As a result of their high degree of precision in identifying criminals, hair and DNA evidence are becoming more and more significant in forensic science. Due to the rising crime rate and the frequent absence of other physical evidence, the use of hair evidence and DNA in criminal investigations has increased significantly in recent years. Hair evidence can be utilized in circumstances when there is a dearth of other evidence to identify the deceased, identify suspects, and link individuals together (Landron, 2019). A crime’s victim or perpetrator can be identified using DNA evidence, and it can also be used to identify the source of a biological substance or poison (Rasool & Rasool, 2020). Although both hair evidence and DNA are incredibly useful instruments in the fight against crime, hair evidence is now used more often than DNA. This suggests that hair evidence is more important in solving a crime than DNA evidence. This essay aims to determine whether hair evidence is more valuable than DNA evidence in resolving crimes.
According to Landron (2019), Hair analysis is a forensic science procedure that involves analyzing a sample of hair to ascertain specific details about the person from whom it originated. Gender, race, and a person’s drug or alcohol use are just a few examples of data that can be included. Hair analysis may, in some circumstances, be used to estimate the time of death. On the other hand, Rasool and Rasool (2020), DNA evidence has been used to solve crimes for many years. It is often the deciding factor in a criminal trial. The use of DNA evidence has been increasing as the technology to test and process it has become more sophisticated and less expensive. The process of hair analysis begins with the collection of a sample of hair from the crime scene. This sample is then sent to a laboratory for analysis. The laboratory will use a variety of techniques to determine information about the hair, including DNA testing. On the other hand, there are two main ways that DNA evidence is used in solving crime. The first is through DNA profiling. This is when a sample of DNA is taken from a crime scene and compared to the DNA of a suspect. If the DNA profiles of the suspect match the DNA from the crime scene, then that person is likely responsible for the crime. Hodge and Holjencin (2020) add that DNA testing of samples that have previously been identified as coming from a suspect is the second way DNA evidence is utilized to solve crimes. When the police have already taken a sample from the suspect or a sample from someone who has been detained in connection with a crime and wishes to ascertain whether or not that person is genuinely guilty of committing the crime, this can be done. Therefore, even if both hair evidence and DNA evidence are used to solve crimes, the utility of hair evidence depends on the accuracy of the DNA process, thus making DNA evidence more important than hair evidence.
There are many reasons why DNA evidence is more important than hair evidence in solving crime. To begin with, DNA evidence is more accurate than hair evidence. Secondly, DNA evidence can be used to identify a suspect, even if the suspect is not present at the crime scene (Landron, 2019). Hair Evidence can only identify a person if that person was at the crime scene and left hair behind. DNA evidence, on the other hand, can be used to identify anyone who has ever been in contact with the victim or crime scene. Moreover, DNA evidence can be used to convict a suspect, even if the suspect did not leave any hair at the crime scene. Hair Evidence is not as reliable as DNA evidence when it comes to identifying suspects. For example, if a suspect leaves their hair at the crime scene but is not the person who committed the crime, hair evidence might not be able to identify that suspect. DNA evidence, on the other hand, can be used to identify any suspect who is present at the crime scene and has had contact with the victim (Hodge & Holjencin, 2020). Finally, DNA evidence is more difficult to fake than hair evidence. Hair Evidence can be easily faked by a perpetrator if they want to hide their identity. For example, a perpetrator could cut their hair short so that it does not contain any hair samples that could be used to identify them. DNA evidence, on the other hand, is not easily faked. In order to fake DNA evidence, a perpetrator would have to tamper with the sample or clone the DNA of another person.
To sum up, when it comes to investigating crimes, DNA evidence is more significant than hair evidence. Investigators can benefit from both hair evidence and DNA evidence, although DNA evidence is more dependable and accurate than hair evidence. While DNA evidence is reliable, hair evidence sometimes is not. Furthermore, DNA evidence is more credible in court than hair evidence since it is more difficult to falsify. In general, DNA evidence is the most significant sort of evidence when a crime is being investigated. It is useful for locating suspects and bringing them to justice for any crimes they may have committed.
References
Hodge Jr, S. D., & Holjencin, A. (2020). A Post-Mortem Review of Forensic Hair Analysis–A Technique Whose Current Use in Criminal Investigations is Hanging on by a Hair. Saint Louis University Law Journal, 64(2), 5.
Landron, A. (2019). Trichology: A Study of Hair and its Uses as Trace Evidence. Ursidae: The Undergraduate Research Journal at the University of Northern Colorado, 5(2), 5.
Rasool, N., & Rasool, M. (2020). DNA evidence in sexual assault cases in Pakistan. Medicine, Science and the Law, 60(4), 270-277.
write