Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
DNA profiling
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Familial DNA searching=== Familial DNA searching (sometimes referred to as "familial DNA" or "familial DNA database searching") is the practice of creating new investigative leads in cases where DNA evidence found at the scene of a crime (forensic profile) strongly resembles that of an existing DNA profile (offender profile) in a state DNA database but there is not an exact match.<ref>{{cite web|url = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dimond/searching-the-family-dna-_b_845340.html|title = Searching the Family DNA Tree to Solve Crime|date = 12 April 2011|access-date = 17 April 2011|website = HuffPost Denver|publisher = The Huffington Post| vauthors = Diamond D |author-link = Diane Diamond|type = Blog|archive-date = 14 April 2011|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110414010014/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dimond/searching-the-family-dna-_b_845340.html|url-status = live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Bieber FR, Brenner CH, Lazer D | title = Human genetics. Finding criminals through DNA of their relatives | journal = Science | volume = 312 | issue = 5778 | pages = 1315β1316 | date = June 2006 | pmid = 16690817 | doi = 10.1126/science.1122655 | s2cid = 85134694 | doi-access = free }}{{Closed access}}</ref> After all other leads have been exhausted, investigators may use specially developed software to compare the forensic profile to all profiles taken from a state's DNA database to generate a list of those offenders already in the database who are most likely to be a very close relative of the individual whose DNA is in the forensic profile.<ref>{{cite web|url = http://www.dnaforensics.com/FamilialSearches.aspx|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101107011011/http://dnaforensics.com/FamilialSearches.aspx|url-status = dead|archive-date = 7 November 2010|title = Familial searches allows law enforcement to identify criminals through their family members|access-date = 7 December 2015|website = DNA Forensics|last = Staff|at = United Kingdom β A Pioneer in Familial Searches}}</ref> Familial DNA database searching was first used in an investigation leading to the conviction of Jeffrey Gafoor of the [[murder of Lynette White]] in the United Kingdom on 4 July 2003. DNA evidence was matched to Gafoor's nephew, who at 14 years old had not been born at the time of the murder in 1988. It was used again in 2004<ref>{{Cite journal|url = https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4908-killer-convicted-thanks-to-relatives-dna/|title = Killer convicted thanks to relative's DNA| vauthors = Bhattacharya S |date = 20 April 2004|journal = [[New Sci.|New Scientist]]|access-date = 17 April 2011|department = Daily News|archive-date = 8 December 2015|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20151208032045/https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4908-killer-convicted-thanks-to-relatives-dna/|url-status = live}}{{Open access}}</ref> to find a man who threw a brick from a motorway bridge and hit a lorry driver, killing him. DNA found on the brick matched that found at the scene of a car theft earlier in the day, but there were no good matches on the national DNA database. A wider search found a partial match to an individual; on being questioned, this man revealed he had a brother, Craig Harman, who lived very close to the original crime scene. Harman voluntarily submitted a DNA sample, and confessed when it matched the sample from the brick.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Greely HT, Riordan DP, Garrison NA, Mountain JL | title = Family ties: the use of DNA offender databases to catch offenders' kin | journal = The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics | volume = 34 | issue = 2 | pages = 248β262 | date = Summer 2006 | pmid = 16789947 | doi = 10.1111/j.1748-720x.2006.00031.x | url = http://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/default/files/event/264460/media/slspublic/Greely.pdf | access-date = 8 December 2015 | url-status = live | s2cid = 1718295 | department = Symposium | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20151208125555/http://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/default/files/event/264460/media/slspublic/Greely.pdf | archive-date = 8 December 2015 }}</ref> As of 2011, familial DNA database searching is not conducted on a national level in the United States, where states determine how and when to conduct familial searches. The first familial DNA search with a subsequent conviction in the United States was conducted in [[Denver, Colorado|Denver]], Colorado, in 2008, using software developed under the leadership of [[Denver District Attorney]] [[Mitch Morrissey]] and Denver Police Department Crime Lab Director Gregg LaBerge.<ref name = "Pankratz_2011">{{cite web | vauthors = Pankratz H | url = http://www.denverpost.com/denver/ci_13801125 | title = Denver Uses 'Familial DNA Evidence' to Solve Car Break-Ins. | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20121019212129/http://www.denverpost.com/denver/ci_13801125 | archive-date=19 October 2012 | work =The Denver Post | date = 17 April 2011 }}</ref> California was the first state to implement a policy for familial searching under then-Attorney General [[Jerry Brown]], who later became Governor.<ref>{{cite news | vauthors = Steinhaur J | url = https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/us/09sleeper.html | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211025192246/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/us/09sleeper.html | archive-date=25 October 2021 | title = Grim Sleeper' Arrest Fans Debate on DNA Use | work = The New York Times | date = 9 July 2010 | access-date = 17 April 2011 }}</ref> In his role as consultant to the Familial Search Working Group of the [[California Department of Justice]], former [[Alameda County]] Prosecutor Rock Harmon is widely considered to have been the catalyst in the adoption of familial search technology in California. The technique was used to catch the Los Angeles serial killer known as the "[[Grim Sleeper]]" in 2010.<ref>{{cite news |vauthors = Dolan M |url = http://www.law.stanford.edu/display/images/dynamic/events_media/GrimSleeper.pdf |title = A New Track in DNA Search |newspaper = LA Times |access-date = 17 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101202175053/http://www.law.stanford.edu/display/images/dynamic/events_media/GrimSleeper.pdf |archive-date=2 December 2010 |url-status=dead}}</ref> It was not a witness or informant that tipped off law enforcement to the identity of the "Grim Sleeper" serial killer, who had eluded police for more than two decades, but DNA from the suspect's own son. The suspect's son had been arrested and convicted in a felony weapons charge and swabbed for DNA the year before. When his DNA was entered into the database of convicted felons, detectives were alerted to a partial match to evidence found at the "Grim Sleeper" crime scenes. David Franklin Jr., also known as the Grim Sleeper, was charged with ten counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.<ref>{{cite web | url = https://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/familys-dna-led-police-grim-sleeper-serial-killer/story?id=11116381 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200730020241/https://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/familys-dna-led-police-grim-sleeper-serial-killer/story?id=11116381#.UMifSmglbFI | archive-date=30 July 2020 | title = New DNA Technique Led Police to 'Grim Sleeper' Serial Killer and Will 'Change Policing in America | work = ABC News }}</ref> More recently, familial DNA led to the arrest of 21-year-old Elvis Garcia on charges of sexual assault and false imprisonment of a woman in [[Santa Cruz, California|Santa Cruz]] in 2008.<ref>{{cite news | vauthors = Dolan M | url = http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/03/familial-dna-search-used-in-grim-sleeper-case-leads-to-arrest-of-santa-cruz-sex-offender.html | title = Familial DNA Search Used In Grim Sleeper Case Leads to Arrest of Santa Cruz Sex Offender | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110321232332/http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/03/familial-dna-search-used-in-grim-sleeper-case-leads-to-arrest-of-santa-cruz-sex-offender.html | archive-date=21 March 2011 | newspaper = LA Times | date = 15 March 2011 | access-date = 17 April 2011 }}</ref> In March 2011 [[Virginia]] Governor [[Bob McDonnell]] announced that Virginia would begin using familial DNA searches.<ref>{{cite news | vauthors = Helderman R | url = https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/mcdonnell-approves-familial-dna-for-va-crime-fighting/2011/03/21/ABOK4f6_blog.html | title = McDonnell Approves Familial DNA for VA Crime Fighting | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211025192315/https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/mcdonnell-approves-familial-dna-for-va-crime-fighting/2011/03/21/ABOK4f6_blog.html | archive-date=25 October 2021 | newspaper = The Washington Post | access-date = 17 April 2011 }}</ref> At a press conference in Virginia on 7 March 2011, regarding the [[East Coast Rapist]], Prince William County prosecutor Paul Ebert and Fairfax County Police Detective John Kelly said the case would have been solved years ago if Virginia had used familial DNA searching. Aaron Thomas, the suspected East Coast Rapist, was arrested in connection with the rape of 17 women from Virginia to Rhode Island, but familial DNA was not used in the case.<ref>{{cite web | vauthors = Christoffersen J, Barakat M | url = http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/08/other-victims-of-east-coast-rapist-suspect-sought/ | title = Other victims of East Coast Rapist suspect sought | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110628204408/http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/08/other-victims-of-east-coast-rapist-suspect-sought/ | archive-date=28 June 2011 | agency = Associated Press | access-date = 25 May 2011 }}</ref> Critics of familial DNA database searches argue that the technique is an invasion of an individual's [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|4th Amendment]] rights.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Murphy EA | year = 2009 | title = Relative Doubt: Familial Searches of DNA Databases | url = http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/pdfs/109/3/murphy.pdf | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101201110255/http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/pdfs/109/3/murphy.pdf | url-status = dead | archive-date = 1 December 2010 | journal = Michigan Law Review | volume = 109 | pages = 291β348 }}</ref> Privacy advocates are petitioning for DNA database restrictions, arguing that the only fair way to search for possible DNA matches to relatives of offenders or arrestees would be to have a population-wide DNA database.<ref name="Cole-2007" /> Some scholars have pointed out that the privacy concerns surrounding familial searching are similar in some respects to other police search techniques,<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Suter S | year = 2010 | title = All in The Family: Privacy and DNA Familial Searching | url = http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v23.2/23HarvJLTech309.pdf | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110607082902/http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v23.2/23HarvJLTech309.pdf | url-status = dead | archive-date = 7 June 2011 | journal = Harvard Journal of Law and Technology | volume = 23 | page = 328 }}</ref> and most have concluded that the practice is constitutional.<ref>Kaye, David H., (2013). [https://archive.today/20140725210336/http://ssrn.com/abstract=2043091 "The Genealogy Detectives: A Constitutional Analysis of Familial Searching"] American Criminal Law Review, Vol. 51, No. 1, 109β163, 2013.</ref> The [[Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals]] in ''United States v. Pool'' (vacated as moot) suggested that this practice is somewhat analogous to a witness looking at a photograph of one person and stating that it looked like the perpetrator, which leads law enforcement to show the witness photos of similar looking individuals, one of whom is identified as the perpetrator.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/14/09-10303.pdf | title = US v. Pool | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110427043310/http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/09/14/09-10303.pdf | archive-date=27 April 2011 | work = Pool 621F .3d 1213 }}</ref> Critics also state that racial profiling could occur on account of familial DNA testing. In the United States, the conviction rates of racial minorities are much higher than that of the overall population. It is unclear whether this is due to discrimination from police officers and the courts, as opposed to a simple higher rate of offence among minorities. Arrest-based databases, which are found in the majority of the United States, lead to an even greater level of racial discrimination. An arrest, as opposed to conviction, relies much more heavily on police discretion.<ref name="Cole-2007"/> For instance, investigators with Denver District Attorney's Office successfully identified a suspect in a property theft case using a familial DNA search. In this example, the suspect's blood left at the scene of the crime strongly resembled that of a current [[Colorado Department of Corrections]] prisoner.<ref name = "Pankratz_2011" />
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)