Unless Mr. Smith has a kidney disease or some other illness that would cause him to shed epithelial cells, he will not have any cells of any kind and no DNA in his urine. How many people missed this? The writers, director, producers, everyone on set. And everyone on this board? Oops.
shareYes, you are a doctor and you know there isn't DNA in urine. I'll bet the Mr. Brooks character knew this as well. But what are the chances Mr. Smith knew this? He may have been an engineer or whatever, but I would bet most people think there is DNA in urine. Mr. Brooks was probably just telling him that as a ruse.
shareThere's always the possibility that Mr. Brooks was pulling Mr. Smith's leg about the cops finding his DNA in the urine left at the crime scene, so as to further pressure him.
shareto the Dr. peploweStop attacking the good doctor, he graduated in the hollywood medical school with Nick Rivera, hi Dr PePremember remember the movie BAD MEDICINE, in mexico eferthing its possibleDr PeP, it think is M.D., you are Dr in?
shareThere is DNA is Urine, for example in fetal testing experiments and also in forensics there will be leakage from the bladder after someone has died and we can match the DNA to that person or at least heavy markers such as the SRY loci.
The thing is that urine is not a pure substance and it will mask/interfer with DNA markers and make it difficult to analyse to be at the 95% confidence levels statistically.
If we could develop separation techniques the DNA and scale it up using qPCR you might get somewhere?
You don't need to be a Biochemist but it does help besides you can always look up research within the last 3-4 yrs to keep updated.
Amen to that! Also that pee washed over his legs skin and pants certainly carrying lots of his cells and thus his DNA.
share[deleted]
who cares whether there's or not DNA in urine. Costner character may have just said it to scare the guy riding the shotgun.
relax, it's a fiction.
climax88, you didn't read the comment before yours, did you?
It's not about the scene in the car, which for itself poses no controversy. But the latest newspaper shows Mr Smith as the alleged thumbprint killer, which assumes he was indeed traced through his DNA.
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/1580/snapshot20101227125909.jpg
We are discussing the likeliness of this to have happened in real life.
___________________
Want the old IMDb layout back? Go to https://secure.imdb.com/register-imdb/siteprefs and check the first two options
"which assumes he was indeed traced through his DNA."
- I never assumed that was the reason. I figured it was because he was already the prime suspect, and he moved out and disappeared (because he was dead).
Anyone else think it is kinda hilarious that Bob Brooker and the op are so angry that others don't agree with them about piss?
Awww, u mad, kids?
*lies on floor kicking feet and screaming, "BUT I AM A DOCTOR SO I AM RIIIIIIGHT ABOUT THE PEE-PEE!!!! I AM A PISS EXPERT!!"*
Anyone else think it is kinda hilarious that Bob Brooker and the op are so angry that others don't agree with them about piss?
http://www.dnacenter.com/forensics-faq.html
Are you able to get a DNA profile from urine?
Yes. A profile can be obtained from urine.
[deleted]
I think the point is Mr Smith didn't know this, Mr Brooks knew he wasn't that clever so bluffed him. If that's not what the writers were doing, they got away with it because that's what they could say.
shareI think it's quite possible Mr. Brooks simply told Mr. Smith he'd incriminated himself by pissing his pants at the apartment to push him in the emotional direction he wanted him to go. He was aware of Mr. Smith's stupidity and ignorance and so it would have been a fair gamble to say Mr. Smith wouldn't have known urine is sterile.
Mr. Brooks was a highly manipulative character so that's the explanation I put forward.