Slashdot Mirror
Twins' DNA Foils Police
Hugh Pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that James and John Parr were both arrested after watches worth £10,000 were stolen from a shopping center. Police found blood on a piece of glass at the scene of the crime and traced it back to the 25-year-old identical twins through DNA tests. But James and John both denied the theft and, because they have identical DNA, it has been impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt which twin is responsible. 'The police told us that they knew it was one of us, but we both denied it,' says James. 'I definitely know I didn't do anything wrong. I was watching my daughter that night.' Now the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has concluded that it cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt who was responsible. 'Unless further evidence becomes available, we are unable to authorize any charge at this time,' says CPS spokesman Rob Pett. 'This is certainly not something that we regularly encounter.' Identical twins have hindered police investigations a number of times since the advent of DNA testing. In Malaysia last year, a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death was released when the court could not prove whether it was he or his twin brother who committed the crime."
Not only has he to live with such a dull name, his brother is a moron and he is accused of theft. Well, that is unless he is an accomplice.
Which one has the cut that left the blood behind?
So DNA is the only way to prove guilt and find the truth? I remember in the old days, before DNA, they were still able to catch criminals. Maybe they should find some retired police officers to see how it's really done.
DNA by itself should never be used as the sole evidence to convict someone. It can be a useful indicator for finding suspects, but there always needs to be more direct evidence to provide a conviction. It is not just that people who don't have twins can be convicted solely based on DNA evidence, while people who do have twins cannot because of the possibility of convicting an innocent person. And that is not even going into DNA collisions or tainted samples.
I've never though that blood at the scene means you were at the scene, or that you did a crime that was committed at that location.
Seriously, they might be able to do a serological comparison but I doubt that the technology is there yet.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Wait until I get some clones, then nothing will stop me from world domination.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
Instead of resorting to third-world tactics like that, maybe the police investigators could just do their jobs, investigate the crime scene, and find some less-ambigous evidence that conclusively points to one brother or the other. Oh, and that doesn't mean that they "manufacture" the evidence, either.
Guilty until proven innocent?
So the solution to genetic privacy is for us all to clone ourselves!
Good thing we"ll have all those genegeneered crops to feed them clones.
You can't take the sky from me...
...a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death...
I'm surprised nobody has said anything about this. Sentenced to death for smuggling drugs? That's more of a problem than twin's getting away with theft and... well... drug smuggling.
I know that DNA testing was a huge breakthrough that solved a great many cases that were previously unsolvable, but it's not like police never got convictions before then. So why is this law enforcement organization apparently so dependent on DNA testing that they comparatively look like idiots when something like this foils the DNA evidence?
Surely they have other evidence at the crime scene, or in plain sight on the suspect(s). If one of the twins left blood, one of them was probably wounded by the broken glass. There may be glass particles in the perpetrator's clothing*, etc.
* Yes, I watched too much CSI...
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
DNA to find out if you've been at a crime-scene gets all the attention but what about family? Using genetics it is possible to narrow down whether or not someones DNA who is on file is a relative of someone's who is not. So, all of a sudden the police may have probable cause to investigate families instead of individuals. Privacy is an issue here, can I be compelled to add my DNA to a database because I happen to be in the same branch of genes as someone who committed a crime? And what is crime: with the radicalization of thought the Federalist Papers today would be filed under "Domestic Terrorism." Does this mean that something which arguably for the better can be nipped in the bud before it gets off the ground? To me, the only way I would accept full DNA profiling of an entire population is when law itself has no gray areas and is amendable to change. If you can't legally change then you need privacy to commit "crimes."
Shh.
This is the way it's supposed to work. DNA is not a magic bullet (heh) for solving crimes.
So the Crown will have to use good old fashioned police work to prove the case, like finding the watch in either twin's possession and/or fingerprints on the broken glass. Even genetic twins have different fingerprints. If the Crown (or any other prosecutorial system based upon English Common Law) cannot do this, then they go free, as per the design of the system.
It's better to let a hundred guilty go free than to jail (or execute!) one innocent person.
--
BMO
Actually, he's not evil at all. He's just into bigger engines than I am. http://www.selectric.org/ vs http://www.cathodecorner.com/
The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
Obviously the one who confesses is the good twin, so you should immediately arrest the other.
The ______ Agenda
I feel sorry for their family.
They will be forced to pay the bullet fee twice.
They BOTH did it.
... not as defendant, but as a juror.
I served on a jury last summer for a case of armed home invasion. The victim, if you can call him that, was a multiply-convicted white crack user. The victim claimed the defendant forced his way into the defendant's house with a gun, as part of a dispute over the defendant's missing cell phone following a drug deal.
The defense attorney's goal was to convince us that there was no way to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether the defendant committed the crime, or his brother. The police did a horribly sloppy job of gathering evidence, the DNA was so contaminated that while it matched the victim, it also had good odds of matching the defendant's brother or about 1 in 5 random people off the street. The victim lied on the stand several times and showed no reliability as an eyewitness, and all the other evidence (phone calls, evidence collected at defendant's house) pointed to *some* member of the defendant's family, but no way to know who.
So we found him not guilty. Kind of a shame since the defendant probably *was* a drug dealer, but no way to prove it wasn't his brother. And the kicker: if they bring the brother to trial, he can use the same defense.
If the twins have not been living near-identical lives (sharing cars, apartments, etc), they probably have distinct bacterial colonies, and bacterial forensics (an emerging science) could be the key.
http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/201003193
This method cannot conclusively place an individual at the scene of the crime, but if combined with DNA evidence, I think you'd have a pretty air-tight case.
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
When two people are on an elevator and one farts, they both know who did it.
Then they both confess, and you're exactly where you are now.
Unless they are like my grandpa. Farts? Hell he craps his pants sometimes and is completely oblivious to it.
Isolate them, and ask each one who the other says is guilty.
DNA has been getting relied on heavily lately to solve otherwise cold cases. States have started running crime scene evidence through DNA databases wholesale, and then running with whatever match they get, even if it's just a partial.
Think about it: if there's a one in a million chance that the DNA will match, and you have a 20 million person database, then you're going to get 20 matches. Now just find the guy who's most convenient to prosecute. Boom, instant cold case conversion!
DNA's Dirty Little Secret: a forensic tool renowned for exonerating the innocent may actually be putting them in prison
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1003.bobelian.html
Also:
New Rule Allows Use of Partial DNA Matches
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/nyregion/25dna.html
DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/science/18dna.html
One simple rule for its versus it's
What is troubling for me to understand is why was their DNA already in the police's database? Have they committed other crimes? Or is the answer as simple as "This took place in the UK"? I don't know about you, but I would be rather pissed if I'm on some database for no reason...
Regards, Boyan
As an identical twin, I can tell you that your idea stinks. If my brother commits a crime, and I deny it, I don't think I should be charged with obstruction of justice. I don't know what he's doing at any given time of the day. I couldn't tell you what he's doing right now. He could be robbing a jewelry store for all I know.
Isolate them, and ask each one who the other says is guilty.
If they both actually believe themselves to be innocent, then neither will have admitted anything to the other, and possibly both will blame the other, since no matter now much they 'cant believe he would do that', they would be sure they didn't.
On the other hand, if one IS guilty and this is a ploy to avoid an arrest, then both will know that one does not have to answer that question at all, let alone truthfully.
They would both have agreed to say "I know for sure I did not do it, and I just can't believe my brother would do that ever, but I don't know how else to explain the evidence"
It's called unlawful arrest. It's not legal to hold someone in contempt of court who is not a witness.
It is unconstitutional (5th amendment violation) to demand someone confess.
This case is further complicated by the fact that one twin always lies, and the other twin always tells the truth. And I can only ask one more question before their lawyers show up! What to do??
Take off every Sig. For great justice.
For folks that are familiar with Monty Python, the Piranha Brothers (fictional, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piranha_Brothers were inspired by the Krays (real, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kray_brothers).
The Krays stayed out of prison for a long time by intimidating witnesses. DNA evidence cannot be intimidated, but given this case, one the brothers could commit a crime, without worrying about leaving DNA behind. Both would claim innocence. They could have called it the "Other Other Other Other Operation.
But the last I heard Reggie (Doug) was dead and Ronnie (Dinsdale) was in prison.
But would the Piranha Brother let death get in the way of committing crimes?
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
It is unconstitutional (5th amendment violation) to demand someone confess.
While I'm not really familiar with the justice system in the UK, I'd have a hard time believing that the US constitution somehow applies there.
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
No, it's way easier than that. All you have to do is analyse their DNA, and see which of them has the Evil Bit set. I can't believe this hasn't been done yet.
ps. The evil bit in DNA is not detected by normal comparisons. You need to find a geneticist with 1337 DN4 5C4NN1NG 5K1LLZ. The median age for such geneticists is 13, interestingly.
they just have to ask what the other twin would have said if he was asked
Actually, neither will confess, and neither one did it. As it turns out they were actually triplets when they were born. The parents had to give one up for adoption. The adopted brother, through cruel twists of fate, turned to crime at a young age. Neither of the "twins" know anything about the third brother.
But, that's not the whole story. The third brother married into a well connected crime family. He did what the family wanted, but that still didn't make them satisfied with him. In time, there was resentment by some of the "family" members, and even his wife.
The wife was having an affair with another member of the crime family. One morning the third brother cut himself shaving. She took that blood, and gave it to her lover, and *HE* is the one who committed the crime.
No one in the crime family, nor even the third brother, knew there were two more people who would positively identify to the DNA match. The third brother remains unsuspected to this day, and those in his circle continue to live free, until the day that his wife finally gets rid of him, one way or another.
{sigh} don't you people ever watch murder/mystery/detective shows? Hell, even an educated background of Scooby Doo mysteries would have thought of this one. Or the old man who lived in the cabin on the hill. :)
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
When are the courts going to get it through their heads that it doesn't take identical twins to make DNA tests fallible and utterly unsuited as sole evidence?
So obvious it's been (mostly) done before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Twin
... is to make being an identical twin illegal. Bang. Problem solved. Both are guilty of something.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Surely, there are other tests using standard blood chemistry that could be performed? A standard annual blood test would test for a whole variety of things - glucose levels, hormone levels, antibody levels.
Wouldn't the brothers have different glucos levels, immune responses or ratios of antibodies?
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
"In Malaysia last year, a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death..."
Wait, he was sentenced to death on suspicion of drug smuggling? If you are going to kill people because you think they might have committed a crime how DNA obfuscating the facts really make that much of a difference?
While we are at it, what happened to the good old "float or drown" technique of evil bit detection.
But to detect that, you'd have sequence much of their DNA. Perhaps partially sequencing using a SNP array chip might catch a mutation or two (23andMe uses these chips). Both techniques would be expensive. Conventional forensic DNA analysis looks at 30 markers. These would be the same for most identical twins.
The 60 mutation number comes from a study reported a few weeks ago fully sequencing parents and an offspring.
It can be argued it was done in Metal Gear Solid, too.
Lol, Mr.Penrose, this is not the Prisoner's Dilemma Duex.
Hold up a red piece of paper and ask if it is a dog.
I know you're joking, but ....
As it turns out they were actually triplets when they were born.
In fact finding a "hidden" 3rd person with the same profile isn't that much impossible.
Given the small amount of tested loci finding a perfect match doesn't even require a true twin brother or triplet, but could also be someone different, who just had the bad luck to have the same DNA only on the dozen of tested loci (and could have different DNA elsewhere).
The wikipedia entry about DNA profiling mentions a case of a "perfect" random match of 13 loci among 30'000 persons.
In short : DNA profiling is a nice tool to have, when the police have a short group of suspect and wants to know who is the one who might have done it. But if you have no idea and are just hitting a database to give you auto-magically the guilty criminal, there's an even increasing chance (as DNA databases are growing bigger) , that the request might return 1 or 2 people who have nothing to do with the case and just happened to share the same loci.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Isolate them, and ask each one who the other says is guilty.
"I have no way of knowing what the other brother may say."
Amongst our weapons.. amongst our weaponry are such elements as fear, surprise, ... I'll come in again.
Researchers have found cases of genetic matches in the FBI DNA database far more frequently than the 1 in 113 billion figure they use. Scarily enough, many states and the FBI now prohibit such genetic collision searches from taking place. FBI officials argue that, under their interpretation of federal law, use of CODIS is limited to criminal justice agencies. In their view, defense attorneys are allowed access to information about their specific cases, not the databases in general.
The same basic right exists in the UK, they call it the right to silence, or the right to remain silent, and it comes from the Judges' Rules, and pertains to rights of the defendant to not testify, and rights to not cooperate with police.
Arguably, potential criminals may have better rights there than in the US, in certain areas.
The 5th amendment of the US constitution is based on it.
But see the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984, PACE Code C.
Or maybe a criminal put the evidence there knowing that it would lead police to a dead end, thus ending the investigation. The police cannot charge either twin, while the real criminal gets away. If all they have is the blood DNA evidence, then I would say it's rather silly to believe it could not have been planted.
Rule out everything that it can't be, and what you are left with is the correct answer. If they both have the same DNA, and one has an ironclad alibi, then it has to be the other twin who did it. Jesus H. Christ, hasn't anyone heard of logic before?
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Obviously, the one with the goatee is guilty.
there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
Funny, I haven't read that book, nor seen the movie. I just made it up. :) I guess Duell was right, "Everything that can be invented, has already been invented".
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
Except that in the ultimate twist, it turns out that none of the 94 clones actually did it, it was their progenitor who having successfully faked his death, and having consumed anti-agathic drugs, decided to break into the shopping center and steal the watches and got cut doing so.
Now the only remaining detective work is to find out why he dun it . And before you smart alecs come out with answers like, "the glass was sharp" , I clearly meant why did he break in and steal the watches. The leading theories :
1. Just to keep in practice doing evil things
2. Because the watches were just so *shiny*
4. It was meant to distract you from the other break in in the other shopping center
5.. i)Fake death ii) Consume anti-agathic drugs iii) Clone yourself iv) Steal watches. v)????? vi) profit.
6. Because the watches had inscribed on them ancient mystic Tibetan runes, that when read together would open the bowels of hell, or entitle the reader to 10% discount in Wally's world rides.
7. ..............
Godwin, fail us not, now.
No civilized country would charge even the guilt party for obstruction of justice for failure to confess. duh!
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
DNA evidence isn't nearly so strong as police imagine, especially if they're using the evidence for finding the suspects. We'll eventually see courts overturning convictions that depend too heavily upon DNA evidence.
If you read the article, they say "the only evidence was blood at the scene which the police tracked to the twins through DNA tests." I'd say that's an acceptable method for finding your suspect, but you've just invalidated your DNA evidence once you've used it for picking out a suspect from a massive database. So you best find more evidence like CCTV, finger prints, shaking down his fence, etc. A competent defense attorney should get their client off if you've only got DNA evidence that's been "statistically contaminated" by a database search.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
This "loophole" in the law augers an era where gangs of clones can commit crimes with impunity. You heard it here first.
There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about. -- John von Neumann
A debatable point has been the prevention of crime by identifying people who are prone to commit heinous acts by analyzing genetics. Is it possible to have an evil twin, the diametrically opposite twin? Good and evil twins would serve as a counterexample of the use of genetics to determine whether someone is evil or subject to weaknesses.
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
If we are to continue with DNA profiling, the collection and storage of specimens needs to be taken away from the police and shifted onto an impartial public service which favours neither prosecution or defence. We also need to ensure that samples are only taken from people against whom there is a reasonable suspicion of involvement in a specific crime. The police should not be able to arrest someone for a minor offence, DNA-rape them and then run the sample against millions of other unrelated offences.
1: Create clone army of self. Replicate any distinguishing features - scars, hairstyles etc.
2: Commit crime(s), leaving DNA evidence.
3: Profit!