A genetic basis for anomalous band patterns encountered during DNA STR profiling

Since 1995 the Forensic Science Service (FSS) has carried out DNA profiling of reference samples for the UK National DNA Database and in forensic casework using two multiplex STR profiling systems. During this period, profiles with anomalous banding patterns, although comparatively rare, have been encountered regularly. The FSS has collected instances of triallelic patterns and aberrant diallelic patterns. A systematic examination of these patterns has provided insight into their underlying genetic cause. The triallelic patterns could be classified into two types based on the relative intensities of their component alleles. In the Type 1 pattern the alleles were of uneven intensity, whereas in the Type 2 pattern, all three alleles were of even intensity. Evidence is presented that the more frequent Type 1 pattern is the result of somatic mutation at a heterozygous locus, and the Type 2 pattern is the result of a localized chromosomal rearrangement at a heterozygous locus. Directly from the Type 1 pattern, it was possible to deduce the size difference between the progenitor and mutated allele. All mutational changes were found to be multiples of four nucleotides, suggesting the loss or addition of one or more tetrameric repeat units. Aberrant diallelic patterns were identified by analysts due to an unexpectedly large difference in intensity between alleles at a heterozygous locus. While some of these diallelic patterns are likely caused by the same genetic phenomena described above occurring at a homozygous locus, others are demonstrated to be caused by a mutation in the primer binding sequence, leading to a reduction in amplification efficiency of one allele. It is concluded that based on a visual inspection of a profile, it is possible to infer a likely genetic basis directly from the triallelic pattern. By contrast, the aberrant diallelic patterns can be due to any one of a number of possible genetic effects.     

Impact of Defense-Only and Opposing Eyewitness Experts on Juror Judgments

Previous research shows that expert testimony on eyewitness memory influences mock-juror judgments. We examined the extent to which opposing expert testimony mitigates the impact of defense-only expert testimony. Participants (N = 497) viewed a video-taped trial involving an eyewitness identification and individually rendered verdicts and evaluated the evidence and the experts. We manipulated the Foils (unbiased vs. biased) and Instructions (unbiased vs. biased) of the lineup and Expert Testimony (no expert vs. defense-only expert vs. opposing experts). Expert testimony did not significantly influence juror judgments, but the opposing expert testimony diminished the credibility of the defense expert in the eyes of the jurors. Results point to the need for further research on conditions that qualify the impact of expert testimony.     

News media reporting on civil litigation and its influence on civil justice decision making

The news media have the potential to act as a powerful influence on the civil litigation system, influencing decision making in particular cases and on the system more generally as media reports influence the decision making of various participants in the system. This paper reviews the research that has examined the relationship between news media reporting and civil litigation and proposes a framework that integrates this work and provides guidance for future research efforts. Specifically, we discuss the nature of media reporting on civil litigation, perceptions of the civil litigation system held by the public and legal actors, and the potential influence of news reporting about civil litigation on the decision making of jurors, judges, civil litigants, and policymakers. Overall, the research suggests that news reporting of civil litigation presents a systematically distorted picture of civil litigation and that this reporting can influence perceptions and outcomes of civil litigation in various ways. However, there are many gaps in the existing research that need to be filled. The proposed organizational scheme helps to identify ways that future research can provide links between the findings of existing research and to identify ways in which this research can be extended to new areas.     

Changing the law,changing the culture: rethinking the "sleepy resident" problem

Ms. Whetsell examines the Bell Regulations, which limit New York's hospital residents' work hours and require increased supervision from senior doctors, in light of the currently pending federal bill that seeks to do the same. The article argues that the federal government should draw lessons from the New York experience before proceeding with similar guidelines. The article notes that many roadblocks have prevented successful implementation of the New York policy, including a long-standing tradition of "hazing" first-year residents with long, unsupervised hours; medical community resistance to the notion of residents' sleep deprivation and dislike of government interference; and a general fear within the medical community of increased medical malpractice liability and other indicia of "blame culture." The Article concludes that the most effective approach to patient safety related to residency sleep deprivation should work within hospital culture, not against it. The proposed alternative approach would encourage patient safety strategies that value teamwork and cross-discipline collaboration, and consequently result in greater satisfaction for residents, hospitals, and patients.     

UK: Hemophiliac wins access to recombinant factor VIII

On 17 July 2003, the England and Wales High Court granted a hemophiliac leave to appeal a decision to refuse to provide him with recombinant factor VIII, a treatment for hemophilia not derived from human blood. The applicant had been infected with HIV and hepatitis B, C, and G through tainted blood products.     

Public Opinion on Federalism in Canada, Mexico, and the United States in 2003

This research reports on public opinion surveys on intergovernmentaland federal issues conducted in Canada, Mexico, and the UnitedStates in March and April 2003. In all three countries, respondentsmost often see their federal government as being the least effective,least efficient, and least trustworthy. Respondents from Canadaappear least supportive of their federal government and mostsupportive of their local governments; those from Mexico appearmost supportive of their state governments; respondents fromthe United States appear more "balanced" in their support ofthe various orders of government. Also, far greater regionaldifferences in opinion exist in Canada than in Mexico or theUnited States. Support for more decentralized federalism isfound to be strong in all these federal countries. This researchalso updates long-term trend data for the United States. Comparedwith respondents from previous years, U.S. respondents in 2003showed a measurable uplick in support for the federal government,compared with state and local governments. This support seemsto be a carryover from the terrorist attacks of 11 September2001.