ABSTRACT
Because DNA evidence is relatively new, there is a misconception among many legal practitioners that there is something special about it and that it has to be treated in a different way from other types of evidence. The idea that DNA is unique for each individual (but, crucially, not DNA profile!) and the fact that interpretation of DNA evidence relies heavily on the use of statistics gives DNA evidence an aura of impregnability often leading to the belief that DNA evidence adduced against the accused is an unassailable proof of his/her guilt. This is far from what DNA evidence really is. There is nothing ‘special’ about DNA evidence to make it different from other types of evidence. It may also be surprising to many to find out that DNA evidence, besides being one of the best studied, is much simpler than many other types of evidence, such as glass or handwriting evidence. The fact that in most cases DNA evidence is easily quantifiable makes it clearly and intelligibly presentable to the jury while the statistical parameters provide quantitative information on the probative value of a particular DNA profile.
