Assessment of forensic findings when alternative explanations have different likelihoods-"Blame-the-brother"-syndrome

Science and Justice

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 226-236

  Nordgaard, Anders ^a,b   Hedell, Ronny ^a   Ansell, Ricky ^a,b  

^a Swedish National Laboratory of Forensic Science   (Sweden)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bayes' factor; DNA profile; Evidence value; Multiple propositions; Relatives; Scale of conclusions

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; DNA DETERMINATION; FORENSIC SCIENCE; HUMAN; PROBABILITY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

DNA FINGERPRINTING; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; PEDIGREE; PROBABILITY;

EID: 84867628120     PISSN: 13550306     EISSN: 18764452     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.12.001     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Buckleton J.S., Triggs C.M., Champod C. An extended likelihood ratio framework for interpreting evidence. Science & Justice 2006, 46:69-78.
2. Aitken C.G.G., Taroni F. Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists 2004, Wiley, Chichester. second ed.
3. Buckleton J., Triggs C.M. Relatedness and DNA: are we taking it seriously enough?. Forensic Science International 2005, 152:115-119.
4. Buckleton J., Triggs C. The effect of linkage on the calculation of DNA match probabilities for siblings and half siblings. Forensic Science International 2006, 160:193-199.
5. Balding D.J., Nichols R.A. DNA profile match probability calculation: how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands. Forensic Science International 1994, 64:125-140.
6. Anderson A.D., Weir B.S. It was one of my brothers. International Journal of Legal Medicine 2006, 120:95-104.
7. Evett I.W. Evaluating DNA profiles in a case where the defence is "It was my brother". Journal of the Forensic Science Society 1992, 32:5-14.
8. Brenner C.H. Forensic Genetics: Mathematics. Encyclopedia of Life Sciences 2006, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
9. Puch-Solis R., Pope S., Evett I. Calculating likelihood ratios for a mixed DNA profile when a contribution from a genetic relative of a suspect is proposed. Science & Justice 2010, 50:205-209.
10. Taroni F., Biedermann A. Inadequacies for posterior probabilities for the assessment of scientific evidence. Law, Probability and Risk 2005, 4:89-114.
11. Berger J.O. Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis 1985, Springer-Verlag, New York. second ed.
12. Buckleton J. A framework for interpreting evidence. Forensic DNA Evidence Interpretation 2005, CRC Press, Boca Raton FL. J. Buckleton, C.M. Triggs, S.J. Walsh (Eds.).
13. Taroni F., Aitken C., Garbolino P., Biedermann A. Bayesian Networks and Probabilistic Inference in Forensic Science 2006, Wiley, Chichester.
14. Nordgaard A., Ansell R., Drotz W., Jaeger L. Scale of conclusions for the value of evidence. Law, Probability and Risk 2011, 10.1093/lpr/mgr020.
15. Albinsson L., Norén L., Hedell R., Ansell R. Swedish population data and concordance for the kits PowerPlex® ESX 16 System, PowerPlex® ESI 16 System, AmpFlSTR® NGM™, AmpFlSTR® SGM Plus™ and Investigator ESSplex. Forensic Science International. Genetics 2011, 5:e89-e92.
16. Evett I.W., Weir B.S. Interpreting DNA Evidence-Statistical Genetics for Forensic Scientists 1998, Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland.