Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Relative's DNA Solves A 1993 Murder Cold Case (washingtonpost.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the fugitives-from-justice dept.

A 44-year-old living in Maine has just been arrested and charged with committing a murder when he was 18, the Washington Post reports: The April 1993 slaying of Sophie Sergie, an Alaska Native, was one of the state's most notorious cold cases until Friday, when authorities announced that DNA genealogical mapping helped triangulate a genetic match... Police recovered the suspect's DNA from Sergie's body. At the time, the district court filing said, DNA processing technology had not been introduced in Alaska. A DNA profile confirming the suspect as male was uploaded in 2000, but it did not match anyone in the FBI's database. The case went dormant for years...

Then the alleged "Golden State Killer" was captured [after searching commercial online genealogy databases for relatives who matched DNA found at a crime scene]. The publicity of the feat, state troopers said, sparked the idea for investigators in the Sergie case. Why not try the same? A forensic genealogist prepared a report on Dec. 18, comparing the suspect's genetic material from the crime scene to likely relatives. A woman's DNA profile emerged in the search. Investigators found their link: She was an aunt of Downs's.
Downs had been a student at the college where the murder took place. He's also been charged with sexual assault -- and with being a fugitive from justice for the last 25 years.

118 comments

  1. Is it a crime to be on the run? by sloede · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How can the suspect be charged with "being a fugitive of justice"? As far as I understand, according to the Fifth Amendment nobody has to incriminate herself. And with a murder charge, there's no statute of limitations.

    1. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you've actually been charged with a crime and got a court date but didn't show up, that's illegal. If you haven't been charged with a crime, then not showing up is definitely not illegal.

      dom

    2. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FFS grow up and get out of your parents' basement.

    3. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's because charges can be brought anonymously. A John Doe was charged with the crime, and remained fugitive for 25 years. At the end of that interval, a specific person was identified as the John Doe. In this case he did not incriminate himself, he was incriminated by genetic information.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    4. Re: Is it a crime to be on the run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? As a non-American, I found their argument quite convincing. What's wrong with the logic?

    5. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DISCLAIMER: foreigner here, you could consider the whole comment useless.

      >_ It's because charges can be brought anonymously.

      Oh, really? How can he know he was charged? (I'm not defending him, I believe DNA proof is relevant and can be used against him) Heck, some charges against John Doe could be pointed in my direction later.

      Where's the fairness if someone is not warned about due process and cannot defend himself?

      >_ A John Doe was charged with the crime, and remained fugitive for 25 years. At the end of that interval, a specific person was identified as the John Doe.

      Then he will be prosecuted and have ample right to Defense. I'm no expert in American law, but this seems to stem from "presumed innocent until proven guilty".

      >_ In this case he did not incriminate himself, he was incriminated by genetic information.

      We are not not talking of proof added NOW, we're talking about a man not being forced to present himself and declare his guilt during 25 years. He NOW must be accused, have the opportunity for Defense and, if convicted, pay for his crime.

      Suggesting he "be a fugitive" if nobody is after him, specifically? Suppose the real criminal is another guy, say from Siberia, why accusing him from "being a fugitive"? I guess this is basic logic.

      Also, this might be considered digressive, but Justice in not in our hands. We cannot restore the girl's life which would be close to a just repair (minus the suffering she may have gone thru). Punishing him is for the sake of mankind, and does not specially help the family or the girl in the least. It's obvious that, if guilty, he's not to live among people he could harm again; but let's really appreciate what we get from punishing him. And "satisfaction" is too fluid: what is satisfactory now maybe a source of shame in the future. Be careful with what you wish...

    6. Re: Is it a crime to be on the run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh great, another avenue for prosecutors to pile on charges.

      Evidence a bit flaky? No worries, just "identify" the suspect as a John Doe from years ago and charge them with being a fugitive. Anything to swell the charge sheet, intimidate the suspect and increase their legal costs.

    7. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      Because legal terms have legal meaning, you don't want to listen to a legal term and just hear whatever it "sounds like," you want to refrain from understanding until after you have the definitions. ;)

      When you're charged in one State, but you're arrested in another State, there are lots of details and paperwork. The jurisdiction holding you has a right to hold you, but they don't control the actual charges against you. Therefore, to prevent that being some sort of black hole that people can fall into, they have to have a process by which you're accused, locally, of having charges against you in another State. That accusation is what the "being a fugitive from Justice" is. It is not a criminal charge. There is a federal criminal charge with the same name, that applies in the situation you describe. This is something different; any extradition from Maine to another State begins with a DA in Maine filing paperwork accusing the subject of being a Fugitive from Justice.

    8. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      In my State if you don't want to be required to present ID, simply don't carry it and you're not required to present it.

      Unless I'm driving or shopping, I don't even carry my wallet.

      BTW, cryptocurrencies track every purchase and when you spend the money, you also transfer the purchase history of that money. It seems a little out of place next to your other concerns; you seem to have been taken for a ride by propagandists.

    9. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >_ but if it is found you were guilty then, obviously, you were a fugitive all these years and a murderer. (emphasis mine)

      That's what I said and you called me retarded. Supposing you're right, you're someone repeating a retarded...

      It's not a troll post. I have more important things to do than trolling here. And again, this is about weird charges like being a fugitive without being sought -- not the homicide charge, for instance.

      Suppose, just for the sake of making things clearer, that he was identified soon after the crime is committed and he is ordered to surrender himself. Then he would be a fugitive if he does not appear at a Police district.

      By that "fugitive charge" idea, the Police could save a lot of money and resources... Just give a generic order like: "everyone who committed a crime is hereby ordered to appear on Monday and confess the deed at the nearest Police station".

      That would work very well...

    10. Re:Is it a crime to be on the run? by bugnuts · · Score: 2

      If you're anonymously charged with the crime and refuse to appear to contest it, you're now a fugitive.

      Even if you're not guilty of the crime, the fugitive charges don't disappear. Even if you're not guilty. That's what you're saying. The courts DGAF if you knew you were being charged or not. And this foreigner is rightfully questioning it.

      And I question it, too. It smacks of secret tribunals, which are explicitly forbidden by the constitution. Anonymous charges in public are nearly the same as secret.

  2. and we're sliding down.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    that slippery slope where the feds have massive dna databases on everybody... even if the databases aren't entirely theirs.

    but what's worse is 'everybody' is willingly giving dna samples away... with absolutely no protections once the private companies involved get their grubby paws on it.

    it wouldn't surprise me at all if one or more of these 'ancestor' gimmicks was an fbi / cia / nsa front, since the government can't go around grabbing dna samples from everybody.. they've come up with a way where the people willingly provide it to third parties instead.. third parties that the feds can then siphon data from whenever the fuck they want.

    1. Re:and we're sliding down.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but what's worse is 'everybody' is willingly giving dna samples away

      You mean everybody's ignorant family. At least in my case, and maybe yours too. Certainly in this guy's case.
      If my cousin is a murderer, I want his ass caught for sure, but I don't want to be tried for a crime he committed either.

    2. Re:and we're sliding down.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      replace "fbi / cia / nsa" with "jewish cabal"
      that's who pulls their strings

  3. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, amazing!

    I am sure this subject must be getting a lot of attention.

  4. This is all fine and dandy by Jarwulf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Until they graduate to using your uncles first cousin's DNA to link you to a protest movement, or to determine you have a greater chance for a medical condition to raise your fees, or to decide your family has a tendency for unorthodox thinking and assign you to reeducation. But trust them. It will never come to that.

    1. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Jarwulf you're a fucking moron in a strawman costume, just show yourself out please. Find a field to scare birds in for chrissake you goon. Make yourself useful for a change. Go find a red neckerchief to complete your ensemble.

      DNA is traceable. The DNA of family members is obtainable. They caught the guy. What the fuck are you crying about specifically lol, grow up.

    2. Re:This is all fine and dandy by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      All the lost state and city crimes getting looked over by US wide investigations for new DNA.
      The other fun is all the people who worked as "informants" for the police/gov/mil and who expected to keep their cover.
      All the undercover work going back decades.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're worried about linking you to a protest movement, I'd wonder about the protest movement. I mean, you're an American, or at least living in Ohio.

      I'd be far more worried about the conditions LEADING to the fact that you will be tracked from your protest movement.

      Private insurance will always be looking for ways to maximize profits. Hence why most western countries have government controlled health care, even here in Belgium where its an 'obamacare' style health care system. They cannot deny me or raise my rates because I have a condition.

      The only country in the world with reeducation camps is China, and they've been doing mandatory DNA/fingerprinting/facial analysis since the technology matured 15 years ago.

      I appreciate that people are scared of their DNA being used against them but quite frankly its not the DNA and searching you have to worry about, its your own complacency in allowing your government to get out of control. Everything you mentioned is seriously 'deep state' worrying.

      I'm far more worried that the data Facebook as acquired (and is being drained by various nation-states) will be used against me. DNA is much harder than your face or your friends.

    4. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      or to determine you have a greater chance for a medical condition to raise your fees,

      Here's information about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act.

      That said, I would not recommend that anyone have any of these publicly-sold DNA tests. It might be possible to take them anonymously, especially by making use of attorney-client privilege, but I will leave that to a lawyer to figure out.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    5. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Moron doesn't understand the difference between a heinous murder / rape and a protest movement

      Many nations are unable to make this same distinction. There are quite a few where you can be executed or jailed for what you say. If you think that the one you live in can't become like that, you're wrong.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    6. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Go read about H. Edgar Hoover's operation of the FBI and his pursuit of the black power movement, etc.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    7. Re:This is all fine and dandy by gweihir · · Score: 0

      And when the fascism has reached full force, they can easily round up any genetic group they want to get rid off. No painstaking detective and data work the Nazis had to do, instant identification of all that are the "undesirables" to be blamed for all the things that go downhill in fascism.

      All these "great" results today are just preparation and propaganda and as soon as the methods are established, they are going to be used for anything possible.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re: This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy to get around, just kill all my relatives and never give a sample and I'm uncatchable!

    9. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      J Edgar Hoover saved the Amurrikah from teh Communizst, you fucking piece of pinko shite.

    10. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I absolutely agree - which is why I said this:

      its your own complacency in allowing your government to get out of control. Everything you mentioned is seriously 'deep state' worrying.

      You're talking about COINTELPRO. The US allowed that complacency out of 'fear' of minorities during a time of increasing racial division. Even the enlightened 'hippies' weren't actually helping here as racism (or sexism )was not considered one of the morally defining ideals of the Counterculture. The FBI also targeted the counter-culture protesters. COINTEPRO didn't discriminate based on color entirely. It discriminated based on political ideology.

      Today we (i mean the people of the world) have no excuse to not understand racism, division, and the idea that our governments are run by corporate interests, most of which are (depending on your country) part of the military industrial complex. At least anyone on slashdot worrying about DNA analysis. Chinese know - DNA is not as scary as your social data. Ask the Uighars if they use social media to talk about religion or their concerns.

      DNA = facial recognition = fingerprint analysis = talking to your neighbors and having them 'snitch' on you.

    11. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      There's a reason they refer to the agents that vacuum up DNA traces in Gattaca as 'Hoovers'.

    12. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Moron doesn't understand the difference between a heinous murder / rape and a protest movement, conflates the two freely for illogical non-arguments of bullshit proportions. Fox breaking News."

      If you don't believe that governments can and do misuse and abuse their powers, especially those powers enabled by new technologies, then you have a very limited imagination indeed. You might like how the government used the technology this time, but you might not like it as much the next time. Be careful what you wish for.

    13. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would seem the moron is you.

      The biggest problem is that people like you tend to think DNA is the perfect proof of guilt. Only it isn't. Even though the chance of getting a misidentification from DNA is a small number, there is a very large number of people in the world. One in a billion doesn't seem that large of a chance, but when there are 10 billion people, that's statistically 9 possibilities that your "perfect" evidence is just deceiving you.

      Then comes the issue of secondary transfer (since you're an idiot, it means you get it on you from someone other than the original source, e.g by bumping into someone who has bumped into the source earlier) etc, which is a real problem which we are not supposed to know about. We lose hairs, skin cells etc, etc, constantly. As it would happen they don't magically cease to exist just because we shed them. They fly around in the air, stick to other people, gets transported around by wind, travelers and so on. There is literally no way of knowing where the stuff might be found.

      All of that just before we add the usual human failures of contaminating samples, mishandling, mislabeling and so on.

      Then comes this little issue with the presumption of innocence. If you have a massive database of DNA which holds basically everyone's DNA and you start looking for matches there, then everyone in that database is treated as suspected until proven innocent by not producing a match. Very dangerous precedent.

    14. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh comen on, literally everything in today's life can be turned against you if your country suddenly wants to crack down on "undesired opinions". Get your head out of the sand and let's be realistic for a change.

    15. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Moron doesn't understand the difference between a heinous murder / rape and a protest movement, conflates the two freely for illogical non-arguments of bullshit proportions. Fox breaking News."

      And this moron has obviously never once read any history ever. Or even just paid attention to the news in his own lifetime. The example is a perhaps a little exaggerated, but that is the path that government always follows eventually.

    16. Re:This is all fine and dandy by bobbied · · Score: 1

      North Korea comes to mind - A place where when you escape the country go be free, they lock up your family you leave behind in their famous death camps for "re-education" or really death by exposure, starvation and hard labor.

      Or, closer to home, those living in Venezuela who don't happen to support the socialist government are getting shot and killed in the streets by the military for protesting, while everybody else dies slowly of starvation.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    17. Re:This is all fine and dandy by bobbied · · Score: 2

      Where it is the natural tendency of government to follow such paths, it is by far NOT a given they will.

      The legal basis of the USA's existence, if interpreted within it's ORIGINAL intent, would make such abuses difficult to exercise. We have very strict rules of evidence for criminal trials based on the Constitution's recognition of basic rights. Rules which protect us from governmental abuses.

      However, I'm not saying it's not possible such abuses could come, only that we will have to either re-define what the constitution says (using the "living breathing document canard") or amend it. Well, short of just plain ignoring it by packing the courts with judges who don't care about the law as written...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    18. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Kjella · · Score: 1

      How they'll use the registry is one thing, but I think the principal battle on whether they'll have a biometric registry on everyone is over, at least here in Europe. The reason is that post 9/11 the US insisted all passports have biometrics with photo and fingerprints, here in Norway 90%+ of the population have a valid passport because in Europe you cross borders constantly. They don't register DNA on anyone but criminals, but the threshold has been going down and down from sex-related crimes to serious crime to any crime punishable by jail time. Currently 1.5% of the population is registered 5 years after the latest relaxation of the rules and you never get off, once you're on file it's for life.

      The other big push is from medicine, personalized medicine and research into genetic predispositions means they will want to have a bio-bank and in countries with universal healthcare that's likely to be a national registry. Probably voluntarily but if they tell you that you get better healthcare through signing up, well I think many people would. At least enough that everybody's cousin is on file. They'll probably be separate registries but the only thing holding them back is the law, which can always be changed/circumvented for national security reasons. Oh yeah and I mentioned photographs, once Face ID is more established I bet there'll be a push to add a 3D scan of your face and iris scan too. Here's the direction it's going:

      https://www.smh.com.au/politic...

      Basically, every snippet about you is going to be on file the moment you touch modern civilization. I wouldn't be surprised if a DNA swab within a few decades becomes a standard part of getting a birth certificate.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    19. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The protest movement and reeducation nonsense are paranoid fantasies. Western democracies with individual liberties are the best defense against such things. That's true whether you have DNA testing or not.

      The insurance scenario is far more realistic. Without strong regulations on personal data, corporations are unbounded in what they can and will do with your data.

    20. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gattacca - best movie ever.

    21. Re:This is all fine and dandy by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      I wonder what happens to all the DNA taken for paternity tests?

    22. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a reason they refer to the agents that vacuum up DNA traces in Gattaca as 'Hoovers'.

      You're not as clever as you think you are, you cock-gobbling imbecile.

      A Hoover is a well known brand of vacuum cleaner.

      This has nothing to do with J. Edgar Hoover who ran the FBI like it was his own personal dictatorship.

    23. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when the fascism has reached full force, they can easily round up any genetic group they want to get rid off.

      And we will start by getting rid of the subhuman waste who don't understand the difference between "of" and "off".

      You're an idiot.

      I am tired of seeing your stupid comments.

      KILL YOURSELF.

    24. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Basically, every snippet about you is going to be on file the moment you touch modern civilization. I wouldn't be surprised if a DNA swab within a few decades becomes a standard part of getting a birth certificate.

      It already is.

    25. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Cito · · Score: 1

      Hoover was a fucking sissy tranny

    26. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Moron doesn't understand the difference between a heinous murder / rape and a protest movement, conflates the two freely for illogical non-arguments of bullshit proportions. Fox breaking News."

    27. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the glorious haven of United Arab Emirates, the shiny beacon of liberal freedom in the middle east. Where you can be arrested, tortured, held in isolation, and never given the right to communicate with anyone--including the consulate--for the crime of "sympathizing with Qatar"? That "crime" holds a 15 year jail sentence.

      https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/3757420/wearing-barcelona-shirt-in-uae-qatar-airways-prison-15-years/

      And if you think the above is just a scare piece:

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/05/british-man-detained-in-uae-after-wearing-qatar-football-t-shirt-to-match

      I'm a little hesitant to even fly through DBX now that I've got four stamps in my passport from travelling through Qatar.

    28. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only country in the world with reeducation camps is China, and they've been doing mandatory DNA/fingerprinting/facial analysis since the technology matured 15 years ago.

      You do know for example that there's a lady in Germany doing prison time for Holocaust denial? No acts of violence, not even incitement, just wrongthink about a historical fact?

    29. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      It seems that if your country does this, that is the problem already, and it has nothing at all to do with DNA.

      I mean with DNA, or without DNA, either your country avoids this problem, or it happens. Using DNA for evidence doesn't seem to even touch this issue.

    30. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      That's another reason why DNA is irrelevant to this problem; countries that lack freedom they already track everybody. If you need permission from the government just to move to a new residence, then you're already being completely tracked, and they can punish your family for what you do whenever they want. DNA doesn't seem to change things at all in that regard.

      If our country loses personal freedom, then we already lost it. So many people seem to be arguing, "if the gubermint took our freedums away, then this would be a powerful tool for them to use." Except, if they took your freedoms away, you already lost them, and these details wouldn't be relevant.

    31. Re: This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We already had that happen in the first years of the country. Remember the Articles of Confederation?

      Gone, gone by fiat.

      Then we have John Addams who locked up people for mocking him.

      Then there was Jackson who almost started a coup.

      Followed by Taney who made up declarations in his court decision, which was shortly followed by violent insurrection.

      Then there was a complete willingness to ignore the lessons of that war or rather, blatantly counter them.

      We can go on with Debs, Scopes, and the Jesuit Children. Which if you think is far away, there was a child just arrested in Florida as somebody unlawfully tried to force them to recite the pledge at school.

      Well, they've learned a lesson. The thugs are in charge. The Constitution is paper, thin and subject to shredding.

    32. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently guy, who committed crime left his DNA - under nails, his blood - something, that did not match with victims DNA. I guess that evidence along with him living nearby is enough to solve case. There can be more than 500 billion different human combinations possible, if those 10 billions mate with each other, so there is and won't be finite number to DNA differences among humans. Those differences carry over generations - that's the idea about identifying someone. Person, who had DNA sample was not arrested, so sleep safe, citizen.

      Not only human population has grown and methods how to avoid crimes, but also technological progress to solve them and DNA testing is one of the tools to solve crimes. Some of us need police - to solve shit that you might do and DNA testing perfectly helps there. Also, after reading slashdot I get really anxious how many stupid people are out there, as only stupid(or desperate enough) people do crimes.

      ffs, get off the internet and DNA topic - it is clearly not for your brains!

    33. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are wrong - lady in Germany was not put in prison, because she denied Holocaust, but because she actively spread that idea that it did not existed. It is not debatable question, but fact - it happened and it can't unhappen no matter how many times someone says that it didn't. Denying it is hate crime and age or sex should not be used as excuse on topic.
      Hardly founding fathers of US thought, that main idea about free speech was to be used as as shield to talk sh!t or hate to fellow people - you still have to be responsible for your words and ideas you are spreading.

    34. Re:This is all fine and dandy by sjames · · Score: 1

      Are you SURE there was no double entendre there?

    35. Re:This is all fine and dandy by gweihir · · Score: 1

      What makes you think the democrats are not part of this too? This has been going on for some decades and has gotten obvious about 10 years back.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    36. Re:This is all fine and dandy by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 2

      DNA is not needed for a government to abuse its people in this manner.

      In fact, DNA has nothing to do with the extent to which a government abuses its people. An abusive government will find ways to do what it wants to do.

      The solution is not to eliminate DNA testing, but to rein in government power. This is an ongoing struggle that will never end. Freedom isn't free.

    37. Re:This is all fine and dandy by whitesea · · Score: 1

      Time for Cardinal Richelieu quote: "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." (Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.)

  5. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

    Isn't the most plausible explanation the one where the sibling is not actually a sibling?

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  6. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boy are you scientists ever dumb.

    Please refer to the milkman theory.

  7. lots of movies on this... by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    ...switched at birth

    1. Re:lots of movies on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Insightful

      Most plausible explanation, like switching a California boy for a New York City girl.

  8. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Woosh!

    You must be new around here...

  9. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OP here, we have envisioned that possibility but subject samples don't match anything we have seen before.

    So, "siblings" should be considered at large.

  10. Re:This is all fine and dandy... "moron..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Moron; now THAT is a convincing argument!

    "That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved."
    ATTRIBUTION: BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, letter to Benjamin Vaughan, March 14, 1785.—The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Albert H. Smyth, vol. 9, p. 293 (1906).
    https://www.bartleby.com/73/953.html

    The problem is not the incomprehension of the -er ..."Moron"... the problem is the authoritarian mindset which seems to value closure, order, law and justice (in about that order). A protest movement can in fact be considered "heinous" when it sufficiently inconveniences the top of the pyramid. If you don't believe me, let us step over to the Free Speech Zone and discuss it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

    Few want truly "heinous" crimes to go unanswered, but if the mechanisms of retribution become simultaneously too potent and too convenient ...

    SPOCK: I do not believe there is much beyond Nomad's capabilities.
    KIRK: And we've shown it the way home. And when it gets there
    SPOCK: It will find the Earth infested with imperfect biological units.
    KIRK: And it will carry out its prime directive. Sterilise.
    "The Changeling"
    http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/37.htm

  11. Re:Yes by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1

    Its how the courts sees it... Strange absolutely, however the same law can be viewed many different ways, all equally viable in the courts.

    --
    [($)]
  12. In the future... by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

    Who knows what new technology will allow authorities to uncover what you were doing years ago...

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    1. Re:In the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's easy - the technology is called social media and The Internet Archive

      Don't want the bullshit you spouted on Twitter to come back and haunt you?

      1. Don't spout bullshit on twitter
      2. Get more politically involved and make sure the Authorities aren't the people you are scared of.

      How is this so hard for the average twitter troll to understand?

    2. Re:In the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How?

      the combined IQ of all twitter users is sub 50, that is how.

    3. Re: In the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should you be worried? Follow the rules, do not make waves, do not question authority. If you suspect that something you're intending to do may be illegal or perceived as that, do not do it. It's not hard.

    4. Re:In the future... by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      Who knows what new technology will allow authorities to uncover what you were doing years ago..

      Like the internet, vs the "Right to be Forgotten" law?

      I still think if it's listed somewhere on a website then Google (et all) should index and search it, as well as (of course) providing a link to it. If it's not true or someone has a problem, they can go correct the original hosting site, and soon the bad info will be gone from the search engines.

      Making the engines not provide things is like adding on to the "dark web".

      Hitler agrees completely with the "Right to be Forgotten", and wishes it would hurry up and be applied to everyone already. He's also upset about OTHER THINGS as well.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    5. Re:In the future... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Who knows what new technology will allow authorities to uncover what you were doing years ago...

      I am suddenly concerned about an internet meme: https://me.me/i/the-fbi-is-wat...

    6. Re: In the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lick those boots! There is still shit on them from the last person to tell me no...

  13. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

    Oh come on. Babies get switched in hospital, courts and law enforcement change people's identities for their protection (even infants sometimes), etc.

    If the person isn't related to any other samples in the library, this is simply a sign of the library being incomplete.

    --
    Bruce Perens.
  14. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    That particular AC was referring to a certain poster that is not liked here for some reason. So kind of a woosh.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  15. "Solves" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Are they sure it's him? Can they prove he was there?

    1. Re: "Solves" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does not matter. The case is closed. Are you questioning authority, citizen? Are you an anarchist? Are you or have you ever been critical of our democratically elected government?

  16. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh come on Bruce!

    Even you bit to this prank?

    No wonder why our humble planet experiences so much problems. I'd say it is a lack of qualified people.

    San Jose, Palo Alto? Do your research before posting anything.

  17. How is it "solved"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He is still a suspect. The case isn't "solved" untill you have a conviction. Guilty untill proven my ass....

  18. They are and they can. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Are they sure it's him? Can they prove he was there?

    His DNA was found on the victim. If this takes the form of his sperm in the relevant locations on the victim's body and his skin under the victim's fingernails it's kind of hard to dispute. You can try to argue that the two of you had passionate sex before the victim was raped and murdered by an unknown condom using, HEV suit wearing rapist whose DNA was therefore completely missing from the victim's body but that brings us to a rather famous item from brother Occam's shaving kit.

  19. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL! It is now April fool's day everyday on /. thanks to our renowned collaborator and no, I am not talking about Bruce Perens

  20. Not a good contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "irst cousin's DNA to link you to a protest movement" protest movement don't leave DNA. Neither has any DNA presence ever lead to something similar. Ever.

    "determine you have a greater chance for a medical condition to raise your fees" that is already done with preexisting condition and I am betting my ass off a lot of US insurance have plan for this. Unfortunately the way it is in the US you are better off fighting for universal care than fighting against such a DNA test plan...

    "decide your family has a tendency for unorthodox thinking and assign you to reeducation" that is even more stupid as unorthodoxe thinking is nurture, not nature , baring mental illness.


    No the real reason to fight against such DNA test search in genealogic DB, is because those DNA check are not nearly as random and as unique as CSI show tell you. If you look into ancestry DB chance are you won't get your 1 in 6 billion (or which ever) probability, because of various effects. So now you get randomly accused of a crime and if they can tie you to the place you get arrested. Which is the *contrary* to what should happen. DNA should be a confirmation not a shotgun approach to find guilty party in a huge DB.

    1. Re: Not a good contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMO a DNA search like this is a valid way of finding potential suspects to spend more time investigating. Prosecutors are always going to try to connect every dot they can to paint a complete picture of the crime and prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

      IMO the real problem would be an over-zealous prosecutor trying to make a name for himself fabricating or falsifying additional evidence. Prosecutors seem to have a mind-set that assumes every suspect is guilty, even when they're not, and if they think they can get away with it... Of course, this is a problem even without dna evidence.

      A lot of people seem to worry about "the government" misusing info like this. I'm a lot more worried about individuals with something to gain than some shady government conspiracy BS.

    2. Re: Not a good contest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine Stalin, Hitler or Mao with the power of DNA at their fingertips. Also remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We've already experienced a number of truly murderous regimes, and nothing so far indicates that we'll never see any of that again.

      IMO, as earlier pointed out, the real problem isn't "overzealous", which I in context take as "corrupt" prosecutors manufacturing evidence. It's rather that people, both inside the judicial system and the civvies have a regrettable tendency to believe DNA to be bulletproof. In reality, DNA comes with a whole host of limitations, like "small probability" not being the same as "no probability", or secondary transfers. The latter kind of ties in with your "manufactured evidence", but there's more to it since it makes it incredibly easy to "plant" evidence, not only intentionally but also inadvertently, mistake, ignorance, carelessness, or even just pure chance.

      This combined with the availability of convenient, massive databases open for fishing expeditions skews the whole basic assumption from being one of innocence to "presumed guilty until the database says no". Just in case anyone want to argue that point, try answer the question "why are you looking in the database if you don't think anyone in there might be a 'person of interest', i.e some kind of suspect?".

  21. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, i am sure this guy is "a scientists" and not "a troll".

    Please refer to occam's razor.

  22. Plausible deniability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I publish my DNA code in the web then anyone can synthetize the parts used in the basic police dna tests and sprad them around. What is the value of DNA evidence against me after that?

    1. Re:Plausible deniability? by Calydor · · Score: 2

      Do tell us more about this synthesized sperm you ejaculate into your rape victims or the synthesized skin you put under your murder victim's fingernails after scraping your real skin out.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:Plausible deniability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I've read of unintentional contamination problems with DNA evidence. I'm afraid that in the near future the DNA contamination will be intentional and comes in the form of a spray can carried by the criminals. I would not want to be the "usual suspect" whose DNA is used for this purpose.

      "Where were you on 23th January 2019? DNA evidence says you are guilty of this crime. Prove that you are innocent or go to prison."

    3. Re:Plausible deniability? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      If you look at the situation in the story, it wouldn't be enough to have generic "usual suspects," you'd need DNA from somebody who was near to the crime.

      The amount of preparation and opsec involved doesn't seem realistic. If somebody was that good at operations, you wouldn't even know a crime had happened for sure, you'd just have a missing persons report.

      Luckily, very few violent crimes are well-planned, and very few violent criminals are good at operations.

      That said, it probably already happens at the nation-state actor level.

  23. Remind me why this is bad? by DalM · · Score: 1

    This is bad because too many slashdot'ers smoke marijuana which is known to cause irrational paranoia.

    Look guys. If the big bad gov'ment is going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you for some reason, then they are just going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you whether you take a commercial DNA test or not. Further, while these consumer level tests can help law enforcement find and narrow down suspects, they aren't going to be admissible in court. Any defense lawyer worth their paycheck would get them thrown. What WOULD happen is that law enforcement would use the public or commercial databases to find or narrow down suspects. Then they would get a warrant to collect a DNA sample under chain-of-custody and run a proper test at an accredited forensics laboratory. Assuming YOU DIDN'T DO THE CRIME, the cops using DNA databases is more likey to clear you from the suspect list than it is to put you on it.

    Similarly, if an insurance company is going to use genetic profiling to decide who to raise rates on, then they aren't going to rely on your test from Ancestry.com. They are just going to make you take one of their tests. (Which is illegal, but what ever.)

    1. Re:Remind me why this is bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the overt actions that will be the problem, it's the lazy investigators and prosecutors that will use any DNA gathered at the scene and arrest anyone who happens to match the profile. There's a large amount of pressure on public service workers to clear these cases and get convictions. How easy is it get an arrest warrant based solely on the DNA evidence. And while you are languishing in jail awaiting trial, the prosecutor offers you a plea deal with a reduced sentence. Do you take the deal and move on with your life, or do you try to fight it and have your life destroyed in the process?

    2. Re:Remind me why this is bad? by twdorris · · Score: 1

      They are just going to make you take one of their tests. (Which is illegal, but what ever.)

      I'm with you on most of this. I'm only going to take issue with this particular part of your post. Many things that are currently legal were once illegal. Things that we would reject outright can slowly become legal in small steps over longer periods of time. That's the concern being raised.

      There's not much to be done about it, of course. We're a reactionary society so there's little chance any real attention will be given to a blossoming issue until it finally blows up and actually causes a problem. It just rubs me wrong when someone dismisses what could clearly become a valid concern if we follow the logical progression of events based solely on the fact that it's not *currently* a concern.

    3. Re:Remind me why this is bad? by PPH · · Score: 1

      There's a large amount of pressure on public service workers to clear these cases and get convictions.

      Not really. It took them 25 years to come up with a name on this one. Besides, get it wrong and your small Alaska town will risk a very expensive lawsuit.

      How easy is it get an arrest warrant based solely on the DNA evidence.

      Pretty easy. As others have pointed out, once you have a name and reasonable suspicion based on other evidence (like opportunity to commit the crime), you obtain a search warrant under the rules of evidence. You don't use the genealogical service sample. From that point on, a positive DNA match is pretty damning.

      Keep in mind that they took 25 years and found their suspect all the way across the USA. If this had been a case of dragging in the usual suspects and charging one to clear the case quickly, this would have been over 24.5 years ago.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Remind me why this is bad? by DalM · · Score: 1

      That may be true, but even if it later becomes legal then your insurance isn't going to use your test from Ancestry.com. They are going to make you take a new one.

    5. Re:Remind me why this is bad? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Stop blaming the weed, man.

      I'm high as fuck and they sound like paranoid nutters to me, too.

      Now I'm gonna go stuff my face with Freedom Fries, because munchies.

      Then I'm gonna come back and throw frozen peaches at morons.

      The real risk is as you allude; the insurance companies might someday be allowed to force you to take it. I doubt nutters shouting about the ebil gubermint are going to notice or stop that from happening, either. lol

    6. Re:Remind me why this is bad? by DalM · · Score: 1

      My point on the insurance companies doing it is less that it can't happen ever and more that if it DOES happen then they will force you to do it regardless whether or not you had previously taken a test through a consumer service. So, you might as well have fun with your DNA now. If and when it's used against you in the future it won't matter that you did it a few years before.

      Honestly, the best reason to not take one is if you are a minority and are concerned about genocide risks, like Native Americans. But even then, genocide isn't exactly a new thing and lots of really bad people were perfectly able to do terrible things long before DNA was discovered. So, even that fear is pointless.

      The point is bad people who are going to bad things are going to do bad things with or without your DNA test. So you might as well take the test and have fun with it now.

  24. Reverse Hanlon's Razor by itsdapead · · Score: 1

    Look guys. If the big bad gov'ment is going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you for some reason, then they are just going to fake evidence to pin a murder on you whether you take a commercial DNA test or not.

    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence... Normally, that's the conspiracy theorist's fallacy, but you've found a reverse application: the real concern here is not that The Man is out to get you personally, but the authorities' capacity for incompetence and misunderstanding of statistical significance, and their disinclination to question anything that seems to offer an easy solution.

    Actually falsifying evidence involves people in power taking a real risk. Buying the snake oil because we don't yet require politicians, lawyers or police to have any scientific education doesn't seem to have any consequences.

    Compare two random samples of DNA and maybe the chances of an accidental match are 1:100,000,000 - but search for a DNA match in a database of 100,000,000 people and its a near certainty that you'll find an accidental match (but still quote the 100,000,000 figure to the jury)... Then fail to ask whether that 1:100,000,000 is just the theoretical chance of two "fingerprints" matching, or if it factors in experimental error, cross contamination etc. and crowd-source your database from "low stakes" ancestry tests that might not work to forensic standards, and present it all to a jury that have watched way too much CSI:New York... and even if justice does prevail and the falsely accused walks free, by the time the wheels of justice have ground to a conclusion, you've already destroyed their family and career (oh, and probably re-traumatised the victims, into the bargain). BTW: can you remember where you were and what you were doing this day in 1993?

    Its like the use of face-recognition and crime-prediction technology by the police - they probably have great potential value when used properly for screening and prioritising, but the potential for abuse is immense - whether its treating a match as "proof" because tfalse positives are politically inconvenient when he force paid $1.5m for the technology, or walking into one of the huge, gaping "confirmation bias" traps that these technologies present and getting a false proof of their efficiency.

    NB: are statistics and the scientific method on the compulsory curriculum at law school yet?

    --
    In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    1. Re:Reverse Hanlon's Razor by DalM · · Score: 1

      Having a DNA sample compared to a public or private DNA database you are in is far more likely to scratch you OFF the list of suspects than it is to put you on it falsely (assuming you didn't do the crime.) Cops being able to compare DNA samples collected at crime scenes to databases of millions and millions of people is a good thing for crime investigators and will lead to FEWER bad convictions. This is a good thing, guys!

      And you are really, really, really woefully wrong with you 1 in 100,000,000 chance of a false positive match. Ancestry, for example, tests your DNA in over 600,000 locations. Those locations are specifically chosen because they are of greatest interest in genealogy matching, they aren't wasted on the 99.999% of the DNA locations we all share in common. That means, it's not a 1:100,000,000 chance of an accidental exact match. Unless you have a clone or an identical twin walking around, the chance of an accidental exact match is 1:4^600,000.

  25. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Calydor · · Score: 1

    Or maybe, just maybe, not everyone reads every comment to every article.

    I have no idea what's so special about San Jose, Palo Alto? Is Trump from there? Is that what the joke is about?

    --
    -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
  26. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TDS much?? Not everything is about Trump. Stop letting him take your brain over. Think for yourself.

  27. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >_ OP here, we have envisioned that possibility but subject samples don't match anything we have seen before.

    You mean the guy has other species genes?

    Could such genes be from Neanderthal, Denisovan or other? -- somehow emerged in that individual?

    BTW, this would not be some kind of joke about someone fairly well known in Palo Alto but not in the rest of the world, would it? Because that would lower this site to new "heights"...

  28. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bruce is only posting because he's here refreshing his blogspam.

  29. There's a reason J Edgar Hoover... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was named after a vacuum cleaner... Because he'd suck up all the evidence of his illegal crossdressing affairs... then keep enough evidence on them to make sure they would never spill his beans :)

  30. Random DNA spray? by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

    I've read of unintentional contamination problems with DNA evidence. I'm afraid that in the near future the DNA contamination will be intentional and comes in the form of a spray can carried by the criminals. I would not want to be the "usual suspect" whose DNA is used for this purpose.

    "Where were you on 23th January 2019? DNA evidence says you are guilty of this crime. Prove that you are innocent or go to prison."

    I think this idea actually has potential..........

    1. Re:Random DNA spray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Commercial DNA spray products are already in use for tagging criminals during a robbery. I do not see a big difference between these products and a spray can filled with the DNA equivalent of random noise. It would work against the standard marker locations used in current DNA identification databases but could be defeated by using nonstandard marker locations.

      This would shift the balance a little towards the rights of an individual. Testing for nonstandard marker locations requires a real suspect and traditional police work to find him or her instead of matching evidence against a database. If any set of nonstandard locations becomes a new de facto standard then this would be added into the random DNA spray v 2.0.

  31. PCR by senileoldfart · · Score: 1

    For a couple hundred bucks, I could acquire a used PCR Thermocycler and the necessary reagents to amplify the DNA from a single hair bulb or the rim of a coffee cup. Could this be used to frame someone for a crime he didn't commit? Would a jury find this to be anything less than slam-dunk evidence of guilt?

  32. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by plopez · · Score: 1

    Let's get Molder and Scully on it.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  33. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by plopez · · Score: 1

    Every day is April Fool's day on the inter web.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  34. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    Just because he has a lot of bullies doesn't mean he isn't also well-liked.

    I'd choose ten of him over one of his bullies, personally.

  35. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Yeah that's true

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  36. Re:OTOH Incompetence and malice are independant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dimensions of the possibility space; consider for instance the (in)famous practice of

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

    also, possibly...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment

    it often seems that those with "power" of whatever sort are held to a LOWER standard of behavior.

  37. Re: I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put your money where your mouth is then!

    Encourage him! Go to his YouTube channel, click on his Amazon links and please buy something!

    Cdreimer left /. after 30+ years and posted 100+ videos in 2018. His trolls are still butthurt about this.

    The thing to do for him: post more videos :)

  38. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by dasunt · · Score: 1

    I work extensively in the DNA field and I would like to share a finding here.

    We came across a subject that has no apparent link to its sibling as far as we can tell. This puzzles us a lot. Maybe his genes come from many generations ago and they have skipped several generations before manifesting themselves.

    By working in the DNA field, do you mean you sweep the floor of the lab?

    Because that's poor reasoning. Genes don't "skip" generations and magically reappear. A child has roughly a 50% chance of sharing a SNP with their sibling. Which means the odds of one child not sharing any DNA in a DNA test is roughly 1-(.5^(snips tested)). (It gets more complicated, that's why I say "roughly".)

    What's far more likely is lab error, or one of the siblings is biologically unrelated to another, such as adoption.

  39. Re:I work extensively in the DNA field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By working in the DNA field, do you mean you sweep the floor of the lab?

    You are most probably right because last time I heard of him, he was sweeping the IT closet floor.

  40. Donated my DNA data to GedMatch by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    After reading about the "Golden State Killer" being found through a GedMatch search, I uploaded my own DNA raw data to the site. If my DNA can help track down a cold case, I want to do whatever I can to help!

    In most parts of the US, the police are still the good guys.