This paper systematically examines the core issues of scientific uncertainty quantification, statistical framework construction, and court admissibility of the new generation of forensic molecular evidence. This article reviews the advantages and limitations of short tandem repeat (STR) typing and mitochondrial hair typing. It notes that traditional binary determinations are not applicable to degraded samples, mixed samples, and situations involving multiple copy numbers. The article advocates probabilistic interpretation based on likelihood ratios and Bayesian reasoning. This paper critiques the independence assumption and database dependence of the Monika-Welzel method. This method was developed to calculate loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) DnSK values under multi-copy conditions. An improved scheme based on simple random error rate (SRE) is proposed. It can better reflect experimental errors and copy number heterogeneity. Two complementary probability metrics are constructed within the formal concept analysis (FCA) framework to achieve a layered assessment from technical reliability to case attribution. Using the Kline-Gray half-code hair case as an empirical example, the role of blind testing, error propagation, and sensitivity analysis in enhancing the admissibility of evidence is demonstrated. It is recommended to promote cross-laboratory standardization, large-scale blind testing, automated data platforms, and scientific-legal communication guidelines. This will facilitate transparency, repeatability, and fair application of forensic molecular evidence in judicial processes.
References
[1] Stern, H. S., Cuellar, M., Kaye, D. (2019) Reliability and validity of forensic science evidence. Significance, 16(2), 21-24.
[2] Valerio, R. (2020) Likelihood ratios for lawyers… I didn’t go to law school for this! Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Forensic Science, 2(3), e1366.
[3] Jovanovic, J. (2021) Statistical interpretation of DNA evidence in the judicial practice of Montenegro. Criminal Justice, 21.
[4] Edmond, G., Roach, K. (2011) A contextual approach to the admissibility of the state’s forensic science and medical evidence. University of Toronto Law Journal, 61(3), 343-409.
[5] Koch, S. L., Liebowitz, C., Shriver, M. D., Jablonski, N. G. (2021) Microscopical discrimination of human head hairs sharing a mitochondrial haplogroup. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(1), 56-71.
[6] Sun, Z., Zhang, K. (2024) Development of biomedical technology from the perspective of ethics and law. International Internal Medicine Journal, 2, 01-11.
[7] Linch, C. A., Whiting, D. A., Holland, M. M. (2001) Human hair histogenesis for the mitochondrial DNA forensic scientist. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 46(4), 844-853.
[8] Davies, C., Gautam, L., Grela, A., Morrissey, J. (2020) Variability associated with interpreting drugs within forensic hair analysis: a three-stage interpretation. Journal of Applied Toxicology, 40(7), 868-888.
[9] Hoffmann, K. (1991) Statistical evaluation of the evidential value of human hairs possibly coming from multiple sources. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36(4), 1053-1058.
[10] Gaudette, B. D. (1982) A supplementary discussion of probabilities and human hair comparisons. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 27(2), 279-289.
[11] Abdel-Rahman, H. K. (2020) Effect of adding magnesium oxide nanoparticles on the antimicrobial activity of a denture soft liner. Polytechnic Journal, 10(2), 20.
[12] Han, P. K. (2013) Conceptual, methodological, and ethical problems in communicating uncertainty in clinical evidence. Medical Care Research and Review, 70(1), 14S-36S.
[13] Giacomantonio, C., Litmanovitz, Y., Bennell, C., Jones, D. J. (2024) Expressing uncertainty in criminology: Applying insights from scientific communication to evidence-based policing. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 24(2), 470-488.
[14] Greenwell, M. R. (2017) Communicating certainty and uncertainty in medical, supportive and scientific contexts. Health Communication, 32(2), 259-260.
[15] Drapkin, L., Gritsaenko, P., Shuklin, A. (2019) Evidentiary and search capabilities of a forensic medical molecular genetic examination. Electronic Supplement to Russian Juridical Journal. 24.
[16] Tarran, B, (2019) The limits of forensic evidence. Significance, 16(2), 12-15.
[17] Zvárová, J. (2009) Statistics and biomedical informatics in forensic sciences. Environmetrics: The Official Journal of the International Environmetrics Society, 20(6), 743-750.
[18] Sonowal, G., Rughani, P., Gogia, G. (2026) Forensic data deduplication: a comprehensive survey of methods and challenges for digital investigation. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 71, 2503-2527.
[19] Xu, X., Vinci, G. (2024) Forensic science and how statistics can help it: evidence, likelihood ratios, and graphical models. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 16(5), e70006.
[20] Rakoff, J. S., Liu, G. (2023) Forensic science: a judicial perspective. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(41), e2301838120.
[21] Narejo, N., Avais, M. A. (2012) Examining the role of forensic science for the investigative-solution of crimes. Sindh University Research Journal (Science Series). 44(2), 251-254.
[22] Norman, C., Lim, D. X. Y., Henderson, T., Casali, F., Daéid, N. N., Nisbet, L., Ménard, H. (2024) Trends and challenges in the use of drugs as forensic evidence: a scientometric approach to map the current literature. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Forensic Science, 6(2), e1509.
[23] Curran, J.M. (2009) Statistics in forensic science. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational Statistics, 1, 141-156.
[24] Stern, H. S. (2017) Statistical issues in forensic science. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 4, 225-244.
[25] Drikakis, D., Asproulis, N. (2011) Quantification of computational uncertainty for molecular and continuum methods in thermo-fluid sciences. Applied Mechanics Reviews, 64, 040801.
[26] Saha, P., Singh, T., Dargush, G. (2021) Uncertainty quantification of differential algebraic equations using polynomial chaos. Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics, 16(10), 101005.
[27] Layne, T., Jackson, K., Scott, A., Tanner, N. A., Piland, A., Haverstick, D. M., Landers, J. P. (2021) Optimization of novel loop-mediated isothermal amplification with colorimetric image analysis for forensic body fluid identification. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 66(3), 1033-1041.
[28] Kubo, S., Niimi, H., Kitajima, I. (2023) Duplex loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for simultaneous detection of human and human male DNA. BMC Research Notes, 16(1), 180.
[29] Kumsiri, R., Kanchanaphum, P. (2021) Comparison of time course detection of human male DNA from blood stains on various objects on surface in a natural environment and in a laboratory using loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP). Scientifica, 2021(1), 4811608.
[30] Wang, C., Hong, B., Li, Y., Ma, Y., Xu, W., Wang, J. (2025) Rational design of a novel DNA polymerase from clostridium thermocellum to improve LAMP detection performance. Biotechnology Journal, 20(1), e202400559.
[31] Harshini, S. S., Veeraraghavan, V. P., Arthanari, A., Gayathri, R., Kavitha, S., Selvaraj, J., Dinesh, Y. (2022) Comparative study of male and female human hair: a microscopic analysis. Journal of Advanced Pharmaceutical Technology and Research, 13(Suppl 1), S297.
[32] Wickenheiser, R. A., Hepworth, D. G. (1990) Further evaluation of probabilities in human scalp hair comparisons. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 35(6), 1323-1329.
[33] Brunelle, R. L. (1973) Novel techniques for the examination of physical evidence – their admissibility as evidence. Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 56(6), 1391-1400.
[34] Cole, S. A. (2021) Autopsy of a crime lab: Exposing the flaws in forensics. Law and Society Review, 55(4), 683-684.
[35] Balding, D. J., Donnelly, P. (1995) Inferring identify from DNA profile evidence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 92(25), 11741-11745.
Share and Cite
Jin, Z., Sun, Z. (2026) The Scientific Uncertainty, Statistical Framework, and Court Admissibility of the New Generation of Forensic Molecular Evidence. Journal of Disease and Public Health, 2(4), 14-26.