SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Orange County Register reports:
[...] one of California's most prolific serial killers and rapists was caught by using online genealogical sites to find a DNA match, prosecutors said Thursday. Investigators compared the DNA collected from a crime scene of the Golden State Killer to online genetic profiles and found a match: a relative of the man police have identified as [the suspect, who was arrested.]
[...] Authorities didn't give the name of the site, one of many, like Ancestry and 23andMe, that allow people to send in their DNA and find long-lost relatives. [...] Contacted Friday, representatives of both Ancestry and 23andMe.com said the sites weren't involved in the case.
takyon: Also at NYT, The Sacramento Bee, NPR, and CNN, which added:
When police announced they had finally caught the Golden State Killer, Bruce Harrington had a simple message for the politicians who fought his tireless efforts to expand the California's criminal offender DNA database. "You were wrong," he said.
Harrington, whose brother and sister-in-law were killed in 1980, spent years in front of public safety committees, pleading with them to embrace DNA technology. "And frankly I ran into a buzz saw of opposition."
Many state elected officials and rights groups fiercely opposed any attempt by the state to expand its DNA collection database. Critics cited the privacy rights of people in police custody and questioned the constitutionality of allowing the state to gather DNA samples without evidence of guilt.
In 2004, California voters passed Proposition 69, known as the "DNA Fingerprint, Unsolved Crime and Innocence Protection Act." It gave the state broader powers to collect DNA. Now, it could get samples from anyone not just convicted of a felony, but even arrested for one. In some cases, authorities could also collect DNA from misdemeanor arrests.
Say goodbye to your genetic privacy. We have killers to catch.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 27 2018, @03:27PM (4 children)
Alleged. Alleged serial killer.
I agree with you in principle, but every time people jump to the crime like it's decided, we reduce the ability for our court system to do its job. Let's please not try people for murder in the court of public opinion. There's no direct DNA evidence here, and as you say DNA is not foolproof.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday April 27 2018, @03:38PM
But, the court of public opinion is the only court in which I have a voice! What are you, a heretic?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 27 2018, @05:27PM
I thought there was. They got a clue to a person via the DNA submission, then searched his relatives' garbage to find DNA samples until they got a match.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday April 27 2018, @06:00PM (1 child)
You need to read more closely.
He raped and murdered people for decades. Plenty of samples from plenty of crime scenes all pointing to one source.
Once they got it narrowed down to him, they followed him around till he discarded something with his DNA on it. BANG: Direct DNA Evidence.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 28 2018, @01:53AM
Allegedly.