• Türkçe
    • English
  • English 
    • Türkçe
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Avesis
  • Dokümanı Olmayanlar
  • Makale
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Avesis
  • Dokümanı Olmayanlar
  • Makale
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Who touched the document?: A new overall strategy for collection and identification of DNA from the questioned documents as a supportive evidence

Author
ANILANMERT, Beril
YÜKSELOĞLU, Emel Hülya
Cengiz, Salih
ÇAVUŞ YONAR, Fatma
Rayimoglu, Gulten
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
The questions on which judges/prosecutors apply for expertise are mostly about by whom a document was drafted/signed. In this study, a new collective strategy was constructed including a collection method, a modified-silica-based DNA isolation method, and a novel purification method on four contact traces formed on four different paper surface during writing, using PCR with AmpFlSTR (R) GlobalFiler (TM) STR kit (after experimental comparison between three different kits) and identification using CE. This collective analysis approach is more sensitive and superior to its equivalents on questioned documents in literature because quantifiable amounts of touch DNA and profiles with high loci percentages (100% on day 1, 72.72% after 1 week) were obtained up to 1 week even after the most challenging conditions of sample forming that a forensic scientist can meet; as washing hands just before drafting and using a very low pressure in a shorter time (simulating a simple contact real conditions while drafting), using no visualizing technique that damages the document. Using the strategy, four most commonly used paper types were compared, to see in which of them DNA could be recovered better. The success of this strategy was shown on the 1-day to 10-year-old real samples from a diary and some archive documents from a law office (including the mix-DNA and different ballpoint pens). Thus, it became possible to show if a person had touched the document, in high success rates up to 1 week as a secondary evidence, when primary evidences are insufficient for the detection of document fraud offenses.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/168626
https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.202100192
Collections
  • Makale [92796]

Creative Commons Lisansı

İstanbul Üniversitesi Akademik Arşiv Sistemi (ilgili içerikte aksi belirtilmediği sürece) Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
Atmire NV
 

 


Hakkımızda
Açık Erişim PolitikasıVeri Giriş Rehberleriİletişim
sherpa/romeo
Dergi Adı/ISSN || Yayıncı

Exact phrase only All keywords Any

BaşlıkbaşlayaniçerenISSN

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypesThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypes

My Account

LoginRegister

Creative Commons Lisansı

İstanbul Üniversitesi Akademik Arşiv Sistemi (ilgili içerikte aksi belirtilmediği sürece) Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
Atmire NV