U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-15-2018, 05:06 PM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,698 posts, read 20,813,481 times
Reputation: 9234

Advertisements

Had I not done genealogy DNA testing it would be easy to find me if I committed a crime. An aunt on mom's side and 1st cousin on dad's side have also taken the test.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2018, 09:42 AM
 
Location: NJ
9,931 posts, read 20,768,948 times
Reputation: 7497
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post
If it's available to the public, it's available to law enforcement. There is nothing in their Law Enforcement Guide that preludes it: https://www.familytreedna.com/legal/...orcement-guide

Court orders or warrants are only necessary for law enforcement to obtain information not available to the public on those site, like personal details like one's phone number or address (because those are private at FTDNA).

It's the same with any database that is open and available to the public - Gedmatch, MyHeritageDNA, FTDNA, etc. If the public can use it/upload to it, so can law enforcement (AncestryDNA and 23andMe are different, they are not public, because no one can upload DNA files from other sources, you must take their test, with their sample kit to be in their database). That's why I don't understand the outrage and fear surrounding this whole thing - law enforcement did not break the law by uploading suspect DNA to public databases. People don't get outraged or fearful when police use the phone book to find someone's contact information... because it's a public database that people have opted into. Same goes for these public DNA databases. It's not law enforcement's fault if some people didn't realize this.
Colleen told me they can not use FTDNA or My Heritage because they're private companies.

She did tell me there is a public Y-DNA database but she hasn't answered where yet. She's been majorly busy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2018, 02:10 PM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
8,519 posts, read 13,229,372 times
Reputation: 10951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roselvr View Post
Colleen told me they can not use FTDNA or My Heritage because they're private companies.
They might have policies against it, but a private company is just one that is owned privately, meaning it's not owned by the government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_held_company

So gedmatch is a private company too. But private companies are entitled to set whatever policies they wish, and any one of them can prohibit law enforcement from uploading suspect/victim DNA.

MyHeritage does indeed have a policy against it: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, using the DNA Services for law enforcement purposes, forensic examinations, criminal investigations and/or similar purposes, without a court order and without prior explicit written permission from MyHeritage, is strictly prohibited. It is our policy to resist law enforcement inquiries to protect the privacy of our customers."

https://www.myheritage.com/FP/Compan...rms_conditions

Apparently FTDNA do also have this comment in their TOS - I do not know how recently this was added: "You agree to not use the Services for any law enforcement purposes, forensic examinations, criminal investigations, and/or similar purposes without the required legal documentation and written permission from FamilyTreeDNA;"

https://www.familytreedna.com/legal/terms-of-service

So MyHeritage and FTDNA have chosen to prohibit it, but Gedmatch have chosen not to. Nothing to really do with being a private company - it's just different policies the owners have chosen. And those policies can theoretically change any time. Of course, so too can a companies decision to allow or not allow uploads to begin with, but I think it's unlikely AncestryDNA in particular will ever allow that, considering they already have the biggest database by far of over 10 million.

Quote:
She did tell me there is a public Y-DNA database but she hasn't answered where yet. She's been majorly busy.
https://isogg.org/wiki/DNA_databases#Y-DNA_databases - I think Ysearch was the big one but it closed down in May.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2018, 05:10 AM
 
Location: NJ
9,931 posts, read 20,768,948 times
Reputation: 7497
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post
They might have policies against it, but a private company is just one that is owned privately, meaning it's not owned by the government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_held_company

So gedmatch is a private company too. But private companies are entitled to set whatever policies they wish, and any one of them can prohibit law enforcement from uploading suspect/victim DNA.

MyHeritage does indeed have a policy against it: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, using the DNA Services for law enforcement purposes, forensic examinations, criminal investigations and/or similar purposes, without a court order and without prior explicit written permission from MyHeritage, is strictly prohibited. It is our policy to resist law enforcement inquiries to protect the privacy of our customers."

https://www.myheritage.com/FP/Compan...rms_conditions

Apparently FTDNA do also have this comment in their TOS - I do not know how recently this was added: "You agree to not use the Services for any law enforcement purposes, forensic examinations, criminal investigations, and/or similar purposes without the required legal documentation and written permission from FamilyTreeDNA;"

https://www.familytreedna.com/legal/terms-of-service

So MyHeritage and FTDNA have chosen to prohibit it, but Gedmatch have chosen not to. Nothing to really do with being a private company - it's just different policies the owners have chosen. And those policies can theoretically change any time. Of course, so too can a companies decision to allow or not allow uploads to begin with, but I think it's unlikely AncestryDNA in particular will ever allow that, considering they already have the biggest database by far of over 10 million.



https://isogg.org/wiki/DNA_databases#Y-DNA_databases - I think Ysearch was the big one but it closed down in May.
I'll post when she gets back to me because now I'm curious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2019, 09:36 AM
Status: "Spring is coming..." (set 3 days ago)
 
8,177 posts, read 10,481,263 times
Reputation: 12060
HLN is broadcasting another few episodes about this case, tonight and tomorrow. One episode is about the DNA technique they used/accessed to catch him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:36 AM
 
15 posts, read 96 times
Reputation: 26
Maybe D.B. Cooper will be solved this way - LOL( actually they supposedly only have a partial DNA profile and they are not sure it belongs to the suspected hijacker)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:12 AM
 
Location: NJ
9,931 posts, read 20,768,948 times
Reputation: 7497
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostOfAndrewJackson View Post
Maybe D.B. Cooper will be solved this way - LOL( actually they supposedly only have a partial DNA profile and they are not sure it belongs to the suspected hijacker)
I haven't read that they have DNA from it yet but I'll be shocked if they don't.

New Evidence Emerges In D.B. Cooper Case - Examination Of His Tie Finds Unique Particles Embedded In The Fabric Wed, Jan 18, 2017
Quote:
The Citizen Sleuths say they used an electron microscope to examine the JCPenney clip-on tie worn by the hijacker, and they have identified some 100,000 particles embedded in the fabric, including titanium, Cerium, Sulfide and Strontium.

...evidence has led some to speculate that the man who called himself Dan "D.B." Cooper may have worked as a manager or engineer is a facility where high-tech manufacturing was taking place. One of those at the time was Boeing, which used those elements in the Supersonic Transport plane project, though they can also be found where items such as cathode-ray tubes are produced

Scientists say they may have new evidence in D.B. Cooper case Published 11:53 p.m. ET Jan. 13, 2017
Quote:
Kaye said the elements were rarely used in 1971, during the time of Cooper’s daring leap with a parachute from the passenger jet.

One place they were being used was for Boeing’s high-tech supersonic transport plane, which was being developed with government funding in the 1960s and 1970s.

Kaye wonders if Cooper could have been a Boeing employee or a contractor who wore the tie to work.

..“The tie went with him into these manufacturing environments, for sure, so he was not one of the people running these (manufacturing machines). He was either an engineer or a manager in one of the plants,” Kaye said.

Kaye says Boeing was developing cutting edge monitors, like radar screens, that used some of the elements found on the tie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:02 AM
 
15 posts, read 96 times
Reputation: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roselvr View Post
I haven't read that they have DNA from it yet but I'll be shocked if they don't.
They have DNA(partial) from the tie (since he was smart enough to take the cigarettes), though they cannot prove it is his and have used it to exclude suspects.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:53 AM
 
Location: NJ
9,931 posts, read 20,768,948 times
Reputation: 7497
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostOfAndrewJackson View Post
They have DNA(partial) from the tie (since he was smart enough to take the cigarettes), though they cannot prove it is his and have used it to exclude suspects.
Found an article from 2011.

D.B. Cooper DNA Results: 'Not A Match'


Quote:
The FBI said the DNA found on the hijacker's clip-on tie and DNA taken from the daughter of potential suspect Lynn D. Cooper is "not a match." However, FBI Special Agent Fred Gutt said, "That doesn't suggest that the current lead is a dead end."

...FBI Special Agent Fred Gutt told ABC News, "It's possible that the DNA sample taken off the tie was not from the hijacker. There are questions about the tie.It may have been borrowed, or purchased used. The DNA may be from someone else," Gutt said. Gutt also said, "The tie had two small DNA samples, and one large sample lifted off in 2000-2001. It's difficult to draw firm conclusions from these samples."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top