Forensic Science Lab
Intro
For the fifth lab in our STEM Biology class, we studied Forensic Science and the techniques used by law enforcement. As we started the project we were given the family history of all family's attending the picnic where the murder took place. After the victim, Carelton Comet was murdered each suspects fingerprints, pen ink's, blood types', DNA Karyotypes, and DNA fingerprints were taken to provide convicting evidence.
Our group decided to convict Nancy Normal, Carelton Comet's Niece. The most suspicious evidence pieces were Nancy Normal's fingerprint matching the fingerprint found on the knife, the death note left on Carelton Comet’s body was tested for ink and was matched to Nancy Normal’s pen, on the knife that stabbed Carelton’s Comet’s knife was found to have two different types of blood where one was matched immediately to Carelton Comet (obviously), but the second blood sample was matched with Nancy Normal; The DNA sequence left on the knife and the DNA fingerprint left on the glass were both 1 on 1 matches with Nancy Normal and no other suspects matched the findings, and our team also interviewed each suspect at the picnic and we now have each family history in pedigree charts. The pedigree charts show us the motive of Nancy Normal, revenge. Nancy’s father died in a suspicious gardening accident when she was three, we believe Thomas Sandstone, Nancy’s Uncle, to have killed Nancy’s father, Tony Normal. Nancy would now have come to the conclusion that Carleton Comet or previously known as Thomas Sandstone killed Tony Normal. Sam Sophmore doesn’t have much evidence against him but his pen, blood type, and DNA fingerprint do match Carelton Comet.
Reflection
During the Forensic Lab our group could have improved on two subjects. The first one was how our group did not have much cultural competence throughout this lab. This lab didn't really require the groups to use cultural competence so our group should work together to make sure we incorporate it in our next project. another are of improvements that could be done was to collaborate better. Although we got the lab finished on time, not everyone put in as much effort as the rest of the group to make sure the project was thorough. If everyone contributed equally to the project then our group could have finished with time to spare and we all could have a better understanding on the subject.
Our group, however having a few things to work on, worked diligently. First of all, our group communicated very well. Everyone expressed their thoughts and ideas well on how to better our project and worked harder to accommodate for the absences of one or more students throughout the whole project. Second of all, our group worked very well as conscientious learners. As a group we set goals and managed our time to make sure that we finished the physical procedures of the lab and the thought taken to convict the criminal. In the end the all of our group members worked hard, and communicated well to obtain the best grade possible.