The DNA and fingerprints matched to a particular suspect would provide verification that the suspect had handled the gun. It would also rule out any other suspects if no other DNA or fingerprints were found on the weapon. Last but not least would be any traces of blood found on the suspects clothing. Blood evidence is very powerful evidence since current technology allows for establishing identities through the analysis of blood that is very effective. George Schiro, a forensic scientist with the Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory writes, "a blood source can now be statistically narrowed down to one person out of several million or even several billion" (Schiro). Most importantly, according to Schiro, blood evidence can eliminate prospective suspects while providing strong evidence in regards to establishing identities of other suspects. All four of the above mentioned evidence types can provide helpful evidence for the prosecutor(s) and often times are direct links to the defendant in regards to establishing crime scene scenarios and what took place during the particular event. Concerning the case example used in this paper, the ballistics of the weapon showed that it was the weapon used during the murder, fingerprints (though no DNA) were found on the weapon that helped to establish the identity of the shooter, and blood spatters on the defendant's shoes were analyzed and it was determined that those blood spatters were from the victim. The suspect was identified by the fingerprint results, while the blood spatters tied him to the victim, and the ballistics tied the defendant to the weapon used during the crime. Profiling the victim and the accused showed enmity between them and the gangs that provided motive for the killing. Once the motive was established, the forensic investigator was allowed the opportunity...

Since it was already determined that the victim was a member of a gang, and that the defendant knew and had had frequent contact with the victim and was a member of a rival gang, the investigator had to use the physical evidence, technological advantages and deductive reasoning to determine exactly what happened. The evidence provided a series of relationships that assisted in that determination. The blood spatters found on the defendant's clothing showed that the defendant was in close proximity to the victim when he was bleeding. The fingerprints on the gun provided evidence that the gun was used in the killing, and the proximity of the gun to the victim showed that the defendant had (at the least) been in the same area as the victim within a certain time frame.
Deductive reasoning assisted the investigator in establishing the fact that the defendant had shot the victim. When confronted with the overwhelming evidence, the defendant confessed, and the crime was solved.

References

Kaasa, S.O.; Peterson, T.; Morris, E.K.; Thompson, W.C.; (2006) Statistical inference and forensic evidence: Evaluating a bullet lead match, Law & Human Behavior, Vol. 31, pp. 433-437

Noble, a.A.; (2006) Introduction: DNA fingerprinting and civil liberties, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 149-152

Pollman, C.; (2004) Suspect identities, the British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 44, No. 2, pg. 297-300

Schiro, G.; (1999) Collection and Preservation of Blood Evidence from Crime Scenes, http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/blood.html, Accessed March 8, 2009