Relative's DNA Solves A 1993 Murder Cold Case (washingtonpost.com) 118
A 44-year-old living in Maine has just been arrested and charged with committing a murder when he was 18, the Washington Post reports:
The April 1993 slaying of Sophie Sergie, an Alaska Native, was one of the state's most notorious cold cases until Friday, when authorities announced that DNA genealogical mapping helped triangulate a genetic match... Police recovered the suspect's DNA from Sergie's body. At the time, the district court filing said, DNA processing technology had not been introduced in Alaska. A DNA profile confirming the suspect as male was uploaded in 2000, but it did not match anyone in the FBI's database. The case went dormant for years...
Then the alleged "Golden State Killer" was captured [after searching commercial online genealogy databases for relatives who matched DNA found at a crime scene]. The publicity of the feat, state troopers said, sparked the idea for investigators in the Sergie case. Why not try the same? A forensic genealogist prepared a report on Dec. 18, comparing the suspect's genetic material from the crime scene to likely relatives. A woman's DNA profile emerged in the search. Investigators found their link: She was an aunt of Downs's.
Downs had been a student at the college where the murder took place. He's also been charged with sexual assault -- and with being a fugitive from justice for the last 25 years.
Then the alleged "Golden State Killer" was captured [after searching commercial online genealogy databases for relatives who matched DNA found at a crime scene]. The publicity of the feat, state troopers said, sparked the idea for investigators in the Sergie case. Why not try the same? A forensic genealogist prepared a report on Dec. 18, comparing the suspect's genetic material from the crime scene to likely relatives. A woman's DNA profile emerged in the search. Investigators found their link: She was an aunt of Downs's.
Downs had been a student at the college where the murder took place. He's also been charged with sexual assault -- and with being a fugitive from justice for the last 25 years.
Is it a crime to be on the run? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you've actually been charged with a crime and got a court date but didn't show up, that's illegal. If you haven't been charged with a crime, then not showing up is definitely not illegal.
dom
Re:Yes (Score:2)
Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
>_ but if it is found you were guilty then, obviously, you were a fugitive all these years and a murderer. (emphasis mine)
That's what I said and you called me retarded. Supposing you're right, you're someone repeating a retarded...
It's not a troll post. I have more important things to do than trolling here. And again, this is about weird charges like being a fugitive without being sought -- not the homicide charge, for instance.
Suppose, just for the sake of making things clearer, that he was identified s
Re: (Score:3)
If you're anonymously charged with the crime and refuse to appear to contest it, you're now a fugitive.
Even if you're not guilty of the crime, the fugitive charges don't disappear. Even if you're not guilty. That's what you're saying. The courts DGAF if you knew you were being charged or not. And this foreigner is rightfully questioning it.
And I question it, too. It smacks of secret tribunals, which are explicitly forbidden by the constitution. Anonymous charges in public are nearly the same as secret.
Re: (Score:3)
Because legal terms have legal meaning, you don't want to listen to a legal term and just hear whatever it "sounds like," you want to refrain from understanding until after you have the definitions. ;)
When you're charged in one State, but you're arrested in another State, there are lots of details and paperwork. The jurisdiction holding you has a right to hold you, but they don't control the actual charges against you. Therefore, to prevent that being some sort of black hole that people can fall into, they
Re: (Score:2)
In my State if you don't want to be required to present ID, simply don't carry it and you're not required to present it.
Unless I'm driving or shopping, I don't even carry my wallet.
BTW, cryptocurrencies track every purchase and when you spend the money, you also transfer the purchase history of that money. It seems a little out of place next to your other concerns; you seem to have been taken for a ride by propagandists.
and we're sliding down.. (Score:1)
that slippery slope where the feds have massive dna databases on everybody... even if the databases aren't entirely theirs.
but what's worse is 'everybody' is willingly giving dna samples away... with absolutely no protections once the private companies involved get their grubby paws on it.
it wouldn't surprise me at all if one or more of these 'ancestor' gimmicks was an fbi / cia / nsa front, since the government can't go around grabbing dna samples from everybody.. they've come up with a way where the peo
This is all fine and dandy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Jarwulf you're a fucking moron in a strawman costume, just show yourself out please. Find a field to scare birds in for chrissake you goon. Make yourself useful for a change. Go find a red neckerchief to complete your ensemble.
DNA is traceable. The DNA of family members is obtainable. They caught the guy. What the fuck are you crying about specifically lol, grow up.
Re: (Score:2)
The other fun is all the people who worked as "informants" for the police/gov/mil and who expected to keep their cover.
All the undercover work going back decades.
Re:This is all fine and dandy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Hoover was a fucking sissy tranny
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reason they refer to the agents that vacuum up DNA traces in Gattaca as 'Hoovers'.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you SURE there was no double entendre there?
Re: (Score:3)
Here's information about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act [hhs.gov].
That said, I would not recommend that anyone have any of these publicly-sold DNA tests. It might be possible to take them anonymously, especially by making use of attorney-client privilege, but I will leave that to a lawyer to figure out.
Re: (Score:1)
And when the fascism has reached full force, they can easily round up any genetic group they want to get rid off. No painstaking detective and data work the Nazis had to do, instant identification of all that are the "undesirables" to be blamed for all the things that go downhill in fascism.
All these "great" results today are just preparation and propaganda and as soon as the methods are established, they are going to be used for anything possible.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think the democrats are not part of this too? This has been going on for some decades and has gotten obvious about 10 years back.
Re: (Score:2)
How they'll use the registry is one thing, but I think the principal battle on whether they'll have a biometric registry on everyone is over, at least here in Europe. The reason is that post 9/11 the US insisted all passports have biometrics with photo and fingerprints, here in Norway 90%+ of the population have a valid passport because in Europe you cross borders constantly. They don't register DNA on anyone but criminals, but the threshold has been going down and down from sex-related crimes to serious cr
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what happens to all the DNA taken for paternity tests?
Re: (Score:3)
DNA is not needed for a government to abuse its people in this manner.
In fact, DNA has nothing to do with the extent to which a government abuses its people. An abusive government will find ways to do what it wants to do.
The solution is not to eliminate DNA testing, but to rein in government power. This is an ongoing struggle that will never end. Freedom isn't free.
Re:This is all fine and dandy... "moron..." (Score:2, Insightful)
"Moron; now THAT is a convincing argument!
"That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved."
ATTRIBUTION: BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, letter to Benjamin Vaughan, March 14, 1785.—The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Albert H. Smyth, vol. 9, p. 293 (1906).
https://www.bartleby.com/73/953.html [bartleby.com]
The problem is not the incomprehension of the -er ..."Moron"... the problem is the authoritarian mindset which seems to
Re:This is all fine and dandy (Score:5, Insightful)
Many nations are unable to make this same distinction. There are quite a few where you can be executed or jailed for what you say. If you think that the one you live in can't become like that, you're wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
North Korea comes to mind - A place where when you escape the country go be free, they lock up your family you leave behind in their famous death camps for "re-education" or really death by exposure, starvation and hard labor.
Or, closer to home, those living in Venezuela who don't happen to support the socialist government are getting shot and killed in the streets by the military for protesting, while everybody else dies slowly of starvation.
Re: (Score:2)
That's another reason why DNA is irrelevant to this problem; countries that lack freedom they already track everybody. If you need permission from the government just to move to a new residence, then you're already being completely tracked, and they can punish your family for what you do whenever they want. DNA doesn't seem to change things at all in that regard.
If our country loses personal freedom, then we already lost it. So many people seem to be arguing, "if the gubermint took our freedums away, then t
Re: (Score:2)
It seems that if your country does this, that is the problem already, and it has nothing at all to do with DNA.
I mean with DNA, or without DNA, either your country avoids this problem, or it happens. Using DNA for evidence doesn't seem to even touch this issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"Moron doesn't understand the difference between a heinous murder / rape and a protest movement, conflates the two freely for illogical non-arguments of bullshit proportions. Fox breaking News."
If you don't believe that governments can and do misuse and abuse their powers, especially those powers enabled by new technologies, then you have a very limited imagination indeed. You might like how the government used the technology this time, but you might not like it as much the next time. Be careful what you wish for.
Re: (Score:3)
Where it is the natural tendency of government to follow such paths, it is by far NOT a given they will.
The legal basis of the USA's existence, if interpreted within it's ORIGINAL intent, would make such abuses difficult to exercise. We have very strict rules of evidence for criminal trials based on the Constitution's recognition of basic rights. Rules which protect us from governmental abuses.
However, I'm not saying it's not possible such abuses could come, only that we will have to either re-define wha
In the future... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Who knows what new technology will allow authorities to uncover what you were doing years ago..
Like the internet, vs the "Right to be Forgotten" law?
I still think if it's listed somewhere on a website then Google (et all) should index and search it, as well as (of course) providing a link to it. If it's not true or someone has a problem, they can go correct the original hosting site, and soon the bad info will be gone from the search engines.
Making the engines not provide things is like adding on to the "dark web".
Hitler agrees completely with the "Right to be Forgotten", and wishes it would
Re: (Score:2)
Who knows what new technology will allow authorities to uncover what you were doing years ago...
I am suddenly concerned about an internet meme: https://me.me/i/the-fbi-is-wat... [me.me]
"Solves" (Score:1)
Are they sure it's him? Can they prove he was there?
They are and they can. (Score:1)
Are they sure it's him? Can they prove he was there?
His DNA was found on the victim. If this takes the form of his sperm in the relevant locations on the victim's body and his skin under the victim's fingernails it's kind of hard to dispute. You can try to argue that the two of you had passionate sex before the victim was raped and murdered by an unknown condom using, HEV suit wearing rapist whose DNA was therefore completely missing from the victim's body but that brings us to a rather famous item from brother Occam's shaving kit.
Re: (Score:3)
Do tell us more about this synthesized sperm you ejaculate into your rape victims or the synthesized skin you put under your murder victim's fingernails after scraping your real skin out.
Re: (Score:1)
I've read of unintentional contamination problems with DNA evidence. I'm afraid that in the near future the DNA contamination will be intentional and comes in the form of a spray can carried by the criminals. I would not want to be the "usual suspect" whose DNA is used for this purpose.
"Where were you on 23th January 2019? DNA evidence says you are guilty of this crime. Prove that you are innocent or go to prison."
Random DNA spray? (Score:2)
I've read of unintentional contamination problems with DNA evidence. I'm afraid that in the near future the DNA contamination will be intentional and comes in the form of a spray can carried by the criminals. I would not want to be the "usual suspect" whose DNA is used for this purpose.
"Where were you on 23th January 2019? DNA evidence says you are guilty of this crime. Prove that you are innocent or go to prison."
I think this idea actually has potential..........
Re: (Score:2)
If you look at the situation in the story, it wouldn't be enough to have generic "usual suspects," you'd need DNA from somebody who was near to the crime.
The amount of preparation and opsec involved doesn't seem realistic. If somebody was that good at operations, you wouldn't even know a crime had happened for sure, you'd just have a missing persons report.
Luckily, very few violent crimes are well-planned, and very few violent criminals are good at operations.
That said, it probably already happens at the na
Remind me why this is bad? (Score:2)
This is bad because too many slashdot'ers smoke marijuana which is known to cause irrational paranoia.
Look guys. If the big bad gov'ment is going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you for some reason, then they are just going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you whether you take a commercial DNA test or not. Further, while these consumer level tests can help law enforcement find and narrow down suspects, they aren't going to be admissible in court. Any defense lawyer worth their paycheck would get them
Reverse Hanlon's Razor (Score:2)
Look guys. If the big bad gov'ment is going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you for some reason, then they are just going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you whether you take a commercial DNA test or not.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence... Normally, that's the conspiracy theorist's fallacy, but you've found a reverse application: the real concern here is not that The Man is out to get you personally, but the authorities' capacity for incompetence and misunderstanding of statistical significance, and their disinclination to question anything that seems to offer an easy solution.
Actually falsifying evidence involves people in power taking a real risk. Buying
Re: (Score:2)
Having a DNA sample compared to a public or private DNA database you are in is far more likely to scratch you OFF the list of suspects than it is to put you on it falsely (assuming you didn't do the crime.) Cops being able to compare DNA samples collected at crime scenes to databases of millions and millions of people is a good thing for crime investigators and will lead to FEWER bad convictions. This is a good thing, guys!
And you are really, really, really woefully wrong with you 1 in 100,000,000 chance of
Re: (Score:2)
There's a large amount of pressure on public service workers to clear these cases and get convictions.
Not really. It took them 25 years to come up with a name on this one. Besides, get it wrong and your small Alaska town will risk a very expensive lawsuit.
How easy is it get an arrest warrant based solely on the DNA evidence.
Pretty easy. As others have pointed out, once you have a name and reasonable suspicion based on other evidence (like opportunity to commit the crime), you obtain a search warrant under the rules of evidence. You don't use the genealogical service sample. From that point on, a positive DNA match is pretty damning.
Keep in mind that they took 25 years and fo
Re: (Score:2)
They are just going to make you take one of their tests. (Which is illegal, but what ever.)
I'm with you on most of this. I'm only going to take issue with this particular part of your post. Many things that are currently legal were once illegal. Things that we would reject outright can slowly become legal in small steps over longer periods of time. That's the concern being raised.
There's not much to be done about it, of course. We're a reactionary society so there's little chance any real attention will be given to a blossoming issue until it finally blows up and actually causes a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be true, but even if it later becomes legal then your insurance isn't going to use your test from Ancestry.com. They are going to make you take a new one.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop blaming the weed, man.
I'm high as fuck and they sound like paranoid nutters to me, too.
Now I'm gonna go stuff my face with Freedom Fries, because munchies.
Then I'm gonna come back and throw frozen peaches at morons.
The real risk is as you allude; the insurance companies might someday be allowed to force you to take it. I doubt nutters shouting about the ebil gubermint are going to notice or stop that from happening, either. lol
Re: (Score:2)
My point on the insurance companies doing it is less that it can't happen ever and more that if it DOES happen then they will force you to do it regardless whether or not you had previously taken a test through a consumer service. So, you might as well have fun with your DNA now. If and when it's used against you in the future it won't matter that you did it a few years before.
Honestly, the best reason to not take one is if you are a minority and are concerned about genocide risks, like Native Americans. Bu
PCR (Score:1)
Donated my DNA data to GedMatch (Score:2)
After reading about the "Golden State Killer" being found through a GedMatch search, I uploaded my own DNA raw data to the site. If my DNA can help track down a cold case, I want to do whatever I can to help!
In most parts of the US, the police are still the good guys.
Re: I work extensively in the DNA field (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's get Molder and Scully on it.
lots of movies on this... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh come on. Babies get switched in hospital, courts and law enforcement change people's identities for their protection (even infants sometimes), etc.
If the person isn't related to any other samples in the library, this is simply a sign of the library being incomplete.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just because he has a lot of bullies doesn't mean he isn't also well-liked.
I'd choose ten of him over one of his bullies, personally.
Re: I work extensively in the DNA field (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Every day is April Fool's day on the inter web.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe, just maybe, not everyone reads every comment to every article.
I have no idea what's so special about San Jose, Palo Alto? Is Trump from there? Is that what the joke is about?
Re: (Score:2)
By working in the DNA field, do you mean you sweep the floor of the lab?
Because that's poor reasoning. Genes don't "skip" generations and magically reappear. A child has roughly a 50% chance of s