DNA is terrific. . . .

"DNA is terrific and nobody doubts it, but because it is so powerful, any chinks in its armor ought to be made as salient and clear as possible so jurors will not be overwhelmed by the seeming certainty of it," said David Faigman, a professor at UC Hastings College of the Law, who specializes in scientific evidence.

DNA's Dirty Little Secrets - 2010 Article

Most of the BK cases don’t have DNA evidence, the only thing supposedly linking Mark to some of the crimes. (Most of the crimes can’t be linked to anyone.) What DNA is available is in miniscule amounts, degraded, and mixtures, which complicates things (enormously) in interpreting results.

I came across this article - DNA’s Dirty Little Secret -and a lot of it could have been written for Mark. Notice this quote from world renowned Dan Krane, "If you show ten colleagues a mixture, you will probably end up with ten different answers." Dan Krane, a molecular biologist at Wright State University and a leading critic of the government’s stance on DNA evidence, agrees. "There is a public perception that DNA profiles are black and white," he told me. "The reality is that easily in half of all cases—namely, those where the samples are mixed or degraded—there is the potential for subjectivity." Read more and learn how DNA evidence is being misused by law enforcement.