Through the Use of DNA Evidence, a Jury Convicted the Defendant

Through the use of DNA evidence, a jury convicted the defendant of the rape and murder of four women over a period of time in the case of Commonwealth v. Gaynor. The defendant contended that in the case of mixed samples containing DNA, the testing protocols could not reliably detect primary from secondary contributors of DNA material or from artifact DNA. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that:

A) the science on which DNA testing is based has moved forward sufficiently so that, in the case of mixed DNA materials, the laboratory analysis will produce readings that are distinctive and reliable that will be in direct proportion to the differences in the amounts of the samples analyzed.
B) the science on which DNA analysis has been based has not moved forward sufficiently to meet the Daubert standards where mixed samples of DNA are involved.
C) mixed DNA samples are not capable of being analyzed to determine which person among many possibilities could be the source of one of the DNA samples and that Cellmark's methodology in dealing with the presence of mixtures or technical artifacts is generally not accepted within the scientific community.
D) artifact and mixed DNA samples do not produce any useful information based on the DNA profiles currently in use.