What is stopping LE from submitting DNA to Ancestry.com?

[orly57]

Apr 18, 2018 20:30:58 GMT eastcoast2 said:

Apr 18, 2018 20:00:55 GMT mustangman said:

The post I commented on didn't say anything about Ancestry.com.  I pasted it below.  I only said that the Grim Sleeper was matched by his DNA (lawfully acquired) to a familiar relative (his son) and no privacy rights were violated.  Neither orly57 or I made any inaccurate statements or did me mention Ancestry.com.   Lets be accurate...   

--------------------------------------------------------------
orly57 Avatar

16 hours ago orly57 said:
Here's the thing. In order to suppress evidence, the defendant must have "standing" in the motion. In other words, he must establish that HIS rights were violated. They already have EARONS' DNA. They aren't obtaining HIS DNA unlawfully. And if they happen to match the DNA to, say, EARONS' first cousin, then it would be HIS COUSIN who may have a claim, but not EARONS. I honestly think that unless they matched EARONS DIRECTLY, then EARONS HAS ZERO STANDING in a suppression motion of this nature.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This thread is titled "what is stopping LE from submitting DNA to ancestry.com", not why doesn't LE check their database for a familial match. Orly57 does not mention which database the match occurred in. If it was the State of California database (which it was), then it creates confusion by putting it in this thread, and then coupling it with a comment that "this is how the grim sleeper was identified". You have left the reader with the impression that a database was used outside of the jurisdiction of the state of CA. and a familial match was discovered, which is not the case.

What? I didn't mention which database anything occurred in. I was t even talking about a previous case. I'm giving my legal opinion as a criminal trial attorney of 15 years. I was responding to someone who wrote that if there was a hit on Ancestry, that the evidence could get thrown out. My point was that EAR would have no standing to suppress a match of, say for example, a second cousin who once sent DNA to Ancestry. We already lawfully have his DNA. EARON's rights aren't being violated in that hypothetical, and the search or intrusion is not upon EAR. Therefore he would have no standing to argue this in a suppression hearing.

[kamose]

Does anybody know what genetic markers the various ancestry companies use? I have seen a lot of talk here about why LE cannot submit EAR/ONS's DNA and so forth, but it would also depend on which markers are being used. If each company has a different and proprietary set, that could be an issue. Also, from what I understand, the amount of DNA remaining for testing if very limited. They would have to be very certain the reward would be worth the risk for submitting it.

[mustangman]

Apr 19, 2018 2:49:17 GMT dukemantee said:

Apr 19, 2018 1:57:01 GMT leonidis said:

amp.theguardian.com/film/2018/apr/13/i-am-evidence-the-shocking-film-on-the-truth-about-untested-kits?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true

Just imagine what these untested rape kits throughout the United States might have to offer? I cannot believe that they are not a priority for LE.

There was a backlog of close to 50,000 rape kits in Detroit and by the time they got through I think 20,000, they found 800 serial rapists at work. 

It was a little more than 11,600 rape kits found in an abandoned Detroit police facility nearly a decade ago (2009).  As a result of the processing of these kits, 273 cases are being investigated, 130 rapists have been convicted and 818 serial sex offenders have been identified. The Detroit tests have also revealed that the rapists have committed rapes and other crimes in 40 states.  Recently, North Carolina reported 15,000 rape kits in the state had yet to be tested.

Nationwide, more than 200,000 rape kits are untested.

Way too many creeps still out there, walking the streets, able to commit these crimes, they should've been locked up years ago.  Just imagine if EAR had started his attacks again and his DNA is in one of those untested kits?  You would think that with all the kits not tested someone in government would see the need for more testing facilities, I mean we've only been using DNA to solve crimes for what, 30+ years now?  Why aren't there enough places to test the samples?  It's a shame we have to put hope in a match thru Ancestry.com etc...   You are probably right leonidis, with hundreds of thousands of untested rape kits, some over a decade old found abandoned, LE isn't looking at this type of crime as a priority. 
 

[goleta123]

Here is a thread on children adopted in the US occupied zone of Germany after WII, often by military and air force families.
adoption.com/forums/thread/324259/looking-for-birth-mother-in-germany/
If the DNA evidence mentioned in this thread is correct, finding a list of young male children adopted and naturalized in USA (1945-mid1950s) would be a good line of research.

[tricksea]

I’ve been using Ancestry, 23andme and 2 other similar services on and off for over a decade.

You have to submit dna via your own saliva, it takes probably 5 minutes of spitting to get the quantity they want. Today, there is no other way to get dna in to their database. There is no creating a fake account and uploading the dna raw data file.

Here is a story about one time LE found a loophole.

www.cbsnews.com/news/how-safe-is-your-dna-familal-search-privacy-rights/


One thing I can do is get a raw data file of my dna and upload it to other companies that provide genetic review services. The raw data is not human readable, even with a cross reference it is extremely challenging to understand.

Also it is the genotyping technology that is not the same. Very discouraging but LE and Ancestry just don’t use the same technology. I have suggested in other posts, wouldn’t it be nice if we knew what ELSE could be gleaned from his DNA? Does he have genetic markers for any diseases like Parkinson’s? Say he has one or more of those markers, His advancing age would mean he’s likely showing signs. The raw data I get from 23and me could get you that answer but I’m not sure believe the report that LE has can. This is just an example, pure speculation on my part, but there is a lot that DNA can tell about a person.

[chainsawjames]

Apr 18, 2018 15:17:19 GMT walter said:

Can someone explain to me exactly what the detective in MM's Gone in the Dark did then that made him mistakenly feel he had a match? He kept submitting the DNA string to a database to look for any returns and got absolutely nothing at all... not even hints of relatives. Then one day he got a dead perfect match, thought he had the guy, and then realized another LE agent had actually entered the EARs DNA into the database (?) This is where I got a little confused because I listened to it through Audible while driving and was half listening at the time. Because it's not in print, I can't easily find the section again.

Did one LE agent actually submit it into the data base and the other just kept manually running the string against the database? How did the one LE who entered it not know what was going on and yet had access to the DNA string?

Thanks.

Yes. I’ve always wondered if they could somehow use this to get a familial dna match.

[eastcoast2]

In reading this thread and not being any type of expert in DNA matching technology, it seems to be that LE has a DNA profile for EAR. I understand that different database companies my use different technologies, but at the end of the day, isn't a DNA profile a DNA profile. Assuming it is legal for LE to submit a DNA profile to all of these companies, which I am sensing it may be, in that, when someone submits their DNA, and someone later matches it (partially), the company may tell the 2nd person that there was a partial match. In other words, by submitting your DNA you allow for subsequent matches . Using this line of thinking, I would be all for getting an EAR DNA sample into everyone of these databases and letting it rip. I originally was on the side that said this was unconstitutional, but now I'm not so sure.

[tricksea]

Apr 21, 2018 14:33:50 GMT eastcoast2 said:

In reading this thread and not being any type of expert in DNA matching technology, it seems to be that LE has a DNA profile for EAR. I understand that different database companies my use different technologies, but at the end of the day, isn't a DNA profile a DNA profile. Assuming it is legal for LE to submit a DNA profile to all of these companies, which I am sensing it may be, in that, when someone submits their DNA, and someone later matches it (partially), the company may tell the 2nd person that there was a partial match. In other words, by submitting your DNA you allow for subsequent matches . Using this line of thinking, I would be all for getting an EAR DNA sample into everyone of these databases and letting it rip. I originally was on the side that said this was unconstitutional, but now I'm not so sure.

While I don’t totally know the answer to the “What was MM doing with the DNA profile?”...I suspect there is a reason this is left intentionally vague in the book. Just look in to the privacy rules, corporate positions and legalities of allowing LE having access to these databases. It’s a really complicated question. 

When you look at the string of data that is the DNA of GSK provided in the book, it looks nothing like what my raw DNA profile looks like from 23andme. I’m completely speculating here but I think this is the outcome of the fact that different genotyping technologies are being used by LE and the commercial DNA services. That begs the question, so OK is there a way for anybody to get a “like for like” profile? Maybe it’s already been done.

Ive said this more than once, if I could get an hour with a geneticist who can explain this to me, I’d be thrilled. Anybody on here a geneticist? 🙂

[eastcoast2]

Apr 21, 2018 15:19:04 GMT tricksea said:

Apr 21, 2018 14:33:50 GMT eastcoast2 said:

In reading this thread and not being any type of expert in DNA matching technology, it seems to be that LE has a DNA profile for EAR. I understand that different database companies my use different technologies, but at the end of the day, isn't a DNA profile a DNA profile. Assuming it is legal for LE to submit a DNA profile to all of these companies, which I am sensing it may be, in that, when someone submits their DNA, and someone later matches it (partially), the company may tell the 2nd person that there was a partial match. In other words, by submitting your DNA you allow for subsequent matches . Using this line of thinking, I would be all for getting an EAR DNA sample into everyone of these databases and letting it rip. I originally was on the side that said this was unconstitutional, but now I'm not so sure.

While I don’t totally know the answer to the “What was MM doing with the DNA profile?”...I suspect there is a reason this is left intentionally vague in the book. Just look in to the privacy rules, corporate positions and legalities of allowing LE having access to these databases. It’s a really complicated question. 

When you look at the string of data that is the DNA of GSK provided in the book, it looks nothing like what my raw DNA profile looks like from 23andme. I’m completely speculating here but I think this is the outcome of the fact that different genotyping technologies are being used by LE and the commercial DNA services. That begs the question, so OK is there a way for anybody to get a “like for like” profile? Maybe it’s already been done.

Ive said this more than once, if I could get an hour with a geneticist who can explain this to me, I’d be thrilled. Anybody on here a geneticist? 🙂

Agreed. It would be wonderful if someone who truly understood DNA could give an explanation of how it works, for laymen. Also, I just re-watched episode 5, and stopped it every time a newspaper article appeared, so I could read what I could of it. It appears that even though California allows for a familial match using DNA (against their database , not a private database), it has to be sanctioned by the courts as it has to pose an imminent danger to the public, ie the grim sleeper case. Also , as was stated, it appears technology is ahead of the courts (as is often the case) . Someone mentions that the use of matches against private databases is something that the courts are still trying to figure out. My position is this. If you submit your DNA today, and samples that are submitted after yours are allowed to be matched up with yours, then you submitted with an expectation that this might happen. It doesn't say only non-criminal DNA will be matched against yours. However, once the match takes place, and if there is a potential or partial match, that's where it gets stickily. I'm guessing that if I submitted today, and the results came back saying I have relatives in Europe, it would not give me their names (anyone who knows better, please correct me). It might just say I have relatives there. So the question would be, how does LE get the names of any possible matches. Does anyone know for sure what you agree to when you submit your DNA to one of these sites ?

[tricksea]

Apr 21, 2018 15:39:56 GMT eastcoast2 said:

Apr 21, 2018 15:19:04 GMT tricksea said:

While I don’t totally know the answer to the “What was MM doing with the DNA profile?”...I suspect there is a reason this is left intentionally vague in the book. Just look in to the privacy rules, corporate positions and legalities of allowing LE having access to these databases. It’s a really complicated question. 

When you look at the string of data that is the DNA of GSK provided in the book, it looks nothing like what my raw DNA profile looks like from 23andme. I’m completely speculating here but I think this is the outcome of the fact that different genotyping technologies are being used by LE and the commercial DNA services. That begs the question, so OK is there a way for anybody to get a “like for like” profile? Maybe it’s already been done.

Ive said this more than once, if I could get an hour with a geneticist who can explain this to me, I’d be thrilled. Anybody on here a geneticist? 🙂

Agreed. It would be wonderful if someone who truly understood DNA could give an explanation of how it works, for laymen. Also, I just re-watched episode 5, and stopped it every time a newspaper article appeared, so I could read what I could of it. It appears that even though California allows for a familial match using DNA (against their database , not a private database), it has to be sanctioned by the courts as it has to pose an imminent danger to the public, ie the grim sleeper case. Also , as was stated, it appears technology is ahead of the courts (as is often the case) . Someone mentions that the use of matches against private databases is something that the courts are still trying to figure out. My position is this. If you submit your DNA today, and samples that are submitted after yours are allowed to be matched up with yours, then you submitted with an expectation that this might happen. It doesn't say only non-criminal DNA will be matched against yours. However, once the match takes place, and if there is a potential or partial match, that's where it gets stickily. I'm guessing that if I submitted today, and the results came back saying I have relatives in Europe, it would not give me their names (anyone who knows better, please correct me). It might just say I have relatives there. So the question would be, how does LE get the names of any possible matches. Does anyone know for sure what you agree to when you submit your DNA to one of these sites ?

Long time user of Ancestry and 23andme. In answer to your question about "...it would not give me their names", it does. To equate this to something that you are probably familiar with, Facebook, it depends on how "public or private" the person has made their data. So, say you have a name and you plug it in to Facebook, and that person has made their entire profile "public", you can see all of their friends, all of those friends pictures and quickly you can easily get separated from the individual who chose to make THEIR data public. Same goes on Ancestry. If you are matched via DNA with a person who has elected to make all of their data public, with just a couple of clicks, you can get to the family tree of that person and start digging through names of people that probably have no idea their data is just out there like that. While some people may balk at this, it really isn't all that different from doing your own research in to these publicly available data sources. It's just consolidated in one nice user interface. One thing that is particularly useful is the City Directories, Newspapers.com, school yearbooks and other archival data sources that allow you to cross reference and really build a story about a particular person if you are so inclined. Everybody has different purposes beyond the traditional uses of this, which is "building a family tree". You can research any name, just like Facebook, they don't have to be related to you via DNA, family tree, or otherwise. 

[eastcoast2]

Thank You tricksea. What you wrote makes sense, and I can all begin to see all the legal issues related. If someone marks themselves as 100% public, then they have basically given up any expectation of privacy, but if someone marks themselves as private, and EAR's DNA has a partial match to them, then what happens ? Let's say EAR himself submitted his DNA to ancestry.com, and they run the DNA from the rapes thru ancestry, and they get a full hit. But EAR has marked himself as private. I would say LE would have to stop. Or maybe they could not use the EAR DNA submitted to ancestry.com by EAR in the match process. Yes a legal Pandora's box.

[soxie]

Apr 17, 2018 20:09:22 GMT jackniferuby said:

Here is some info that I was given by a Detective Sanders of the Irvine county Sherriffs dept. He has been working the case for quite a while. I initially spoke with him regarding the submission of DNA to sites such as 23, Heritage etc. I had previously left some info with the FBI but after speaking with my father in law , who is a retired US Marshall, I called the detective directly. I was suggesting the use of GEDmatch to circumnavigate the privacy issue since it’s open source and volunteered information.

Here is what I was told and where the investigation stands as of today according to LE working on the case:

* GSK’ dna has been submitted to CODIS on a regular basis with ZERO hits to date.
* GSK’s dna has recently been compared to every single available dna database currently in existence( ancestry/23&me etc) EXCEPT the one I offered. Unfortunately, that database is simply an opensource database that compiles profiles from all the others, submitted voluntarily . The only difference being that it’s information is totally PUBLIC (see the loophole there?) Investigators are currently looking into using this one as well because it uses a different marker and algorithm to determine matches. .
* Here is the big deal: there have been ZERO matches in the United States. When I say zero I mean not even an eleventh cousin twice removed.
* DNA databases are very small or non existent in other countries- but so far no hits there either.
* Through ancestry comparisons they have found a similar match of one element (this is a very simplified explanation) . This links him to a man over 100 years ago who lived in another country (believed Germany) There is a surname associated.
* Because there are zero matches in the US, they firmly believe that he was adopted from another country and brought here. (Surname useless)

So, all this being said ,what it means is that GSK was brought here from another country, his biological parents are likely dead as are any other siblings. It also means that he has never had any children of his own. It is very unlikely that he was ever married or had any sort of long term relationship that could have even produced offspring ,by accident or on purpose.


This is the person we are looking for now and I can honestly say that it eliminates every single POI I have ever seen mentioned on FB groups or even the Proboards.

I’m refocusing my efforts and will be keeping in contact with the detective.

I have lots of questions about this!!!! 
Here a some...
1. How can they test EARONS DNA into a place like ancestry, 23 and me...with out his saliva?
2. What year was this submitted? Will it continue to check daily on everyone who  submitts theirs? Or do you have to resubmit? If it hasn't been check for a while maybe someone has submitted theirs that match?
3. Maybe at the time EARONS was submitted no family members had submitted theirs?
4. Instead of being adopted,could it have been that Maybe his parents were only children and so was he?
5. Which site was his DNA submitted in... Ancestry, 23&me...etc...?
6. In order to find a match wouldn't you have to submit EARONS DNA in to ALL of them? 
7. Is there a chart that shows his line that we can all see, Like, 75% German,10% Ukraine 5% etc....?

I have no problem protecting law abiding citizens, but when a criminal breaks the law,a gives up those rights to be protected!!! If EARONS left his DNA is in the hand's of LE then it should be theirs to do with what they need to to protect the citizens!!!!

[soxie]

***Have no idea where that mad face came from at the end of # 6, but ok...lol

[tricksea]

Apr 21, 2018 16:23:32 GMT eastcoast2 said:

Thank You tricksea. What you wrote makes sense, and I can all begin to see all the legal issues related. If someone marks themselves as 100% public, then they have basically given up any expectation of privacy, but if someone marks themselves as private, and EAR's DNA has a partial match to them, then what happens ? Let's say EAR himself submitted his DNA to ancestry.com, and they run the DNA from the rapes thru ancestry, and they get a full hit. But EAR has marked himself as private. I would say LE would have to stop. Or maybe they could not use the EAR DNA submitted to ancestry.com by EAR in the match process. Yes a legal Pandora's box.

One other thing that occurred to me....

I guess a key difference between Facebook and Ancestry is that every Facebook user has knowingly opted in to it. People you can find on Ancestry includes every person on the planet who has a paper trail.  The distinction though is that users of Ancestry also create a profile/ family tree that they then set privacy permissions on. So that profile is controlled by the user, the data sources that help build the profile are still public. On Facebook the database is only people who have opted in to Facebook. And as far as DNA getting in to Ancestry, that is 100% opt in. 

I admit I do not know how this at all works for LE. I read the fine print and corporate positions from all of these companies. It doesn't seem possible, feasible, legal or any way shape or form doable. Then you see the chapter in Michelle McNamara’s book, and comments on this site that appears to indicate that LE has in some way accessed these sites. But then others say, nope that definitely has NOT happened. I don’t know if there is a source of truth out there like Morf or Drifter who can put this one to rest.