This same article examines the history of DNA evidence and recognizes that when evidence was first presented to the courts that the new type of identification was was initially accepted without challenge, however, critics quickly argued that DNA testing was problematic due to the reliability and validity of the evidence's probative value. For example, DNA exoneration cases suggest that errors in forensic identification have led to a high number of wrongful convictions, and concerns that media portrayals of forensic science evidence on popular television programs lead jurors to unfairly weigh DNA evidence while they make their decision on the facts of a case. process (Carrell, 2008). Additionally, in recent DNA exemption cases courts and jurors have had difficulty analyzing expert testimony on forensic identification evidence. According to the article, in 86 DNA exoneration cases, forensic analysis errors were the second leading cause of wrongful conviction, behind eyewitness misidentification (Carrell,