Human identification techniques are constantly developing. Before the discovery of DNA, anthropology accompanied with odontology was the most applicable technique for human identification. With the new era of molecular biology and the revolution of DNA and PCR techniques, DNA profiling has become the core of the human forensic identification process. Different types of samples can be exploited in forensic DNA analysis. In some extreme cases, bone samples are the only accessible samples of DNA due to the bad conditions of putrefaction or degradation of other biological materials and tissues. Therefore, an appropriate method should be determined to yield a full and clean profile. A case study is presented here in order to identify human remains and conclude the most appropriate method of DNA extraction from human remains. In addition, this study looks at the best part of the skeletal remains to be considered in the extraction of DNA for the purposes of identification. A suspect admitted that he buried his aborted son six months ago. The remains were recovered and DNA analysis was performed in order to determine any genetic link of the remains to the suspect and the female who delivered the baby. Two extraction methods were compared, the standard organic (phenol:chloroform:isoamyl alcohol) and automated extraction using magnetic beads coated with silica (Qiagen EZ1 Advanced XL). Two bone parts, femur and clavicle, were also compared in terms of DNA yield. The efficiency of the two methods of DNA extraction from bones is illustrated quantitatively and qualitatively. Paternity testing was performed and the suspect was excluded from being the alleged father.