GHTM

Global Health and Tropical Medicine

  • GHTM
    • Vision
    • Mission
    • Governance
    • Scientific Advisory Board
  • News
    • Outreach
    • Events
      • GHTM Sessions
      • Workshops
    • Articles
    • Jobs
  • Research
    • Cross-cutting issues
      • Global Pathogen Dispersion and Population Mobility
      • Drug Discovery and Drug Resistance
      • Diagnostics
      • Public Health Information
      • Fair Research Partnerships
    • Research Groups
      • PPS – Population health, policies and services
      • THOP – TB, HIV and opportunistic diseases and pathogens
      • VBD – Vector borne diseases and pathogens
      • IHC – Individual health care
    • Research in numbers
      • 2020
      • 2019
      • 2018
      • 2017
    • Projects
      • Ongoing Projects
    • Members
      • Population health, policies and services
        • PPS PhD members
        • PPS non PhD members
      • TB, HIV and opportunistic diseases and pathogens
        • THOP PhD members
        • THOP non PhD members
      • Vector-borne diseases and pathogens
        • VBD PhD members
        • VBD non PhD members
      • Individual Health Care
        • IHC PhD members
        • IHC non PhD members
      • Technical / administrative support
  • Publications
  • Education
    • Master Theses
    • PhD Theses
  • Services
Home / Publicações / Science in court: the myth of HIV fingerprinting.

Science in court: the myth of HIV fingerprinting.

  • Autores: Abecasis AB, Albert J, Geretti AM, Power L, Vandamme AM, Weait M
  • Journal: The Lancet Infectious Diseases
  • Link: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1473309910702838?np=y

An Editorial in Nature has emphasised the importance of proper scientific validation of forensic methods before their use in court. Classic fingerprinting, DNA fingerprinting, and brain imaging were discussed, and several cases of doubtful interpretation of forensic evidence with potentially incorrect conviction or exoneration of suspects were indicated. Cases of HIV transmission examined in court are experiencing similar problems, whereby the risk of incorrect conviction is substantial because of a flawed view of the science behind forensic phylogenetics. A scientific discussion of HIV fingerprinting in cases of HIV transmission is therefore urgent.

In 1994, phylogenetic analysis, alongside other compelling evidence, first led to a criminal conviction in a case of HIV transmission through rape in Sweden. Thus, the precedent was set for the use of phylogenetic data as circumstantial evidence in court. Since then, forensic phylogenetic analysis has been used repeatedly, albeit in the context of other incriminating evidence. This analysis is increasingly determining convictions by criminal courts. By calling such investigations HIV fingerprinting, scientists raise unrealistic expectations among court rulers. Unlike for DNA fingerprinting, where a likelihood can be calculated for a full match between the evidential DNA and the suspect DNA, there is never a full match between the RNA or the DNA of HIV in two samples, even within an individual.

HIV is constantly evolving, and in forensics, phylogenetic analysis investigates the evolutionary (and thus epidemiological) link between the HIV strains of victim and suspect, trying to establish whether they belong to a transmission chain. When forensic phylogenetics finds a monophyletic cluster joining victim and suspect, this evidence cannot prove transmission beyond reasonable doubt. Proper identification of the transmission source would require two major assumptions: that a phylogenetic tree can flawlessly reconstruct a true epidemic history and that strains from all patients ever infected with HIV are available as controls. Both assumptions are unrealistic. An error margin for clustering in a phylogenetic tree can be estimated by use of bootstrap replicates or Bayesian posterior probabilities for example. However, we can never sample all infected individuals and neither the number of unsampled patients nor their phylogenetic clustering is known. Nevertheless, sufficient controls can be included in the analysis to explore the diversity of HIV strains circulating in the vicinity of suspect and victim. Under such conditions, significant clustering of the suspect and victim virus strains can indicate that they belong to a transmission chain. However an indirect link can never be ruled out.

Full-size image (52 K)Figure.
Hypothetical phylogenetic tree for an investigation of HIV transmission. Although the suspect and the victim form a monophyletic cluster that is significantly supported, because complete sampling of all patients with HIV (or at least from the epidemiologically relevant population who are local to the parties under investigation) is not feasible, to know if (and how many) other individuals belong to the same transmission chain is not possible. *Statistically significant support of that cluster.
Because the full transmission tree is unknown, no likelihood can be attached to the a priori hypothesis of direct transmission, even if that hypothesis cannot be rejected. In contrast, separate clustering with unlinked individuals that is statistically supported can disprove direct transmission. Therefore, forensic phylogenetics has to be done in the context of hypothesis testing—the court’s hypothesis being the suspect infected the victim, while the expert tries to find evidence to reject this hypothesis. Furthermore, phylogenetic evidence cannot indicate the direction of transmission, but the person who was infected later can be excluded as the source of earlier infections by taking into account the dates of seronegative and seropositive results and the appropriate window period. Such exclusion should not be mistaken for proof of transmission in the other direction. To prevent erroneous use of phylogenetic evidence in court, scientific experts are recommended to do the following: (1) to provide evidence of their expertise in forensic analysis; (2) to use two samples from different times from each party under investigation as close as possible to the alleged time of transmission; (3) to analyse two different viral genomic regions; (4) to use sufficient local controls, with full protection of their identity; (5) to blind the identities of the parties, with unblinding allowed only for testimony; and (6) to word correctly the findings, with no claims made about the likelihood of direct transmission.

Phylogenetic analysis is a powerful technique that can, if properly used, provide valuable circumstantial evidence in forensic investigation for cases of HIV transmission. However, scientists should be aware of the limitations of this analysis, and should emphasise that courts must use other evidence to achieve a conviction.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Events

IHMT selected for the pilot phase of the Research Data Repository Service of the FCT

  In order to promote good practices in Open Science with regard to research data and … [Read More...]

Paulo Ferrinho interviewed for the new e-magazine of European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP)

Paulo Ferrinho, professor and Diretor of Public Global Health Departament at the Instituto de … [Read More...]

How can we improve the environmental performance of our laboratories?

  Every day in NOVA's laboratories research is carried out with the consumption of numerous … [Read More...]

PhD student from GHTM attended the India|EMBO Lecture Course

Ronise Silva, a PhD student under the Tropical Diseases and Global Health program at the Institute … [Read More...]

Call for PhD Studentships

The Institute of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (IHMT), Universidade Nova de Lisboa (NOVA), through … [Read More...]

IHMT | GHTM – APPLICATIONS ARE OPEN!

IHMT | GHTM - Applications are open for three research vacancies:   One position - PhD … [Read More...]

About GHTM

GHTM is a R&D Center that brings together researchers from IHMT with a track record in Tropical Medicine and International/Global Health. It aims at strengthening Portugal's role as a leading partner in the development and implementation of a global health research agenda. Our evidence-based interventions contribute to the promotion of equity in health and to improve the health of populations.

Contacts

Rua da Junqueira, 100
1349-008 Lisboa
Portugal
+351 213 652 600
+351 213 632 105

  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Subscribe Newsletter

  • How to get to GHTM/IHMT
  • GHTM Sessions
  • Research Groups
  • Cross-cutting issues
© Copyright 2023 IHMT-UNL Todos os Direitos Reservados.
  • Universidade Nova de Lisboa
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia

    Project UID/Multi/04413/2013