Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Searching DNA For Relatives Raises Concerns

Posted by kdawson on from the database-creep dept.

An anonymous reader calls our attention to California's familial searching policy, which looks for genetic ties between culprits and kin. The technique has come to the fore in the last few years, after a Colorado prosecutor pushed the FBI to relax its rules on cross-state searches. "Los Angeles Police Department investigators want to search the state's DNA database again — not for exact matches but for any profiles similar enough to belong to a parent or sibling. The hope is that one of those family members might lead detectives to the killer. This strategy, pioneered in Britain, is poised to become an important crime-fighting tool in the United States. The Los Angeles case will mark the first major use of California's newly approved familial searching policy, the most far-reaching in the nation."

8 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. DNA evidence 'planting'? by JSBiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suppose this might be slightly off-topic, but one concern I have with the use of DNA evidence is that, now that everybody knows about DNA evidence, what's to stop someone from planting DNA evidence at a crime scene? Splash some body fluids here, drop some hair there, and smear some skin cells at a strategic location, and voila "we have DNA evidence that places the defendant at the scene of the crime."

    1. Re:DNA evidence 'planting'? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, as someone who used to live a truck stop I can tell you that many hookers are junkies and will be happy to sell you ANYTHING for cash. So I doubt it would be real hard to wave a twenty in front of a hooker and get anything you wanted, especially something she wouldn't be able to normally sell like a used condom.

      Of course this gets even worse if you think about it. How many times have YOU left DNA that could be recovered by anyone in a public place? A coke can, those of us like me who smoke leaving our butts in a public ashtray, etc. And as DNA gets used more and more it will be in a criminals best interest to pick up something like that, if for no other reason that it adds to the chance that you could throw them off the trail. And with WAY too many jurors watching CSI all the will have to say is "DNA evidence" and you ass is toast.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    2. Re:DNA evidence 'planting'? by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if somebody that hates you that much has access to your DNA samples, you've already got some serious problems!

      Never been divorced have you?

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:DNA evidence 'planting'? by Binty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Remember that law enforcement agencies keep the raw blood/hair/whatever sample. So, suppose you've got a guy who has been in and out of prison a few times and now is being investigated for another crime. The authorities are pretty sure he did it, but don't quite have the evidence for a conviction. It would be pretty convenient just to splash some of that previously collected sample around and guarantee a conviction. I think that is the parent's concern here.

  2. Privacy concerns, yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But dress it all up as "social networking" and you'll have zillions of willing participants.

  3. Seriously though, what about adopted kids? by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder what happens if son/daughter is adopted and doesn't know, yet this shows DNA link to a criminal parent. That's a nasty shock to the system, I can just see it now:

    Officer: Hi, can you tell us where that lowlife father of your is?
    Kid: He is at work at the moment.
    Officer: Yeah, drop the act kid, he ain't worked a day of his life. Now, where is he ya little lying bastard?
    Kid: He will come home from work in three hours...

    *three hours later*

    Officer: This ain't your dad! Quit fucking with us here!
    Kid: Whaaaaaaa! (Or any other such life changing crying sound when you suddenly find out you are adopted and your whole life has been a lie)

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    1. Re:Seriously though, what about adopted kids? by Xiroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good point. Or consider problems that could come up if the kid's biological father was an anonymous sperm donor - could be bad if either the kid or the biological father got into trouble.

    2. Re:Seriously though, what about adopted kids? by dwarg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Paragraphs man, paragraphs! It's a wall of bloody text up there. Not to mention a premature and gratuitous execution of Godwin's Law That said:

      Power should be given to government only as much as necessary. Such databases should be in the private sphere, held by someone like the clergy with the "seal of the confessional", or by attorneys in a fashion similar to attorney-client privilege. We need a system of internetized public notaries/attorneys holding confidential private information, regarding issues of identity, privacy, will/testament etc.

      So, government bad, but combining the clergy and attorneys "in the private sector" WhatCouldPossiblyGoWrong?!? Or in other words, what we need to do is create another quasi-governmental agency (that answers to whom?) to entrust this super secret information to, but since it isn't called "government" it's somehow better than what it really is?

      You then go on to say that this entire mythical structure you've created would be useless because they wouldn't actually give out the information law enforcement is looking for. So why the hell are you suggesting we create it in the first place?

      You're entire post can be reduced to, "No! The gub'mint can't have my bodily fluid data." Saving you time you could use to add another layer to your tinfoil hat and haul a few more wheelbarrows of dirt out of your survivalist's bunker.