Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
database within the USA. In 1994 the US congress passed the DNA Identification Act
(Public Law 103 322), which enabled the establishment of CODIS. CODIS, which
is the federally held DNA database, has expanded very quickly and comprises the
National DNA Index System (NDIS), the State DNA Index System (SDIS) and the
Local DNA Index System (LDIS). The information about each sample that is loaded
onto the CODIS database includes a laboratory identifier, a specimen identifier, infor-
mation to classify and review the integrity of the DNA record and the DNA profile
itself. CODIS links local, state and federal crime laboratories. The FBI selected 13
STR loci (CODIS loci) for developing the database. Like the UK NDNAD there are
two main segments called 'indices' of CODIS:
•
The Forensic Index contains DNA profiles from crime scene samples.
•
The Offender Index contains DNA profiles of individuals convicted of cer-
tain categories of violent crime, although now many States are expanding their
databases and are profiling persons arrested for all felonies.
Other CODIS indices are:
•
unidentified human remains;
•
relatives of missing persons.
At the moment there are about 200 DNA laboratories around the USA that are
designated and accredited as CODIS laboratories. These laboratories are validated
according to the standards of FBI and are authorized to submit the DNA profile
information into CODIS.
The situation in the USA as of July 2010 is:
•
total number of offender profiles: 7 940 321
•
total forensic profiles: 306 028.
When compared with the UK, the USA is a much larger jurisdiction and now
contains more profiles. However, because of lack of funding, coherent structure
and variable legal approaches, there have been lengthy delays in DNA profiling
of casework samples that has led to massive backlogs. The president of the
USA announced the 'President's DNA Initiative' in 2003 in order to enhance and
streamline the use of DNA as a forensic tool and also signed an act to enhance
the facilities for DNA databasing [16]. The main aims of this initiative were
to clear the backlogs quickly and also to improve the capacity of the forensic
laboratories for databasing the samples besides promoting research and development
in the field; unfortunately, delays in processing samples have continued [17]. In
spite of this, the number of samples has increased dramatically, and in terms
