
The Messy Consequences of the Golden State Killer Case - danso
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/10/genetic-genealogy-dna-database-criminal-investigations/599005/
======
friedegg
I wonder how long until someone creates a DNA site where you can upload your
DNA, and then get a "reward" if yours is used to locate a suspect, with
closeness of relation being worth more. The rewards could be paid for by the
money they charge the law enforcement agencies to use the database. If the
rewards were high enough, you'd probably get a lot of people signing up for
the chance to make money off their relatives. Of course, you'd need some way
to ensure people are only uploading their own DNA, but that's probably do-able
if you handle the DNA samples directly.

~~~
mc32
Ah, the gamification of citizen law enforcement. What have we come to?

~~~
friedegg
We already have rewards for help solving some crimes, this just makes it more
of a market. Participants could opt to have their rewards donated to charity.
If I knew anything about DNA, I'd probably be very tempted to work on this.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
> At one point, the site secretly allowed police to upload DNA from the scene
> of a violent assault—following a personal appeal from the detective to one
> of GEDmatch’s co-founders.

One thing with these DOJ guidelines is that they will create a 2 tier system
of justice. Ordinary victims won't be able to use these genetic databases to
try to obtain justice. However, family members and close friends of the
executives of these companies will have access to these (If the founder of the
company comes to law enforcement and says, "Here are the closest DNA matches
for the assailant of my niece." do you think law enforcement will refuse that
information?)

~~~
jlarocco
I don't think that's a big concern because law enforcement will have to refuse
the information or the case will be thrown out. They can't just go up and
present illegally obtained evidence. Even the crappiest public defenders
should catch something like that.

Parallel construction might be a possibility (though still illegal), but it
would be difficult in this situation when the criminal isn't a suspect
already.

~~~
brohee
Parallel reconstruction. Happened before, will happen again. Confidential
informant will suddenly tie the genetic match to the crime scene.

------
tareqak
Here is the thread about the same/similar topic from a different source six
days ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21086866](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21086866)
.

------
pessimizer
The Golden State Killer was a cop that didn't have his DNA taken, and was used
as a justification for cops taking your DNA.

------
Mathnerd314
It seems like it wouldn't be hard to have hospitals do DNA sequencing after
birth so that eventually everyone with a birth certificate had their DNA on
file. The data could then be used for medical research, law enforcement,
genealogy, etc.

I'm sure this would have terrible unintended consequences but I can't think of
any at the moment.

~~~
dmm
False positives. When selecting from a small pool of suspects the chance of a
false positive is negligible. If you are searching the entire population it is
no longer negligible.

False positives mean a SWAT team knocking down your door and shooting your dog
and possibly you. A false positive means your name forever associated with
horrible crimes.

Universal DNA databases are an IMMENSE increase in govt power that needs to be
matched by greater accountability and oversight.

~~~
bhl
That’s being over dramatic. DNA tests are only one component in building a
case against someone.

~~~
PeterisP
Here are some articles with examples of false convictions caused solely on DNA
test results:

[https://gizmodo.com/when-bad-dna-tests-lead-to-false-
convict...](https://gizmodo.com/when-bad-dna-tests-lead-to-false-
convictions-1797915655)
[https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/mar/09/forensics-
firm-i...](https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/mar/09/forensics-firm-
investigated-dna) [https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/forensics-gone-
wrong...](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/forensics-gone-wrong-when-
dna-snares-innocent)

That being said, there are also many false convictions where the innocent
accused people were exonerated after DNA testing became available.

------
stefan_
So many questions. How did "sexual assault" sneak in here next to homicide?
That's not a capital crime. Is the irony of having a one-person opt-in/opt-out
box entirely lost on the people running genealogy websites? How can you give
informed consent to sharing your data when the entire point of these sites is
not knowing what you discover?

And of course the biggest problem of all, which is that these sites are used
to discover _third-parties_ not using the site or consenting at all. The
article bizarrely omits this, making the whole thing seem like a cookie
consent popup.

~~~
radicalbyte
Rape (and related crimes) and Murder are both crimes which have a large
external cost and where there is a reasonable chance at repetition.

The value to society of catching the perps in these cases is large enough to
make giving police access on a case-by-case basis worth it.

~~~
mc32
And also vicious physical assaults. They can leave people injured for life.

------
RIMR
I really don't like some of the philosophies expressed in this article. The
whole "put family members in jail" bit feels like a worthless appeal to
emotion.

If your family member is a mass murderer, I really don't care if investigators
use information related to you to catch them. Even if that data is your DNA,
and it was shared contrary to your expectations.

Nobody wants to see their loved ones go to prison, but the Golden State Killer
was an absolute monster, and it's an demonstrably good thing he was caught and
faced justice.

I understand that people feel that using DNA information from genealogy
services to investigate crimes might feel like a slippery slope towards
egregious abuse (and maybe that's true), but the Golden State Killer is
definitely not an example of such abuse.

~~~
authoritarian
I don't buy this justification. It's like the people talking about mass
surveillance saying,

"I understand that people feel like unchecked government mass surveillance
might feel like a slipper slope towards egregious abuse, but it's worth it to
catch all the evil terrorists and pedophiles"

Sure the Golden State Killer was a terrible person, but I'm not willing to
just blindly trust and accept that the government should be able to access and
use whatever data they want to keep me "safe."

Personally, I fall into the "Those who trade liberty for security deserve
neither" camp

~~~
oh_sigh
The good news is - you don't have to! But I don't mind giving my DNA if it
means my mass murdering 2nd cousin might be caught.

~~~
tbyehl
How will you feel when your 2nd cousin is convicted of being a murderer based
on nothing more than shed skin cells, and your whole family believes their
alibi of being with their mother, but the jury doesn't because mothers lie for
their children and DNA transference sounds far-fetched?

That's the nightmare scenario of familial matching and government access to /
creation of DNA databases.

~~~
oh_sigh
How many people have been falsely convicted(or even justly convicted) because
their skin cells were found at the scene, with no other evidence?

~~~
tbyehl
How would we know?

Here's a story of someone who came close and probably would have been
convicted had their attorney not credibly identified a source of the
transference.

[https://www.wired.com/story/dna-transfer-framed-
murder/](https://www.wired.com/story/dna-transfer-framed-murder/)

