The genetic witness: forensic DNA phenotyping

Nick Olivier (Ed.) • 29 September 2025

Editorial:  The Genetic Witness: Forensic DNA Phenotyping

Before the advent of DNA testing, according to van Laan, forensic biological samples were processed primarily through serology techniques, such as ABO blood typing and polymorphic isoenzyme analysis, to narrow down potential donors. While these methods could help eliminate unlikely suspects, they could not pinpoint an individual. Research has shown that many convictions based on serology were later proven incorrect when DNA testing was applied, with FBI studies indicating that nearly one-third of serologically determined cases would be excluded by DNA. This high error rate, often due to exaggerated serological findings, led to wrongful convictions and increased calls for better testing methods.


DNA, a fundamental building block of life, became a cornerstone of forensic investigation after Sir Alec Jeffreys discovered its ability to individualise humans in 1984. Testing techniques have advanced since then, starting with Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP). Although RFLP provided valuable results, it required a significant amount of quality DNA and was time-consuming.


In the future, even tiny amounts of DNA could create accurate photographic composites of suspects, allowing for specific and rapid identification. Forensic DNA Phenotyping (FDP) of External Visual Characteristics (EVCs) could deter crime by increasing the likelihood of identification. Additionally, retrieving fingerprints from DNA samples could allow for searches in databases like the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS).


Despite its promise, FDP technology is still developing and requires further validation for reliable use. Research is needed on environmental changes, mixed sample interpretations, and improving predictive accuracy. Regulations should guide the responsible use of FDP to mitigate risks of misuse. Ultimately, FDP must be employed to objectively seek the truth and ensure justice.


Read more from the source.


Source: Michele Van Laan (2017), The genetic witness: forensic DNA phenotyping. Journal of Emerging Forensic Science Research. Vol. 2 No. 2: 33-52. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14636778.2012.687132


Image: By Jerome Walker - Own work, created from GDFL work created by Michael Ströck, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=934419


by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 9 May 2026
Editorial: (Fraud Risk Management) "A Comparison of Key Risk Management Frameworks: COSO-ERM, NIST RMF, ISO 31.000, COBIT."
by Nick Oliver (Ed.) 3 May 2026
Editorial: (Digital Forensics) "Digital Forensics Has a Body of Knowledge Problem. This Taxonomy Is My Attempt to Fix It."
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 2 May 2026
Editorial: (Forensic Science) Comparing "Thompson et al. 2025" with "Morrison et al. 2025": The Question About the Best Way to Present Likelihood Ratios.
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 24 April 2026
Editorial: (Forensic Science) "The Identification, Processing and Investigation of Forensic Investigative Leads in the South African Police Service"
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 23 April 2026
Editorial: (Investigative Interviewing) "Culture, Trauma, and Memory in Investigative Interviews"
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 22 April 2026
Editorial: (Law & Justice) "International Co-Operation in Criminal Matters in South Africa: A Comprehensive Analysis of Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition"
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 21 April 2026
Editorial: (Forensic Pathology) "Forensic Maceration – A Comparative Analysis of Literature and Practical Application"
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 17 April 2026
Editorial: (Forensic Science) "Towards More Relevance in Forensic Science Research and Development"
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 15 April 2026
Editorial: (Forensic Science) "Artificial Intelligence in Forensic Science: Can It Be a Revolution or Else?"
by Nick Olivier (Ed.) 14 April 2026
Editorial: (Policing) "Bridging Policing Practice and Academic Excellence for Sustainable Crime Prevention and Public Sector Reform"