The Power of Citizen Journalism
Post News ($)»     Post Blog»     Upload Image»     Groups»     Events»     Alerts»     How do I ...»
Email Print Share

Email this article

Recipient email:
Your email:
optional
Message:
optional

article imageScientist Fired For Testing Husband's Underwear For DNA Evidence

Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  jaguar in Science | 7 comments | 777 views
Next in Science
Related News
Advertising
In Lansing, Michigan a state forensics scientist, Ann Chamberlain, was fired from her job because she used the forensics lab to test her husband's underwear for DNA after suspecting him of cheating on her.
Chamberlain testified at her divorce hearing in March 2007 that she tested her husband's underwear for the DNA of another woman last September. Her husband's lawyer asked what the test found. She replied,
Another female. It wasn’t me.”
Ann Chamberlain also claimed in another hearing that she did the DNA test on her own time and with old chemicals that were going to be thrown out anyway.

Michigan State Police oversees the Lansing lab where Chamberlain was employed. They announced today they fired her, effective August 16, after they did an internal investigation of her violating administrative policy.

These policies prohibit the use of "department supplies, materials or equipment for non duty or non-department purpose."

The 33-year-old scientist received an award for Outstanding Contribution to the Michigan State Police Biological Services in 2006 for her research and method development in embryonic/fetal DNA recovery, according to Forensic Science Consultants Inc., which lists her among the forensic scientists it employs.

A sad career ending of a talented scientist. Now she has lost both a husband and a job. I am thinking that the job is the greatest loss and a terrible blow to her. Hopefully she will soon find another lab to put her skills to use at.
article:219608:9::0
3 subscribers
Subscribe To This Thread[?] :
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Bob Ewing
    #1
    I think that firing her was a bit strong a reprimand would have been enough.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Debra Myers (skyangel)
    #2
    I think that if I had been in her shoes and been able to do what she did, I would have done it too! (No offense guys!)
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Chris V. (cgull)
    #3
    I don't see anything wrong with it maybe a minor fine but not being fired totally. These guys so much money doing crazy tests and buying chemicals and stuff at high prices. Almost every laboratory does that, it would hardly have cost much money in this instance. I hope she gets a better job and better partner also.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  Carolyn E. Price (gohomelaker)
    #4
    I guess I'm the one who is going to dive in and say, look, she knew what the rules were and what did she do? She broke the rules, therefore she should be fired. This is a complete abuse of her position. She could have taken the underwear to a private clinic and had them tested if she needed evidence for a divorce proceeding. That is what any other person would have to do and logically, that is what she should have done. It is really too bad that an unfortunate decision on her part, made in the heat of a very stressful and emotional moment has lead to her firing but she should have known better and honestly, she probably did. It is not as if this woman didn't know of any other place to get the undies tested.
  • avatar Posted Aug 21, 2007 by  patxxoo
    #5
    OK i'm like this .... i never could understand the need for verification of trust ..if you can't trust your partner move on
  • avatar Posted Aug 22, 2007 by  jaguar
    #6
    good points, GHL. She definitely broke the rules. There's probably many others who break those same rules though, but they don't come out publicly admitting to it like she did in the divorce case. I guess that's what slipped her up. When she saw the evidence from her own test that he was cheating, she should have sent those undies (or another pair afterwards) to a different, outside lab.
    I probably would have tested his underwear if I thought he was a "dog" & I had access to the lab like she did, but I would have asked a superior for permission first. If it were denied, I would hope that I'd have done the right thing & sent them to another lab & paid for the testing to make it legit!

    Thanks for commenting everyone. I hope she'll get another job soon because she does seem to be a talented scientist with much to offer. It's too bad she had to be fired, but I guess she had to be an example to everyone else that rules DO need to be enforced, & when they're broken there are consequences.
    Her firing seems harsh, but who knows what politics are behind all of this?
  • avatar Posted Aug 22, 2007 by  jaguar
    #7
    @ patxxoo
    OK i'm like this .... i never could understand the need for verification of trust ..if you can't trust your partner move on


    Good point!

Add a Comment

You have to Login or Register to comment


Email:
Password:
Remember meForgot password?