Fast Discrimination of Marijuana using Automated High-throughput Cannabis Sample Preparation and Analysis by Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry

In the United States, federal law and many state laws differentiate between marijuana and industrial hemp through delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) levels, whereby the latter is defined as ≤0.3 percent THC on a dry weight basis. Many traditional cannabis identification methods employed by crime laboratories cannot accurately determine total THC quantities in accordance with federal and state regulations, or do so with increased time, labor, and risks of instrument damage. In order to quickly distinguish positive marijuana samples, a method was developed to identify plant material with a total THC level >1%. This novel, automated dispersive pipette extraction (DPX) method uses tip-based technology and an automated liquid handler to enable fast, hands-free selective isolation of THC and its precursors for downstream gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis. The workflow proceeds with no repetitive manual effort and reduced need for instrument maintenance while enabling crime labs to legally identify marijuana through the detection of total THC above 1%. Recovery of THC using the DPX extraction method was 93% at 30 µg/mL and 78% at 500 µg/mL. Similarly, THCA-A recovery was 100% at 30 µg/mL and 74% at 500 µg/mL. Samples evaluated in a blind study (proficiency, hemp, and nonprobative case samples) were all accurately identified as greater than or less than 1% THC, with samples containing <1% THC being identified as “cannabis” and subjected to more discriminative analysis as needed.     

Stampede to judgement: persuasive influence and herding behavior by courts

We model appeals courts as Bayesian decision makers with privateinformation about a supreme court's interpretation of the law;each court also observes the previous decisions of other appealscourts in similar cases. Such 'persuasive influence' can cause'herding' behavior by later appeals courts as decisions progressivelyrely more on previous decisions and less on a court's privateinformation. We provide an example drawn from a recent UnitedStates Supreme Court decision finding unconstitutional a basicprovision of a law previously found constitutional by six circuitcourts. Herding on the wrong decision may remain uncorrected,since review of harmonious decisions is rare.     

Screen-printing ink transfer in a sexual assault case

Yellow plastic-like particles were discovered on the clothing and body of a sexual assault victim. These particles were later associated to an athletic jersey with flaking yellow screen-printed numbers and letters, worn by the suspect. Depending on its intended substrate, screen-print ink can vary in color and composition. Particles dislodged from screen-printed garments may exhibit fabric impressions. Screen-printed clothing, commonly encountered in forensic casework, should be viewed as a potential source of trace evidence.     

Internal Validation of RapidHIT®ID ACE Sample Cartridge and Assessment of the EXT Sample Cartridge*†

A new rapid DNA solution, the RapidHIT^®ID, can accommodate two different sample cartridges, ACE, for the analysis of a single swab and EXT, for the analysis of DNA extracts. An efficient internal validation designed for low‐throughput rapid DNA is described. An evaluation of the EXT sample cartridge is also described. Each cartridge generated profiles with sufficient data quality to meet CODIS eligibility in fewer than 120 min. The results exhibited 100% correlation when compared to conventional DNA typing methods. Precision, reproducibility, stochastic, mixture, and contamination experiments produced expected results. Sensitivity of the ACE sample cartridge was acceptable for buccal swab analysis. The sensitivity of the EXT sample cartridge is discussed. The ACE validation and the EXT evaluation utilized a minimalist, cost‐saving, efficient design to generate a validated RapidHIT^®ID instrument capable of producing genetic profiles from both extracted forensic DNA samples and buccal swab samples within 120 min.