasians. Forensic Science International, 95, 27-37.
  • [60] Foreman, L.A., Smith, A.F.M. & Evett, I.W. (1999). Bayesian Validation of a Quadruplex STR Profiling System for Identification Purposes. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 44, 478-486.
  • [61] Foreman, L.A. & Lambert, J.A. (2000). Genetic Differentiation within and between Four UK Ethnic Groups. Forensic Science International, 114, 7-20.
  • [62] Foreman, L.A. & Evett, I.W. (2001). Statistical Analysis to Support Forensic Interpretation of a New Ten-Locus STR Profiling System. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 114, 147-155.
  • [63] Foreman, L.A., Pope, S. & Evett, I.W. (2003). Statistical Simulations to Assist in the Investigation and Interpretation of Complex DNA Cases, (in preparation).
  • [64] Friedman, R.D. (1986a). A Close Look at Probative Value. Boston University Law Review, 66, 733-759.
  • [65] Friedman, R.D. (1986b). A Diagrammatic Approach to Evidence. Boston University Law Review, 66, 571-633.
  • [66] Fukshansky, N. & Bär, W. (2000). Biostatistics of Mixed Stains: The Case of Tested Relatives and a Non-Tested Suspect. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 114, 78-82.
  • [67] Fung, W.K. & Hu, Y.-Q. (2002). The Statistical Evaluation of DNA Mixtures with Contributors from Different Ethnic Groups. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 116, 79-86.
  • [68] Garbolino, P. & Taroni, F. (2002). Evaluation of Scientific Evidence Using Baysian Networks. Forensic Science International, 125, 149-155.
  • [69] Gill, P., Sullivan, K. & Werrett, D.J. (1990). The Analysis of Hypervariable DNA Profiles: Problems Associated with the Objective Determination of the Probability of a Match. Human Genetics, 85, 75-79.
  • [70] Gill, P. & Werrett, D.J. (1990). Interpretation of DNA Profiles Using a Computerised Database. Electrophoresis, 11, 444-448.
  • [71] Gill, P. et al. (1994). Identification of the Remains of the Romanov Family by DNA Analysis. Nature Genetics, 6, 130-135.
  • [72] Gill, P. & Evett, I.W. (1995). Population Genetics of Short Tandem Repear (STR) Loci. Genetica, 96, 69-87.
  • [73] Gill, P., Sparkes, B. & Buckleton, J.S. (1998a). Interpretation of Simple Mixtures When Artefacts Such as Stutters Are Present-with Special Reference to Multiplex STRs Used by the Forensic Science Service. Forensic Science International, 95, 213-224.
  • [74] Gill, P. et al. (1998b). Interpreting Simple STR Mixtures Using Allele Peak Areas. Forensic Science International, 91, 41-53.
  • [75] Gill, P., Whitaker, J.P., Flaxman, C., Brown, N. & Buckleton, J.S. (2000). An Investigation of the Rigor of Interpretation Rules for STRs Derived from Less Than 100pg of DNA. Forensic Science International, 112, 17-40.
  • [76] Gill, P. (2001). Application of Low Copy Number DNA Profiling. Croatian Medical Journal, 42, 229-232.
  • [77] Gill, P. (2002). The Role of Short Tandem Repeat (STR) DNA in Forensic Casework in the UK-Past Present and Future. Biotechniques, 22, 366-385.
  • [78] Gill, P.D., Foreman, L.A,, Buckleton, J.S., Triggs, C.M. & Allen, H. (2003). A comparison of adjustment methods to test the robustness of an STR DNA database comprised of 24 European populations. Forensic Science International, 131, 184-196
  • [79] Hoffrage, U., Lindsey, S., Hertwig, R. & Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Communicating Statistical Information. Science, 290, 2261-2262.
  • [80] Jeffreys, A.J., Wilson, V. & Thein, S.L. (1985a). Hypervariable `Minisatellite' Regions in Human DNA. Nature, 314, 67-73.
  • [81] Jeffreys, A.J., Wilson, V. & Thein, S.L. (1985b). Individual Specific `Fingerprints' of Human DNA. Nature, 316, 76-79.
  • [82] Jensen, F.V. (1996). An Introduction to Bayesian Networks. University College London Press.
  • [83] Kadane, J.B. & Schum, D.A. (1996). A Probabilistic Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Evidence. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • [84] Kaye, D.H. (1993). DNA Evidence: Probability, Population Genetics & the Courts. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 7, 101-172.
  • [85] Koehler, J.J. (1997). Why DNA Likelihood Ratios Should Account for Error (Even When a National Research Council Report Says They Should Not). Jurimetrics Journal, 37, p. 425.
  • [86] Koehler, J.J. (2001a). When Are People Pesuaded by DNA Match Statistics. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 493-513.
  • [87] Koehler, J.J. (2001b). The Psychology of Numbers in the Courtroom: How to Make DNA-Match Statistics Seem Impressive or Insufficient. Southern California Law Review, 74, 1275-1305.
  • [88] Lambert, J.A., Scranage, J. & Evett, I.W. (1995). Large Scale Database Experiments to Assess the Significance of Matching DNA Profiles. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 108, 8-13.
  • [89] Lander, E.S. (1989). DNA Fingerprinting on Trial. Nature, 339, 501-505.
  • [90] Lempert, R. (1997). After the DNA Wars: Skirmishing with NRC II. Jurimetrics Journal, 37, 439-468.
  • [91] Lewontin, R.C. & Hartl, D.L. (1991). Population Genetics in Forensic DNA Typing. Science, 254, 1745-1750.
  • [92] Lowe, A.L., Urquart, A., Foreman, L.A. & Evett, I.W. (2001). Inferring Ethnic Origin by Means of an STR Profile. Forensic Science International, 119, 17-22.
  • [93] Lowe, A.L., Murray, C., Whitaker, J.P., Tully, G. & Gill, P. (2002). The Propensity of Individuals to Deposit DNA and Secondary Transfer of Low Level DNA from Individuals to Inert Surfaces. Forensic Science International, 129, 25-34.
  • [94] Mortera, J. (2002). Analysis of DNA Mixtures Using Bayesian Networks. In Highly Structured Stochastic Systems, Eds. P. Green, N.L. Hjort and S. Richardson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, to appear.
  • [95] Mortera, J., Dawid, A.P. & Lauritzen, S.L., Probabilistic Expert Systems for DNA Mixture Profiling. Theoretical Population Biology, to appear.
  • [96] Morton, N.E. (1997). The Forensic DNA Endgame. Jurimetrics Journal, 37, 477-494.
  • [97] National Research Council, Committee on DNA Technology in Forensic Science, Board on Biology, and Commission on Life Sciences (1992). DNA Technology in Forensic Science. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  • [98] National Research Council, Committee on DNA Forensic Science: An Update & Commission on DNA Forensic Science: An Update (1996). The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  • [99] Nichols, R.A. & Balding, D.J. (1991). Effects of Population Structure on DNA Fingerprinting Analysis in Forensic Science. Heredity, 66, 297-302.
  • [100] Nordby, J.J. (2000). Dead Reckoning: The Art of Forensic Detection. Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC.
  • [101] Perlin, M.W. & Szabady, B. (2001). Linear Mixture Analysis: A Mathematical Approach to Resolving Mixed DNA Samples. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 46, 1372-1378.
  • [102] Puch, R.O., Smith, J.Q., Wynn, H.P., Champod, C. & Evett, I.W. (in preparation). A Bayesian Decision Support System in Forensic Science.
  • [103] Redmayne, M. (1995). Doubts and Burdens: DNA Evidence, Probability and the Courts. Criminal Law Review, pp. 464-482.
  • [104] Redmayne, M. (1996). Science, Evidence and Logic. The Modern Law Review, 59, 747-760.
  • [105] Redmayne, M. (1998). The DNA Database: Civil Liberty and Evidentiary Issues. Criminal Law Review, July, pp. 437-454.
  • [106] Risch, N.J. & Devlin, B. (1992). On the Probability of Matching DNA Fingerprints. Science, 255, 717-720.
  • [107] Robertson, B. & Vignaux, G.A. (1995). Interpreting Evidence-Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • [108] Robertson, B. & Vignaux, G.A. (1997). Bayes Theorem in the Court of Appeal. The Criminal Lawyer, January, pp. 4-5.
  • [109] Robertson, B. & Vignaux, G.A. (1998). Explaining Evidence Logically. New Law Journal, 148, 159-162.
  • [110] Roeder, K. (1994). DNA Fingerprinting: A Review of the Controversy (with Discussion). Statistical Science, 9, 222-278.
  • [111] Sjerps, M. & Kloosterman, A.D. (1999). On the Consequences of DNA Mismatches for Close Relatives of an Excluded Suspect. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 112, 176-180.
  • [112] Smith, J.A.L. & Budowle, B. (1998). Source Identification of Body Fluid Stains Using DNA Profiling. In Proceedings from the Second European Symposium on Human Identification, pp. 89-90. Innsbruck (Austria): Promega Corporation.
  • [113] Stockmarr, A. (1999). Likelihood Ratios for Evaluating DNA Evidence When the Suspect Is Found through a Database Search. Biometrics, 55, 671-677.
  • [114] Taroni, F. & Aitken, C.G.G. (1998). Probabilistic Reasoning and the Law. Part 1: Assessment of Probabilities and Explanation of the Value of DNA Evidence. Science and Justice, 38, 165-177.
  • [115] Taroni, F., Lambert, J.A., Fereday, L. & Werrett, D.J. (2002). Evaluation and Presentation of Forensic DNA Evidence in European Laboratories. Science and Justice, 42, 21-28.
  • [116] Thompson, W.C. & Ford, S. (1990). Is DNA Fingerprinting Ready for the Courts? New Scientist, March 31st, 38-43.
  • [117] Thompson, W.C. (1993). Evaluating the Admissibility of New Genetic Identification Tests: Lessons from the `DNA War'. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 84, 22-104.
  • [118] Thompson, W.C. (1997). Accepting Lower Standards: The National Reseach Council's Second Report on Forensic DNA Evidence. Jurimetrics Journal, 37, 405-424.
  • [119] Tully, G. et al. (2001). Considerations by the European DNA Profiling (EDNAP) Group on the Working Practices, Nomenclature and Interpretation of Mitochondrial DNA Profile. Forensic Science International, 124, 83-91.
  • [120] Weir, B. (1992). Population Genetics in the Forensic DNA Debate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 89, 11654-11659.
  • [121] Weir, B.S. (1996). The Second National Research Councul Report on Forensic DNA Evidence. American Journal of Human Genetics, 59, 497-500.
  • [122] Weir, B.S. et al. (1997). Interpreting DNA Mixtures. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 42, 213-222.
  • [123] Werrett, D.J. (1997). The National DNA Database. Forensic Science International, 88, 33-42.
  • [124] Whitaker, J.P., Cotton, E.A. & Gill, P. (2001). A Comparison of Profiles Produced with the AMPflSTR SGM Plus Multiplex System for Both Standard and Low Copy Number (LCN) STR DNA Analysis. Forensic Science International, 123, 215-223.
  • [125] Wickenheiser, R.A. (2002). Trace DNA: A Review, Discussion of Theory & Application of the Transfer of Trace Quantities of DNA through Skin Contact. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 47, 442-450.
  • [126] Wigmore, J. (1937). The Science of Proof: As Given by Logic, Psychology & General Experience and Illustrated in Judicial Trials (3rd edition). Boston: Little Brown.