Efficacy of extended kinship analyses utilizing commercial STR kit in establishing personal identification

Abstract

Unprecedented fidelity and specificity have afforded DNA testing its long reigning status as the gold standard for establishing personal identification. While the method itself is flawless, forensic experts have undoubtedly stumbled across challenging cases in which no reference samples for an unknown person (UP) are available for comparison. In such cases, experts often must resort to an assortment of kinship analyses-primarily those involving alleged parents or children of a UP-to establish personal identification. The present study derives likelihood ratio (LR) distributions from an extensive series of kinship simulations and places actual data, obtained from 120 cases in which personal identification of a UP was established via kinship analyses, to a comprehensive comparison in order to evaluate the efficacy of kinship assessments in establishing personal identification. A commercially available AmpFlSTR Identifiler kit was used to obtain DNA profiles. UP DNAs were extracted and isolated from fingernail (n=87), cardiac blood (24), carpal bone (7) and tooth (2). Buccal cells were procured from alleged kin (AK) for subsequent kinship analyses. In 72 cases 1-3 alleged children were available for comparison; in 46 cases, one or both alleged parents were available; and in the final 2 cases (involving a pair of bodies discovered together in a dwelling), their alleged children were typed for comparison. For each case a LR was calculated based on the DNA typing results. Interestingly, we found that the median LR observed in the actual cases virtually mirrored those of the simulations. With exception to 2 cases in which a silent allele was observed at D19S433, biological relatives showed a LR greater than 100 and in these cases, kinship between the UP and AK were further supported by additional forms of evidence. We show here that in the vast majority of identification cases where direct reference samples are unavailable for a UP, kinship analyses referring to alleged parents/children and using 15 standard loci is more than capable of establishing the identification of a UP. However, discretion should be advised for silent alleles which-albeit rare-are known to occur at loci such as D19S433, along with other mutations which could render a deceivingly reduced LR.