No DNA evidence was found on the stripper that alleged that the Duke Lacrosse team beat and raped her. 46 of 47 players submitted to a DNA sample (the one black player did not have to give a sample because the victim said her attackers were white), and now they expect the investigation to be over soon.
Here is my question. Do we trust DNA evidence too much? I know that technically you can still proceed with a trial without a DNA match, but it seems like a lot of times it is the main factor. The way science is always moving, who is to say that in five years we won't have some breakthrough that shows that our methods for DNA testing is all wrong, that we have put away innocent people or let guilty people go free because we thought the world was flat. If anyone knows anything about why we should trust our DNA so much let me know, I will admit that I don't know that much about science and I have a problem with trusting it unconditionally.