On July 9, 2009, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder spoke at

the Vera Institute of Justice’s Third Annual Justice Address. His comments focused on a review of sentencing guidelines, mandatory sentencing, racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing plus resources for public defender programs. The Department will also consider alternatives to incarceration and new legislation that will reform the structure of federal sentencing.

The Administration is concerned with indigent defense, which attorney General Holder describes as being in a state of crisis. Holder made the following statement:

“Resources for public defender programs lag far behind other justice system programs, constituting only about 3 percent of all criminal justice expenditures in our nation’s largest counties. We know that defenders in many jurisdictions carry huge caseloads that make it difficult for them to fulfill their legal and ethical responsibilities to their clients.”

Desiree Washington of Popdecay reports that the Department will also look at the usage of forensic DNA evidence and its increasing role of importance in criminal prosecution.

“Our goal is to ensure that forensic science is practiced at the highest level possible, and always in the pursuit of truth,” Holder stated.

He also indicated support for defendants having access to DNA evidence, and he hopes that states will follow Federal law allowing access. DNA has an unparalleled ability to exonerate the wrongfully convicted as well as identify the guilty.

The Innocence Project tally of Exonerations of wrongfully accused citizens now stands at 240. Mr. Holder’s initiatives seem to be tempered by two recent Supreme Court decisions regarding DNA evidence and the extensive National Academy of Science report, released in February 2009, critical of many forensic science disciplines and structure.

This question comes up every week: “Can you do a DNA test on a hair sample?” Our customer service reps are always tell clients, “Yes, most of the time.” There is one primary factor that determines whether a DNA lab can perform a paternity test on hair.

The hair must be from the root.

Clients contact us and want to prove paternity without other individuals knowing. Usually, collecting a hair sample is the easiest way, but the hair must be plucked, or otherwise from the root.

We’ve had good success obtaining DNA from a hairbrush. We ask our clients to send us the entire brush, so our forensic analysts can collect an appropriate sample. This involves placing the hair under a microscope, and selecting the strands that contain a root. One thing to consider: The brush should have only one user; many people share their brush

with family members who have similar colored hair. It will be very difficult to determine which strand belongs who which person.

There is no nuclear DNA in a strand of hair that does not contain the root. Paternity testing cannot be completed without the root. However, we can complete maternity testing, because the hair contains mitochondrial DNA, which is passed on through female generations.

If you have a hairbrush that you want tested, I recommend sending the entire brush to a DNA lab, rather than pulling hair out yourself and sending it in. Forensic analysts are trained to collect and extract DNA from difficult samples.

Next time you’re unable to collect a cheek swab, consider a discreet paternity test using a hair sample.

A news article in Dominican Today reported on Sunday that the New York Yankees voided a player’s contract after he “failed” a DNA test. On July 2, 2009 the Yanks reached a deal with Damian Arredondo, a switch-hitter who claimed to be 16 years old. Apparently, this kid took a DNA test that showed evidence he lied about his name and age.

This Yankees Blog gives some good information about the story.

This article really intrigues me for a couple of reasons. First, it’s amazing how in-depth these major league clubs are getting with background checks. I can see your typical physicals, drug tests, and intelligence tests, but now they’re introducing DNA? I can’t wait for Commissioner Selig to come forward and introduce the new MLB steroid….I mean DNA Testing Policy.

Second, how do they actually do the testing? You can’t just take Arredondo’s DNA sample and figure out his real name and age. You’d need to compare the DNA to someone he claimed he was related to. You’d need consent from his ‘alleged’ parents to perform paternity testing between Arredondo and his father.

What made the Yanks test this kid in the first place? He must have claimed he was Manny’s younger brother, so they decided so run a siblingship DNA test. BUSTED!

If anyone from the Yankees organization is reading this, Boston Paternity is more than happy to be a full-service DNA testing company for all your Dominican recruits.

Noot Lenoel, of Vinton, VA petitioned to bring her brother and sister-in-law to the U.S. from Thailand 13 years ago. She owns the Red Jasmine restaurant in Vinton. Her Brother, Piya, makes amazing Thai dumplings, and Noot refused to serve them until her brother made it into the U.S.

The family did not see the immigration process being as difficult as it was. Piya and his wife needed to go to six interviews at the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok . Each time they needed new documents and paperwork in order to prove their relationship with Noot.

According to the Roanoke Times article about Lenoel’s Immigration Process, the familiy needed DNA testing for Immigration as a final step to prove their relatedness. The DNA testing was necessary because there is a significant amount of immigration fraud in Southeast Asia, specifically Thailand.

Finally, after 13 years, Piya and his wife are in the U.S. They immigration process from Thailand was a long struggle, but the family says it’s worth it. Without DNA testing, there is a chance embassy officials would have denied the family a visa.

On behalf of Boston Paternity, congratulations on obtaining your visas. I am sure the patrons of the Red Jasmine are anxiously waiting for the Thai dumplings.

The vast majority of people believe that DNA testing is the end all and the be all of proof of relationships. Two major uses for DNA testing today are paternity testing and forensic DNA testing. Paternity testing tells us if a man is the biological father of a child, while forensic DNA testing tells us if a suspect has committed a crime. Both forms of testing are fool-proof, infallable, watertight, and flawless......aren't they?

Unfortunately, there are a number of factors which could lead to false or inaccurate results for each of the two types of DNA tests mentioned.

The number one reason for wrong DNA test results for paternity testing involves chain of custody. Chain of custody is documentation showing proof of the participants. When individuals purchase home kits, they may not collect DNA from the person they say they collected it from. They might intentionally or accidentally switch DNA samples, which lead to incorrect results. It’s crucial that chain of custody stays intact when collecting and processing DNA samples for paternity testing.

There are more opportunities for incorrect results with forensic DNA testing. Chain of custody is another huge factor in forensics, since you are handling evidence and working within a crime scene. Contamination of evidence can be a major reason for wrong DNA results. If a detective touches evidence without taking appropriate precautions, then her DNA may contaminate the evidence sample.

There are a number of other possibilities for wrong DNA test results. Before you decide that the results you receive are accurate and correct, make sure there is a legitimate and thorough chain of custody accompanying those results.

Michigan, in particular, is a state which has made it law to collect DNA from suspected criminals along with convicted felons. This has led to 6,000 DNA samples that need to be collected and added to the national CODIS database.

Unfortunately, Michigan doesn't have the $1 million needed to fund additional DNA equipment and staff. According to an online Michigan newspaper article, not only did the funding not come through, the state is considering closing one of seven existing crime labs.

Michigan has a dilemma. They understand that DNA testing is a very effective way of solving and preventing crime, but they think they don't have enough money to perform the testing. I have a solution.

Outsource the testing to an independent forensic DNA laboratory. I guarantee any forensic lab in the United States will process 6,000 samples for far less than $1 million. Independent DNA laboratories have existing equipment and staff needed to complete high volume DNA sample extractions.

When you think of it, wouldn't it make more sense for all criminal DNA testing to be done by an independent lab? State crime labs are working directly with the prosecution. They can't be trusted with completely unbiased testing and reporting.

Using an independent and accredited forensic DNA laboratory would save states millions in tax dollars, as well as provide fair DNA test results for all.

Missouri Governor, Jay Nixon, signed into a law a paternity bill that gives men the right to challenge a paternity ruling for two years. The new law takes affect on August 27th.

Currently, there are three ways a man can be named the legal father of a child.

1. The man is married to the mother of the child.

In this case the man is automatically presumed to be the legal father of the child. In cases where the presumed father is not the biological father, another man would need to prove paternity using DNA testing, and submit evidence in court. Then it's up to the judge to rule on the case.

2.  The man signs an acknowledgment of paternity.

Usually this is completed in the hospital at the time of birth. The acknowledgment of paternity is purely voluntary. Men who are uncertain of whether they are the biological father should consider DNA paternity testing before signing the acknowledgment.

3.  A court orders the man to be the putative father.

A judge can rule a man to be the legal father of a child whether or not he is the biological father.

The new Missouri Paternity law will affect all three of these situations. Anytime a man is named the father he will now have two years to challenge that ruling. If DNA testing proves he is not the father, then he will be relieved of all past and future child support payments in Missouri. Missouri joins about 30 other states to adopt the two year paternity law.

I'm not sure how I feel about the two year rule. Is it too long, or not enough time?

Michael Jackson's death has sparked controversy as to who will gain custody of Jackson's three children. Jackson's will clearly states he wants his mother to have custody. If Ms. Jackson is not available, Michael wanted long time friend, Diana Ross to have sole custody. Now, ex-wife and surrogate mother of the two oldest children, Debbie Rowe, is considering a legal battle to petition for custody of all three children.

This case is extremely difficult, and will be handled in California Probate Court. What makes it difficult is that Jackson is rumored not to be the biological father of any of the children. In addition, Rowe is not the biological mother, but the surrogate to the two oldest children. She is not the mother of the youngest child. Rowe apparently waived custodial rights in 2003 in exchange for a multi-million dollar settlement. It seems clear she isn't seeking custody for the benefit of the children.

One would think that DNA testing on Michael Jackson and his children would solve everything. In this case it wouldn't. California law usually grants custody of children to the remaining parent. In this case, Rowe is the legal parent of the oldest two children (you can't waive parental rights without a judicial ruling). Even though Michael wants his mother to have custody, she most likely will not get it unless both legal parents are deceased or deemed unfit. As far as the third child, most courts do not like to separate siblings. This makes Rowe the favorite to win custody of all three.

Although paternity testing helps courts make decisions in thousands of custody battles, it doesn't appear that a DNA test will help much in the Jackson case.

There's some additional information about the custody battle at BBC News.