This is great. Now let's test all the rape kits sitting on shelves and create profiles to catch more rapists and killers.
67
Before today I had no interest in a DNA test. After reading about this case, I think I will get my DNA into the database. Everyone who has a wife, a daughter, a girl friend should think about it.
Anyone who wants to be part of the solution of any crime in which DNA evidence could be collected, can add their DNA to the big data bases. That gives law enforcement access to all of the relatives. If you have a relative who is a criminal, do yo want to be part of the solution to that crime? I think the answer should be yes.
The much bigger question is for rapists. The question they must ask themselves - did any of my relatives contribute DNA? If they did, it is just a matter of time until the knock on my door. Once this knowledge becomes a meme, the incidence of rape will drop because rapists will know they will get caught.
So, providing DNA serves two purposes - detecting past rapes and preventing future rapes.
One of the most unexpected and powerful uses of big data.
60
It's worth noting that if the perpetrator were black, he likely would have been found already. In California, police are allowed to collect DNA samples from SUSPECTED felons, not just convicted ones (as is typical in most other states). With blacks disproportionally overrepresented in the criminal justice system and with 1 in 9 black children having had an incarcerated parent, the odds favor at least a distant cousin being included in the searchable database.
I'm glad that the ethical issues of using DNA-databases to identify relatives of criminals, not the criminals themselves, are being raised again. But it's important to remember that the police have been using such databases for years. Indeed, it's how the "grim-sleeper" was caught in '16. Personally I find using such databases acceptable to identify hardened criminals, but I do think there should be public debate about the issue.
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/04/02/california-supreme-court-upholds-c...
https://oag.ca.gov/bfs/prop69
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-familial-dna-20161023-snap-stor...
4
There are no ethical issues with using DNA in this circumstance. Stop that narrative. It’s false and for the cases where there are ethical concerns, we can use laws to prevent the abuses.
23
I am only guessing that uncaught rapists are now nervous knowing that their untested DNA sample, sitting on some shelf, may be tested and directly they will be found because of Ancestry.com or 23andMe. Get testing those 1,000's of dormant rape test kits, right now, today! Rape is a horrifying, debilitating, lifelong tortuous crime.
48
The DNA database used to track the Golden State Killer was GEDmatch, an open-source (publicly-accessible) online source. Here’s a link describing it, including its orivacy warning:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/Suspected-Golden-State-Killer-...
13
Well I am both a member of Gedmatch and Ancestry, I have done the DNA without concerns having not committed any criminal act. That said, I also don’t have sympathy for relatives who may have either committed criminal acts or have by blows. A person looking for their heritage should not be rob of it by others. I think the science of medical answers are important as are the human ones of knowing who you are, it’s important and it’s personal and complicated. Also I grew up in Citrus Heights near this monster, he impacted my family life while I lived in Europe in late 1970 and early 1980’s. I visited and my mother who was a nurse at a local hospital she would hang her laundry out at midnight or about after work, Our house was not in a suburb per se and so she just would come home and unwind doing the laundry. The night I was home a full helicopter police team rushed the back of of yard wondering my Mom was doing. Appreciate air surveillance but It was disconcerting and after having being in Europe it emphasized on me the significance of the East Side Rapist. My regret is many Californian’s impacted by this crime did not live to see Justice, somethings are best not served cold.
15
I weighed this possibility when I signed up for 23andme and decided the benefits outweighed the risks. I was looking for more information about my great grandfather’s family, which hasn’t yet materialized, but I did find some other interesting connections and corresponded with some interesting people. I probably would not have submitted a DNA sample if I thought any of my immediate family members had skeletons in the closet or genes that can be used to deny someone insurance. I was pretty sure my family was boring and who they said they were going back several generations. I was right on both counts. I probably wouldn’t object if the cops used publicly available information to track down some distant cousin, but I would object if they got a warrant for my DNA to do the same. I have not submitted my information to GED and have refused permission for 23andme to use it in research. Who knows if that would hold up in court?
3
I don't think the popular geneology sites can yet legitimately claim that they can determine potential disease states for the vast majority of people with a few exceptions. The human genome (DNA) is so complex that actually predicted disease states is not much better than guesswork. Some might claim they can inform you of certain predispositions, but the complexity of the way genes interact in an organism such as human beings is way to complex to predict much of anything about your health condition. Besides that it would probably be an invasion of privacy that would not hold up in court.
3
This article is very unclear about exactly how the investigators pulled this off, the steps involved, the chronology - what exactly is meant by "somehow they got information and through checking family or descendants?" Are the exact methods unknown to the Times? If so, that should be stated outright in the article. I read it several times thinking I was missing something.
8
If you submit your DNA to say, Ancestry, you can request a printout of other people who have also submitted their DNA to Ancestry who are genetically related to you, provided they have given their permission to be linked with relatives. Sometimes the printout contains close relatives you might likely know, or more distant relatives you might not. You may be provided with their actual name if they approved that, or a username which you could send a message to.
It sounds to me in this case like the investigators submitted the killer's DNA (which they had from the crimes) and said they were looking for relatives for genealogy purposes. After they had the contact info for the relatives, it is usually pretty easy for a genealogist to do a family tree, and they figured out from the names on this tree who could logically be the killer.
10
Five doors down? Now we are all supposed to watch our neighbors?? Lordy, the paranoia is profound ... and, unreasonable.
Be careful of your DNA
Or cops will sure put you away.
They gather it from trash and waste
To find a crime that can be traced
Back to your chromosomes, then BAM!
Behind thick bars they gladly slam
You, or perhaps it’s cousin Sue
That they arrest -- they don’t care who,
As long as the heredity
Helps meet their quotas handily.
4
If you do the crimes and this guy did many, he Needs to do some time. He not only took lives he stole a lot of community peace of mind over decades. Not just the East Side Rapist but the Golden State Killer
9
This poem shows you know nothing about how DNA is used as evidence. DNA can only identify a person. If you noticed in this case the police searched for corroborating evidence such as possessions the killer had kept of his victims. This is complex police work and has nothing to do with filling quotas.
17
It's hard to understand what the serious civil liberty concerns are. No one is using DNA here to see if you're susceptible to disease or to glean other private information. Instead, they are using DNA to see who's related to whom. That is already publicly available information.
17
“He was totally off the radar till just a week ago, and it was a lead they got, somehow they got information and through checking family or descendants — it was pretty complicated the way they did it — they were able to get him on the radar,”
Let’s hope they can explain all that to a jury.
9
I guess to carry this out to its logical extension, a DNA database such as this could be used to eliminate those not deemed racially pure. It would provide a pretty conclusive one-drop rule.
Normally, I might not think of something like this. But these are not normal times and just the other day there was mention in the news about Donald Trump harboring concerns about certain populations breeding.
5
No Trump supporter here, but that comment was misconstrued - he had been talking about crime, and the common phrase "breeds crime" was probably trying to make it's way out of his brain. He wasn't talking about human breeding or breeds of humans.
2
mcomfort,
I went back and looked up the April 18th tweet from Donald Trump. I don’t think it’s at all clear that he did not mean ‘breeding’ in the reproductive sense. He tweeted,
“There is a Revolution going on in California. Soooo many Sanctuary areas want out of this ridiculous, crime infested & breeding concept...”
I’m not the only one who interpreted this as racist code. You might be right. Perhaps he just couldn’t get the words out and meant a breeding ground for crime. But, it’s equally possible he knew exactly what he was saying and was pandering (again) to certain elements of his base.
10
You can't show racial purity with DNA or any other trait (phenotype) because there is no such thing. Humans are a species and the idea of race was always a fictional construct used by people with motives other than scientifically based facts.
3
I'm glad this deadly nut has been caught. That said, the DNA cat is out of the bag. Soon enough all these forensic breakthroughs will remind us all of Alex in Stanley Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange."
10
DNA is just another forensic tool used by law enforcement. A Clockwork Orange was a fictional creation from the mind of a great film maker and director. Try not to confuse art and science.
7
Wasn't the entire recent NYSP case load thrown due to faulty handling/processing of dna data etc. in port crane, new york??
The investigator(s) who thought long and hard about matching this suspects DNA and then coming up with this plan is a hero and needs to be recognized.It seems so simple but wasn not done earlier is what I question. It had to be someone young with a very curious mind.
19
His name is Paul Holes, and he is recently retired from the Contra Costa County DA’s office.
11
Here is a diabolical thought, but I have no idea how it could be achieved:
Perhaps criminals will now start leaving DNA of other persons at crime scenes.
8
You're giving liberals ideas. Trump's "abandoned-DNA" probably is easily available. Just check with a sampling of porn queens.
6
They already are in some cases. It's even been portrayed in movies, see the car burning scene in The Town.
4
"The test result confirmed the match to more than 10 murders in California."
That's.... irrefutable, as they say. You would need a steady supply of someone else's DNA and sprinkle it around like a murder fairy at every crime scene to pin this on another person.
7
Let the word go forth to anyone even thinking about committing any horrific crime:
There now are all sorts of incredible technologies available to law enforcement and you will be caught! Go seek help BEFORE you commit a crime.
12
Your mouth to (insert Deity name)'s ear.
1
Now, you know what’s right around the corner? Health records and hippa will be bypassed and dna sorted out for health issues that might interest insurers—and who knows what else? Like someone said—we have a problem w facebook? This IS a can of worms
6
*HIPAA*
4
The ironic thing about this case is that it illustrates that your choice as to whether to upload your DNA to a testing service is no longer about protecting your own privacy, it is now expanded to protecting the privacy of all your relatives.
I suppose if I had a relative committing terrible crimes I would want him/her caught, so I am not too worried about that scenario, but what if someone is doing a DNA search with nefarious intent? By uploading your DNA you have also exposed all your relatives to some nefarious usage of the information. I imagine this point will be litigated in court at some point. Loss of privacy by proxy.
42
Apparently, it was the same with Facebook too, but worse because even your friends were exposed. Makes one want to move into a cave in the wilderness, but then the cave could be affected by climate change and you might need a fireman to rescue you. Better to stay home and go out with your friends instead of texting them.
5
It probably wasn’t the rapists choice about his DNA but child or a sibling, who can say it isn’t a straight line.
What nefarious intent do you imagine. Like knowing where your ancestors come from? I don't think the FDA has even approved it for medical forensics. Use of gene analysis can be used for people who consent for their own reasons, like to determine potential threats to their offspring. So if you suspect and discover that for example a health insurance company is using it for such a a nefarious purpose without the person's knowledge it would seem you would have a great civil case against them. I am sure the law will catch up with this fact and make it illegal to use in such circumstances. Most people are covered through group insurance plans anyway in both the public (medicaid, medicare) or through their employer where specific health questions are not even asked.
2
So much for all the speculation that a tip or the hammer and dog repellant led them to look for abandoned DNA. That I saw, only one commenter on the original story suggested genealogy sites as a possibility and she was shot down by other commenters. However, it was also mentioned that Michelle McNamara brought this up in her book, so maybe she inspired this line of investigation after all.
I’d have to give some thought to privacy implications of DNA databasing. As long as it’s to catch criminals, what’s the downside? Maybe if what constitutes criminal acts somehow changes? Hiding Jews in World War II Germany would have been a criminal act, for instance. I would think the greatest danger would be of it being used for discriminatory purposes by insurance companies. Anyway, it makes you think, but as other commenters say, better using DNA as evidence than eye witnesses and kudos to law enforcement for figuring this one out.
8
I am confused by the facts of the article. If the police had Mr. DeAngelo as a person of interest, why didn't they just use his "abandoned DNA" to match against the DNA left at some of the crime scenes? Why did they have to go to a geneology site and get an idea from a past relative?
3
They traced him as a person of interest via the genealogy site. It led them to some distant relatives of his first, which in turn led to him as a possible suspect.
11
He left DNA in the crime scenes, but there was nothing to match it to in the records kept by law enforcement -- I assume one would only be in law enforcement databases if you had already committed a crime or misdemeanor that allowed law enforcement to finger print you or collect samples from you. It's not explicitly stated in the piece, but I assume that is where the genealogy site comes in.
The genealogical site DNA helped point the way to him, via relative's DNA. Then, his identity was confirmed by the use of his own samples, via "abandoned" DNA -- from the article's explanation I think that means things like when you leave behind hair, saliva, etc. in a public domain, I guess like at a public restroom, hotel, park, so on. So this is pretty rock solid as identification goes
6
I understood the article to say that the GEDdna database pointed law enforcement in the right familial direction. Abandoned DNA was used to confirm the suspect
6
Slippery slope is a classical debate FALLACY. You need more than "what if" to say that this is bad because someone could use it in a bad way. If our government gets to the point of ethnic cleansing or massive corruption with no checks and balances, there's far more wrong than the existence of DNA samples that any such unchecked government would simply demand.
I'm glad they went to find new ways to find this killer, it's a very good thing. If every rapist could be caught, just by DNA, how many would think twice? It's a crime of power - they don't want to be caught and be on the wrong end of a power imbalanced relationship with the justice system. There are so many horrible people that can be taken off our streets, caught before they hurt millions more innocent men, women, and children.
47
I acknowledge this is not the main point of your comment, but you mentioned "It's [rape] is a crime of power." This is what I've often heard also, but have since learned that there are no physiological or neurological studies that show this to be the prime motivation of such predators; there is a sexual component. This power-only statement came from rape victim counseling and has its roots in making sure that victims don't blame themselves for their rape. As noble as that is, it has unintended consequences such as limiting discussions on common sense things women can do to reduce their risk. It also precludes treatments for serial rapist such as chemical castration ... because reducing the sex drive of predators should not have an impact if it is "power-based".
5
I never thought the power concept precluded the arousal effect of the adrenaline that would be racing through a rapist. I always figured it fed it.
Power has been described as an aphrodisiac
Why would they need a new sample of his DNA if they already had it from the original crime scene. Is this just confirmatory?
I don't understand your question, it is like you assume that they already knew the crime scene DNA was his, but that's not the case when they started looking into this. On one hand the authorities had some DNA samples from the crime scenes but they didn't know whose it is. On the other hand, here's this suspect whose DNA profile they aren't sure of and they have indirect hints to through partial matches from his relatives. To make an objective confirmation beyond any reasonable doubt, they need to collect a sample of this guy's and compare it to whatever they found at the crime scenes. Only when both are fully matched can they establish that the rapist/killer and this suspect are in fact the same person.
2
They have the DNA from the crime scene they can profile that. They plug that into a data base and it resembles distant or not so distant relatives of the original profile. They search for possible suspects using that information (i.e. relatives). They focus in on likely suspects of those relatives and then I guess your right they have to obtain that suspects DNA to confirm that he was the one who left his DNA at the crime scene.
2
@jsfranco: ... and, he was actually, physically, at the crime scene.
Congratulations Ms Shubert DA to use DNA to ferret out this
monster cop who leveraged his job at two different police departments to elude detection.
It is unbelievable, not one police officer would catch on to him.
Or rather the Brotherhood just kept quiet.
Who are thiese people so outraged over using DNA ?
I venture to say they would like to hide from law enforcement.
10
DNA evidence is turning the criminal life upside down, and I am so glad it is.
With all this being said, I don't know who my biological father is. I found out ten years ago (because I had my suspicions and my two siblings agreed to go along with me) via DNA, that he was not my father, and my mother would not cop to the scientific evidence I lovingly presented her with. Her 80-year old self looked at me and said, "How do they do that?" She took the truth with her to her grave. I guess she was just too ashamed to admit it.
Any advice? I have no name. One of the well-known sites would charge me $3,000 to do a search, with no guarantees. :-(
4
I understand the need to find answers. It's the central mystery of your life. But obviously there is a reason your mother didn't want you to know and maybe you should take that as a cue not to pursue it. If the man who raised you was a good person and treated you like his own child (I can't tell from your post if this was the case. I'm just speculating here), then I would say he was your father, even if not in the biological sense.
The "father" you seek was basically just a sperm donor, not a parent. It's the people who surround us with love, advice and guidance to influenced us to become well-adjusted humans that we can truly call family.
7
I would start by reviewing where your family was living around the time you were conceived. Who were the family friends? The neighbors? The friends of your siblings' father. Maybe she didn't venture too far.
4
There are probably a lot of reasons why a mother would lie about who the father is, some of them tragic. I would like to find out more about my great grandfather, who vanished when my grandfather was six. To me, he’s a fascinating mystery. But my grandfather himself had little interest and viewed his parents as the aunt and uncle who adopted him.
2
I too remember the chilling effect on the entire community, and I cannot see anything wrong with the type of searches that have been reported. The article states that the genealogy site that was used warned its users that their DNA would not be private and that if they wanted it to be, they should remove it. Use of that site led police to relatives of the man who had been arrested, and searching abandoned items, apparently trash -- which is nothing new -- did the rest. If I had a relative who had murdered eight people and raped 50 women, I would be thrilled that he had been caught. But the bottom line still is: If you don't want your DNA used this way, don't leave it on a site that warns it is not private.
6
Sounds like the plugged the data in, and found a similar dna match (to his relatives to uploaded their data). They then triangulated him by demographic and location.
2
What do you mean by demographic triangulation. When the DNA left at the crime scene resembled a relatives profile that was already in the data base they must have looked at relatives that were already suspects. The relatives DNA profile drastically limited potential suspects. I wonder how many of these relatives they profiled before they got an exact match?
1
Not only is one's DNA immutable, but it is rather easily obtained without your knowledge by a bad actor. What a boon for stalkers, con artists, identity thieves, secret police, totalitarian governments, etc, to be able to acquire a hair or saliva sample surreptitiously from their target, and then use online DNA databases to locate their close relatives and, with not much additional effort, their identity.
As time goes on, more and more personal traits will become determinable from DNA. Will those who have placed their DNA profile into databases want this information made available to insurance companies and employers?
Who wants to bet that these cavalier private companies amassing public DNA databases are not going to be hacked one of these days?
If a debate is to be had about if and how this ultimate assault on privacy is to be controlled or legislated, it needs to happen sooner rather than later.
16
Um, DNA or as its better known in the scientific community as genotype can only identify very general phenotypes (traits like dark skin blue eyes and such), but by no means can specific people be determined by these phenotypes because they are so common. Its the genotype (the DNA) sequence that positively identifies an individual.
3
If there were ever a case where the ends justify the means, this is is.
14
THE SERIAL KILLER NEXT DOOR The "Golden State Killer" has been brought to justice using DNA. I expect that there will be lots of cold cases reopened, using DNA. In some ways, this change is an extension of the #MeToo movement, involving the survivors and descendents of victims. It also means that people currently involved in crime are now set on notice that their DNA will be left all around public places wherever they go. So they can run; but they can't control where their DNA lands and who will be able to trace them.
9
When these crimes were happening, authorities acknowledged the suspect was likely someone with law enforcement experience. This man is a former police officer who was fired for shoplifting, and he lived then, and all this time, in the centre of an area where these rapes and murders occurred. I wouldn't call that a great law enforcement success. From the way things were going, I'd say if not for DNA testing this man would likely never have been arrested, and lived out his long life not too far from the crime scenes.
7
There are hundreds of police officers, no doubt there were several with some little issue - shoplifting really isn't close to violent crime, not a reason to look at him. Great monday morning quarterbacking, but only works by hindsight.
4
Except the items he stole could be used to incapacitate and then bludgeon a victim
3
Except that’s not why he was shoplifting these items. He was shoplifting to return these items somewhere else to collect money. My dad was actually hired on the Auburn PD in 1979, filling the vacancy left when they fired this guy. According to my dad and the cops on his team, this guy was different. He didn’t bond well with the team. They also believe he cased the house of the police chief that fired him, which was a pattern he used in his crimes.
2
A lot of commenters are misinterpreting this; He didn't submit is DNA and his kids probably didn't either. A "family member" could be a 2nd cousin, a nephew, or a other relatives. DNA profiles can be traced even partially and those relatives can point, by word, database, or an Ancestry family tree, to the killer. In this case, they made the match and found him by his age and location.
This is to say, if your great-uncle was a serial killer and your kids submit their DNA to 23andme, he could be busted. As these databases grow, a LOT of past criminals (living or otherwise) may be ID'd in the years ahead.
50
And that's a good thing.
11
I agree. it appears they are using the data the same way any other user would, they upload the suspect's DNA, and then compare it to the DNA of all the other people who have willingly submitted samples. They don't have to have access to the individual's DNA profiles, the company has that and is just providing the information that the two samples match at some level.
6
Seems like this could be exploited by criminals seeding their crime scenes with somebody else's DNA and then uploading that to an "open source" domain, leading the bloodhounds down the wrong trail. Worked this time, but not likely to last now it's old news.
6
Well this would be why DNA evidence is not sufficient to convict. There has to be some corroborating evidence like the fact that the person has no alibi or could not have been at the crime scene, had no motive to comit the crime. DNA is only a way of netting suspects.
2
A crimimal would have to go around in a sealed suit to keep from leaving behind any DNA. Smart ones already know to use gloves and hats. They learn that in the movies. But if they're a rapist, it's gonna be a little harder for them to keep from leaving behind some DNA. Thank goodness.
3
Most biological samples submitted to companies like this essentially have you sign in your fine print a 'universal waiver' which essentially states that your genetic material is being databanked. You will not be re-contacted for consent on each individual project. And what these things can be put to use for are amazing, especially with the ability to do whole genome searches for even single base pair changes. The only way, pretty much, you can keep your stuff out of these sites is by NOT submitting data.
3
Was I the only one that read the article. It said a specific genealogy site had spelled out to its CUSTOMERS it would use their acquired DNA for such purposes as comparing to crime DNA. Not all Genealogy sites.
11
The day will come when everyone's DNA is uploaded at birth into a universal data base. And probably inscribed on an implanted chip easily read by an app. No more need for SSNs. No more unidentifiable dads. Far fewer serial criminals running free. Many more successful transplant matches. The idea of privacy will be quaint.
18
So if another government took over in the future and wasn't interested in civil rights, but the identification and eradication of a ethnic group, family or to track down dissidents. They could use the big data DNA base to put a marker on everyone. Great tool for law enforcement, no so great in the wrong hands.
11
This makes life very hard for rapists. I feel no sympathy.
Privacy issues are a complicated knot. What's interesting here, and probably in most cases, is that it wasn't the rapist but someone else--a distant relative--that provided the first sample that led the police to the 'suspect.'
Did DeAngelo have a privacy right in a distant relative's DNA? Even if we decide the answer is yes, we will have a very hard time enforcing such a right.
The bottom line is that DNA and computer technology have taken away our ability to hide, and thus reduced our privacy, in ways that can't be undone. So long as that ability is used to catch bad people, it's fine with me.
But if is used by bad people to attack good people (e.g. political enemies, etc.), it may become problematic.
7
to hec with privacy we need a national database of everyone's DNA so we can catch more of these things.
9
Weighing the benefits of keeping my dna on 23andme (they come up with new tests, such as BRCA recently) and the very real privacy concerns. Who knows where this could lead?
29
I would. I commit no crimes and have no intention to. If my genes ever bring a relative to justice, I would be pretty happy.
11
If you read the story correctly, I believe the popular sites like 23 and me allow you the option of uploading your DNA profile. So if you want you can keep it private. Or you could help criminologists identify criminals, just as if you were a witness to a crime. In a sense it it like a civic duty unless of course you are the one who committed the crime or its a close relative that you know has committed a crime. I don't understand why people expect to be protected from criminals if they don't want to help law enforcement.
4
I think a golden opportunity was missed long ago by law enforcement when the Golden State Killer moved to southern California - most likely the Goleta zip codes area. Had an Excel matching process of DMV drivers license numbers been done at that time, ten murders and several rapes would have been prevented.
When the East Area Rapist-Golden State Killer moved to southern California, he moved within a specific time period of 3 months after his last crime in northern California on July 5, 1979 (July, August, and September). And, he moved to a relatively rural area of Southern California (President Reagan had his ranch in the area). So, with the short time period and relative small population, the move-in numbers would have been small. And, then when you match the fact that the same driver’s license number was used in the East Area of Sacramento at the end of 1976, you have really narrowed the searchable population.
In other words, law enforcement could have used Excel matching formulas to find those few individuals who moved to the Goleta area in the summer of 1979 and who had been registered as living in the greater Sacramento area at the end of 1976 when Golden Gate Killer's crime spree was just beginning.
Eventually, it will be reported if and when DeAngelo registered with the DMV his move to southern California. If I am right, law enforcement has some difficult explaining to do.
26
My understanding is that law enforcement in the two areas did not realize that the crimes were related, till many years later. Close to 2000 (I think).
7
Excel was introduced in 1985. Need I say more?
2
I have a similar thought as well but involved voter registration and state income tax returns. Not everyone changes their address on their license right away, but you do not ever mess with Uncle Sam and your tax returns.It would be an immediate result because your new employer provides the info to the state. Would have been much easier to decipher as well.I , like you look forward to the details of this investigation, not to blame, but to learn.
2
"If law enforcement located the suspect through a genealogy site, it could raise ethical issues, particularly if individuals did not consent to having their genetic profiles searched against crime scene evidence."
Nothing is private, someone once told me to act as if anything I do or say could wind up on the front page of this paper, not that it ever happened, just sayin.....
17
In the past I would have read this article and immediately thought that investigators used AncestryDNA or one of the other few companies that we are all aware of however, I recently learned that there is a burgeoning field of forensic genealogy and software programs that are used by plugging in the raw data that individuals voluntarily agree after being contacted and it is done outside of the big companies that come to mind. Typically looking for a missing family member or trying to identify relatives of unclaimed remains.
I would guess they used the DNA found at the crime scene and worked it out. It’s a genius suggestion if you ask me. I hope they will use it to solve the case of the Oakland Co Child Killer(s)
7
Whether or not consent for sharing of DNA info was obtained, this raises profound constitutional issues.
Americans consider the right to be secure in our homes, papers, possessions to be a fundamental right protected by the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. Freedom from trespass, freedom from someone's encroaching on our personal image or likeness, has been protected for a thousand years by the English Common Law, which operates at the State level in American law. That Common Law also guarantees our freedom from trespass, and ensures that ancient notion that "a man's home is his castle." Freedom from self-incrimination or compulsion to reveal ourselves guilty of a crime are central and essential to something far more basic than mere contractual terms or situational ethics.
Smashing those most basic and fundamental of human rights will also destroy the fundamental individual right to private property. If the "free market economy" leads us into such a morass, I don't see how the USA can possibly avoid becoming a gangsterized oligarchy such as that of Russia, where law is made only by those with money.
6
I’m sorry, but you are just wrong. This technique should be applauded and used for this specific application whenever it can be. We can legislate against the abuses, and this is not one of them.
2
Dogged police work captures a mad dog. Xlnt. However, anyone a bit dubious about DNA-sharing might consider their support of single-payer national health insurance. From cradle to grave, the gov't will know you inside and out without you ever knowing what kind of people will populate the government during your lifetime.
6
A single-payer health care system does not imply or rely on a government database of DNA. You are confusing two separate topics. The insurance system to pay for health care (single-payer or otherwise) is different than a single system of electronic health records that might (or might not) contain DNA data.
26
Medical privacy has been protected by strong statutes for decades. DNA is a medical privacy issue, and it has no such protection.
3
ALL relatively wealthy countries have single payer systems like our Medicare. None of these countries (Canada, Australia, Germany, France etc etc etc ) takes patients DNA and stores it.
Single payer system mean access to health care for all (Canada even put it in its Bill of Rights). Government has nothing to do with it. Single payers systems are independent from it.
As for what kind of government you will have in your lifetime, you can control this by VOTING and supporting a free press.
4
Voluntarily sending one's DNA to a business, voluntarily providing FB with one's personal info, choosing to give one's SSN/birthdate/phone # to ANYONE . . . . these are all choices that people make every day eroding their privacy.
I give up as little as I can get away with, and I am NOT not a serial killer!
11
The suspect didn't volunteer anything, according to my reading of the story. It was his relatives' DNA already in the database that allowed law enforcement to find him from DNA left at his crime scenes.
Having typed all this, I have to confront the fact that this is actually more sinister than a company giving up YOUR data; you're exposed by choices other customers of on-line services make whether you participated or not (lookin' at you, Facebook).
7
And yet, it doesn't matter if you voluntarily give away your DNA info or not. A distant relative who you've never even heard of could be the one who made the choice to do so and it could still have the potential to impact you, as was the case here.
7
And your point is? He was a killer. Great detective work led to his capture. There is no down-side to the application of the science for this specific scenario. We can legislate for the cases where the ethical issues arise.
3
So it was his vanity that allowed diligent detectives to find him with forensic evidence.
1
To me it's simple regarding civil liberties or potential lack thereof. If you don't want your DNA in someone else's hands then don't submit said DNA.
8
Yes, but your relatives can submit their DNA and that can reveal a great deal a lot about you. In fact, if I am reading this correctly, this investigation relied heavily on finding family members' DNA.
9
Again, that's not what happened here. The suspect didn't register his DNA -- his relatives registered theirs which led law enforcement to him based upon the samples they had collected. The real moral of the story here is that if you don't want the government poring over your genetic material, refrain from leaving it at crime scenes.
11
But when your siblings or parents or grandkids submit their DNA they are submitting a bit of your DNA.
1
The opening few paragraphs of this article are not exactly crystal clear. It sounds like what they did is take DNA from the crime scenes (which they've had for years) and run it through the online genealogy database. This produced some sort of near or partial match because some relative(s) of the killer uploaded their own DNA for purely genealogical purposes? Is that correct? And then using that information, they looked for male relatives of this person(s) of a certain age living in this area and zeroed in on the suspect. Then they collected his DNA from some place where it had been "abandoned" (another commenter says his trash) and got the direct hit they were hoping for. I wish it had been laid out more clearly.
As for the civil liberties concern, I honestly don't understand why anyone would oppose the use of DNA like this. You'd rather let a serial rapist/murderer walk free for the rest of his life than let some cops run a search against your DNA? What if it had been your brother/cousin/uncle? Wouldn't you be *glad* that your own DNA helped put him behind bars. I know I would.
98
People are worried about the potential for abuse, which we haven't even begun considering the possibilities, because the majority of us are not criminally minded. This case is a ingenious new use of a DNA database that had a positive outcome. It represents how powerful such a database can be. But what might a negative outcome look like? Are you going to add your DNA to a database and just hope no one comes up with an abusive use case for your information? I'm certainly not.
7
I don't think they want to lay it out because the police or some of them have really messed this up for years. That press conference was a disgraceful back slapping extravaganza which told us nothing. I'm guessing some amateur or retired cop did it. They were quick to dismiss the book as helping when it kept the case alive.
3
I'm guessing that they used a genealogy database to identify DNA results from people with surnames overlapping with the major suspects. Anyone who did a such a DNA test without restricting the testor's freedom to share that information effectively placed it in the public domain.
Refining that list by location, possibly by using google -- but also requiring a lot of people processing a lot of names -- they narrowed the list to publicly posted DNA samples that matched each of the suspects.
Then they took the DNA samples from the suspects themselves, and they did a frequency distribution of # of matching suspects by # of crime scenes.
Are Facebook users shivering again as they consider what a potentially-dangerous treasure-trove of info they have made available to government, bill collectors, and bad guys?
3
This man was a cop on somebody's police force years ago. Let that sink in also, after all the DNA/Civil liberties bruh-haha dies down.
55
Can they find Jimmy Hoffa?
4
I’m sure Jimmy’s family would be grateful. Wouldn’t it be great if they found the Oakland County Child Killer(s) while they are at it? In both cases there are likely important people who would be exposed as the monsters they are or help keep hidden
1
Yes, there's a dystopian "Minority Report" aspect to this news, the fear that future crime could be prosecuted without the rule of law; however that's the new world we live in. All our information, as we now know, is being harvested, sold and analyzed by data companies -- anyone who has a credit card, Facebook , email, cable TV or mobile phone, is already a "product" with a profile, being analyzed and marketed to. So that's just the way it is. I hate it but you can't turn back the tide. Using DNA plus new databases in this case to find a horrific killer seems to me a good use of this new technology, and if it brought this animal to justice, here's my DNA folks. It will be the responsibility of young people -- just starting to build this new century and world of information -- to decide how to regulate it and if and when they decide it goes too far. It's just not possible to live with our heads in the sand anymore.
19
Article's title question is never answered in any detail. A sentence or two about plugging the genetic profile into an online database, and that's it? What the heck is a genetic profile? what is 'plugged in,' exactly? I'd imagine those answers are pretty cool!
11
It's easy to look up "genetic profile" and DNA. Plugged in means that the specific DNA is typed into a list....
If you imagine the answers "are pretty cool" do yourself a favor and look them up. Genetics is a fascinating field and perhaps you might want to study it in college?
2
It's great the police caught him, but this article leaves it frustratingly unclear how they did it. 'Officers found distant relatives of Mr. DeAngelo’s and...traced their DNA to his front door.' How did finding the relatives lead to Mr. DeAngelo exactly? We need this broken down into steps.
13
It’s been broken down in subsequent articles. Some distant relative had their DNA information uploaded to a public genealogy database. Officers registered on this site and used DNA from one of his attacks to see if there were any matches. There were no exact matches, but close matches from a family member. Once they identified this, they then worked the family tree of these matches to narrow in a group of possible suspects. Knowing that they were working with a former cop and the areas he lived in, they were able to narrow it to him and then they obtained a DNA sample from him through him discarding something in a public place (likely his trash). Match confirmed. Killer caught. Score one for science!!!
1
We face so many untested rape kits in the US. I wonder how many victims will ever live to see a successful investigation of their cases, even if now the genealogy DNA data bases might be accessed to look for suspects who are not in a criminal data base.
14
I don't like the regular mentions of his being angry or shouting cuss words while working on his car. I would regard it as unusual and suspect that someone never showed signs of anger or raising their voice. It is normal and common for someone to cuss when working on a car or anything else. Its not optimal but it is certainly not abnormal or in any way strange.
I think some of these people who are pointing at normal human frailties as if the indicate some intrinsic fault need to be looked at. I mainly mean the reporters and editors who keep putting that stuff in the story as if it has some significance, as well as the folks who seem to think it bears mention.
9
This was a neighbor's observation trying to make sense of his ordinary neighbor suspected of being a serial killer and torturer.
In cases like this, people try to remember things of no real importance. As in everything, CONTEXT is the key.
5
I'm not sure they are suggesting everyone who curses loudly is a potential criminal. But cursing so loudly that someone inside their home half way down the block hears, is a kind of anti-sociality and points to anger issues.
5
Sharing of DNA profiles is worrisome for those of us in the DNA testing community. No lab, absent a court order, should ever share their customer's DNA profile with anyone the customer does not authorize.
If our clients think that their DNA profiles will be shared, they may be reluctant to submit to testing, or demand special assurances, beyond what the lab already provides, that their data is safe.
Since the act of collecting a DNA sample requires either the client go to a collection facility, or that collection material is sent to the client's home, the client should state and sign, in writing, who they authorize to view the results.
6
"No lab, absent a court order, should ever share their customer's DNA profile with anyone the customer does not authorize."
Agree completely, but in this case, the company's terms of service included allowing outsiders (law enforcement) access to customers' DNA profiles.
1
The genealogy sites explicitly warn of this. You have to sign a consent form just as the one you mention.
they aren't actually sharing the DNA profile, they are uploading the suspect's DNA, and then seeing who is a match with the suspect. From there, they would have lots of tools at their fingertips that would help them identify other relatives, maybe a little laborious, as anyone who has done DNA research would tell you, but very doable. Census records, and so on. So I actually don't see how they're different than any other DNA user who uploads their data, like I have, and then is presented with a list if matches
1
As most people do not read the fine lines of legal verbiage before clicking the 'I AGREE' button, in there somewhere is that potentially they are able 'share' your results with others.
Most of the time it is for commercial purposes but do you want your DNA to be 'shared' with insurance companies? Or the FBI? or whoever can afford it?
11
The purpose of DNA Genealogy sites is to make yourself visible to potential relatives, and to allow them to find you. It's a way to fill out your family tree. If you hide, how will relatives find you? If they hide, how will you find them?
3
Uh... You DO realize that there's not a single word in the article that justifies the headline, right? In fact, the article only contradicts the headline.
Okay, I read the article twice. I give up. Tell me. How DID a Genealogy site lead to the front door of the GSK? Do tell. I'm waiting.
17
Police got a lead, which they don't elaborate on. They went through the saved DNA had on him from his crimes and used the genealogy sites to locate to winnow down the related DNA to a man who was the right age etc to have committed the crimes. That's a lay person's take from the article on how they used genealogy. And decades of stick-to-it-tiveness. TG.
6
The killers kids or some otherr relative provided their DNA sample to the web site. This sample was used to match that with what was found at 10 crime scenes. Then the cops got 2 new DNA samples from the killer and verified the match. The relatives DNA match helped locate the address of the killer.
BTW - Yesterday, a NYTs poster gave a great detailed account of how he/she thought the killer was identified. This person was right on the mark except for saying Ancestry .com.
10
It's a DNA site that's use is for genealogy research. Submitting DNA allows families to find each other. It's another way to build your family tree.
Congratulations to those who solved this case. It would be interesting to have more details as to how it all transpired. It must have been quite a thrill when a match was confirmed!
On the dark side, I expect insurance companies are also quite interested in this public data. With Republicans authoring legislation that gives consumers “choice” on being able to purchase sub-optimal health coverage and Ted Cruz proposing a return to the pre-Obama Care nightmare/human rights violation of exclusions for pre-existing conditions, this open source data can be used against individuals. Congress should pass legislation barring discriminatory use of genetic data.
33
DNA-related privacy is also an issue for people who volunteer for medical research. Read the consent before signing!
7
I'll guarantee you not even most lawyers will be able to parse any consent form correctly.
2
I'm thinking I wouldn't object to having my DNA stored in a government agency were that agency well enough guarded that there would very little chance of ever being hacked. I would go so far as to offer my new born baby's DNA to the same data base. I think the benefits far outweigh the risks.
11
It is unlikely that we will have a government agency that reliable again until we get rid of the republican party.
16
The party may go but there will always be people just like those who make up the current Republican party.
1
I hope that this arrest brings some semblance of peace to those families who were affected. I can't help but wonder if he did actually just stop after the last murder or rape they attribute to him. Maybe we'll learn more, maybe not.
But thanks to the law enforcement people and journalists who kept this alive. It may help some families sleep easier.
15
This should be a wake-up call to all Americans to never ever voluntarily turn over DNA to a genealogy site. What an invasion of privacy!
10
They PAY good money for it too! It is not free.
2
Sure -it's really sad that a serial killer was found through a voluntarily submitted sample. You've gotta be kidding me.
8
That would be the case if you were reading the names of every DNA match that was found. The pool of DNA matches was discarded when the best match was located. The suspect was surveilled, his DNA gathered from something he discarded - and the EXACT match was made. There was nothing found or revealed that put anyone but the suspect at risk.
4
Like so many I was curious about my genealogy so I contacted a major site. I did opt out to having distant relatives found though. I wonder if my DNA is still in their file, not that I'm afraid of being identified as a criminal.
1
I think it's worth pointing out the unintended consequences of agreeing to make personal DNA profiles public: Whether you realize it or not, you are possibly agreeing to make access to your family members' DNA available as well. So much that we as private individuals agree to share ends up impinging upon the privacy of others who have never agreed to have their information made public (FB anyone?) In this case it worked out spectacularly well and has brought to justice a criminal who may have never been caught otherwise. And much credit is due to the investigators and others who insisted on pursuing this 30+ year-old case: The many victims are absolutely owed this admittedly belated measure of justice, as are all of us who deserve to feel we are safe in a society of laws and civility. But we do need to be reminded from time to time that just as those who enforce the law may take advantage of our online activities to help curb crime and prosecute criminals, those very criminals can also take advantage to use this information against us, and even our family members and friends.
42
We also need to be reminded that familial DNA matching can be used to persecute innocent family members. See the case of Michael Usry Jr.:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-safe-is-your-dna-familal-search-privacy...
2
Imagine for a moment that your NOT YET born son or grandson, or even great grandson could someday be easily identified as having committed a criminal act based on DNA you supplied someone decades earlier that is sitting in an easily searchable database in perpetuity. And we are all worried about what Facebook is doing with our information...how quaint.
38
That would be great as long as we still have a strong rule of law. Would you want your grandson to get away with being a serial rapist?
68
I'll take DNA identification over eye witness testimony any day. And if my future descendant commits a crime then she is like anyone else and should be identified as having committed that crime.
101
If my son or grandson is a criminal, I hope he gets caught. Period.
70
Totally brilliant...this use of DNA to search for criminals who aren't in criminal registries is going to become standard...any if you leave DNA at the crime scene you WILL BE FOUND.
108
The DNA sample was found in subject's trash. I popularized this form of spying when I went through Bob Dylan's trash. Before that it was only used by FBI in "trash covers" and by the CIA which went as far as collecting urine samples of world leaders. There was a Supreme Court ruling that I am cited in which allowed cops to use evidence found in trash in a court of law. I invented the word garbology to describe this journalist technique but not the word garbologist which the aussies called trash collectors. Now garbology is the study of trash to determine environmental factors.
48
One would think that as a person matures, they would come to see a difference between a good and important reason for a cop to pick through someone's garbage and one that seeks to justify one's obsession at the expense of the privacy of a fellow citizen.
3
If I have to give up a small portion of my privacy to catch a serial killer I'll do so. Most DNA profiling services ask if you will agree to use your DNA sample to match profiles in their database in order to connect with unknown relatives. If permission was given no privacy concerns apply.
134
What if a small portion of your privacy is all you have left?
7
The privacy of your blood relatives is not yours to give up.
2
"If law enforcement located the suspect through a genealogy site, it could raise ethical issues, particularly if individuals did not consent to having their genetic profiles searched against crime scene evidence." Is this an editorial opinion, or the personal opinion of this article's author? This statement cries out for further explanation. My understanding of the agreement entered into with the various sites like Ancestry is that if you choose to make your DNA profile public it is just that: open for anyone to see. Why would anyone have the expectation that this would not include the possibility of comparison to crime scene evidence?
98
Fine as long as one's decision to make DNA public can be reversed.
5
At Ancestry at least, DNA “profiles” are not made public. When one submits a sample or a text file from previous sequencing, the company searches for matches and provides lists of possible relations. These cousin matches have chosen various levels of privacy in terms of identity, contact, access to family trees and the like. The actual DNA sequencing is not publicly available. (There are web sites that do make this information publicly available, and it is the choice of the owner of the DNA information to make it available.)
After the cousin matches were made to the suspect’s DNA (most likely based on a file of the sequencing rather than a sample) the detective work started to work out family trees looking for the most likely owner of the DNA. The only one losing privacy in this case is DeAngelo, left his DNA at the crime scene and later in some public space (a tras can?)
11
An editorial opinion is the opinion of the author. It's kind of the definition.
2
As much as I am glad the Golden State killer has been caught, this story is chilling for the future of civil liberties. It's right out of the movies.
40
No, it’s not. Applied to this scenario, it should be applauded.
18
No, it is not. There are much more chilling trends and possibilities regarding civil liberties. The use of DNA evidence in this manner is a technological extension of existing practices that fit well within the rule of law.
Instead of knee-jerk reactions, consider what kind of wise legislation you would support to prevent abuse of this data. For example, there should be a "firewall" preventing law enforcement or other parties from actually "seeing" the full DNA of those in the database. Instead, the suspect DNA should be submitted by law enforcement to the analysis engine that then returns minimum viable information about people associated with database DNA that reaches a threshold match. In that manner law enforcement never actually probes the DNA and never "sees" the database contents - they only receive the minimum required information regarding matches.
30
I assume that nothing is perfect but finding a person who has harmed/killed another person is impetus enough to use DNA. Do you feel the same, as you have stated above, about those persons who have been incarcerated until just recently the DNA found in the evidence was found not to be their own? That doesn't cause to question every single person's guilt or innocence whom we have killed using capital punishment?
25