There are flaws in simplifying DNA science through speedy storytelling. Sure, a narrative moves much faster but it also leads to misconceptions about the process. We assume so many things because of it.
Discriminating one blood cell from any other cell is the real job here. There are skin cells, bacteria cells, and every other cell that floats by and gets mixed into a sample. It’s like looking for the right cell in a cell stack. It’s not easy. Everyone in the chain must do their job right to ensure a successful, accurate, and usable outcome.
And then there’s thatwonderful moment in history when DNA science was introduced into a law court for the first time. The test was highly accurate and irrefutable. It was the beginning of a change in Law and the way investigations were conducted.
But there was also a magical safe zone that existed for a time while this change took place. It meant that anyone who wanted to commit a crime only had a short time to get it done. If left too long, a criminal could get caught by way of DNA science.
This transitional period and DNA’s implementation into modern investigations intrigues me. It makes me wonder how many real-life criminals are out there just waiting for a knock to come on their door for some crime they committed just prior to the acceptance of DNA science.
Now here’s a twist to that idea: What if your own DNA profile was matched to that of an unsolved murder? That’d shock you, right? You’d deny committing the offence, of course, you would. Like my protagonist, you’re decent and kind. It’s impossible to be linked to any crime, much less murder.
Perhaps someone set you up? That’s the most logical answer of all, right?
Or you did it and don’t know.
