Replies

Only 20 years ago, in cases where police technicians found something from the body of the perpetrator at a scene, they did a blood type analysis. The majority of people are "secretors". Being a secretor means that your blood type can be determined from bodily fluids of yours other than just blood.

And the secretor vs. non-secretor distinction was yet another clue, when they would attempt to find out about a perpetrator by studying his/her "leavings" at a scene.

These determinations, compared to DNA and even mitochondrial DNA, were hardly cutting-edge. If the above tests have been accepted as legitimate (which they have), I don't see why mitochondrial DNA, which has a finer point than just blood type analysis, shouldn't be allowed to be used for evidence.

"I don't see why mitochondrial DNA, which has a finer point than just blood type analysis, shouldn't be allowed to be used for evidence.

I don't either. I know there was a lot of talk about it in the Westerfield case, but they also had other DNA.