English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Congress explicitly ordered the National Academy of Science to investigate ‘non-DNA’ forensic techniques. But DNA typing nonetheless exerted great influence over every aspect of the process, from the story of how the committee came into existence to the final contents of the report's pages. This article unearths the pivotal role played by DNA typing in the formation and execution of the committee's mission. It then uses that history to caution against ‘DNA exceptionalism’—the inclination to view DNA as uniquely impermeable to error or as requiring less oversight and scrutiny than traditional methods. Instead, this article argues that the committee's recommendations should be interpreted as safeguards essential for all forensic methods, not just the ones expressly covered by the report.

What ‘Strengthening Forensic Science’ today means for tomorrow: DNA exceptionalism and the 2009 NAS Report