Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
With murder you have a dead body from which a suspect's DNA is collected. With rape you have a person who makes an allegation that usually is very difficult to prove.
|
How many rapes have you investigated?
Oh, that's right, you've never investigated a rape or sexual assault in your entire life and never will.
Rest assured, I have.
You get semen. Sometimes sexually transmitted diseases, because the rapist is infected with chlamydia, or gonorrhea, or herpes. You get pubic hair. You get other body hair. You get clothing fibers. Sometimes saliva. Sometimes teeth-marks. Sometimes you get foreign material like motor oil, lubricants like grease, or lubricants from the condom (some rapists use condoms, but you wouldn't know that), metal filings, sawdust, flour -- just a few I've come across, and sometimes in resisting, the victim picks up skin or blood from the rapist.
Sometimes there's other evidence, like finger-prints, shoe-prints or tire tracks, or tool marks or physical damage to doors or windows when the rapist forces his way into the home.
One time, I had tire-tracks, forced entry, finger-prints, a brutally beaten victim, and semen and pubic hair samples.
And you're saying it's an "alleged" rape?
People just like you are the reason many women don't report rapes.
The finger-prints came back to a man she didn't know. They had never dated, did not go to school together, did not work together, had no commonalities among family, friends, acquaintances or co-workers, and had never communicated telephonically (cell-phones weren't big back then).
He just happened to frequently drive down that road and knew a woman lived there and that her husband worked 3rd shift, so she was alone.
He confessed to that, and two other rapes. He's doing life plus 8-15 years (for the burglaries -- that was his MO to break in at night and rape).
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
And unfortunately there are many people who are casual liars, or pathological liars, or who have personality disorders, or who later recant their allegation, and whether they lie about a rape to law enforcement or later to a social worker at an adoption agency (like my birth mother) it is still a lie that in the end tragically diminishes the credibility of all people who allege rape.
|
That's a very small percentage, and, why, yes, I've investigated those, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
You missed the post where I said all rape kits should be tested using existing law enforcement DNA technology, not genealogy databases.
|
That's not how it works, and if you knew what you were talking about, you'd know that.
The DNA is tested
first, and after,
and only after, the DNA has been tested do they look at genealogy databases.
The reason to look at genealogy databases is because the identify of the DNA contributor is unknown.
By comparing the DNA contributed by the perpetrator to DNA in genealogy databases, you can identify surnames.
And that is very often where it ends.
Because once you have several surnames, you can run those surnames through RCIC/NCIC or any number of other law enforcement databases and get a list of people with those surnames, and their given names, and their arrests and convictions, and their last known address.
Now, who, among that list of people, has some relationship with the victim, or lives in the area where the crime occurred, or lives in the area where the victim lived?
It's not rocket science.
Most likely, that will be only one person. Now you do a background investigation, and if the information is sufficient, you bring them in for questioning, or if there is substantial information, execute search and arrest warrants.
However, not everyone who commits a crime has a prior criminal record, and if they don't, then law enforcement has to go back to the genealogy database and construct a family tree to either identify the individual or the closest family member and then interview them to identify the individual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
And while I'm happy they have been able to solve some of the most heinous crimes using genealogy databases, I still don't believe they should be used for that purpose.
|
If government used them to track down heirs to an estate or money owed to those people, would you be opposed to that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
I'm still undecided what to do with the many kits I manage at FTDNA for people both related and unrelated to me. I've helped several other adoptees who've shown up in my relative lists identify their parents. It has given me a great deal of satisfaction. I would hate to lose that ability by deleting kits. I've spent upwards of $1000 on testing including BigY, mtDNA, and autosomal tests. It has evolved into one of my favorite hobbies and passions. It feels unfair that they're changing the rules now to allow criminal investigations after I've been a customer for 7 years. I don't appreciate being told "If you don't like it, leave it." They're not going to refund my money.
|
Why should they? You've already obtained something of value for something of value.
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007
There is no value in taking a test for genealogical research if there is no large database of users to compare to.
|
Yes, there is.
If you want Y-DNA testing, your options are extremely limited. FTDNA is just about the only option.
It would be false to say it was of no value.
I know exactly, within 5 miles, where my ancestors were living 850 years ago.
Ancestry, 23andMe and MyHeritage were unable to do that, but FTDNA could and did.
And, thanks to FTDNA, I'm now in contact with someone from a family group who lived right next to my family 850 years ago, and we're having fun sorting this thing out.
We believe we can go back another 100 years, to about 1070 CE to 1090 CE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westsideboy
All good points. I will add that you absolutely can "fake a murder." A person can stage a suicide scene to look like a murder to get back at someone.
|
That actually happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westsideboy
An accidental death can be staged to look like a murder to deflect blame away from the person who did the actual accidental killing (which could still be manslaughter.)
|
That actually happens, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westsideboy
Many people view the evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey case as the later, an accidental death/manslaughter that was staged to look like a premeditated murder.
|
I've considered that as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
What happens when an adoptee (or anyone else) tests and finds out that their closest match is a criminal DNA sample uploaded by law enforcement? Will they be able to communicate with law enforcement to get information about the crime committed? This would really complicate things.
|
In what way? I'm guessing you're not familiar with the phrase "matter of public record."
All criminal records are a matter of public record, as are property transfers, probate actions, marriages, deaths and births, business filings, and other business transactions. Adoption records are limited.
For the record (no pun intended) there is no State that expunges criminal records.
One may -- and State laws vary greatly, but generally certain felony offenses are exempted -- seven years from the date of total completion of sentence, meaning the sentence, parole or probation has ended and the last dollar owed for restitution, fines, fees or court costs have been paid, seek to have their records sealed. Sealed records may not be viewed by anyone, not even law enforcement, unless they appear before a judge and show cause.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
There are an estimated 400,000 untested rape kits languishing in the country, vs. how many serial murderers?
|
Far less than 400,000. Serial murderers are extremely rare.
The FBI estimates there are perhaps 2,600 serial killers in the history of the US, which is 0.65% of 400,000 rape kits.
In reality, there are more serial rapists than there are serial killers.
The definition of serial killer is two or more murders occurring as disparate events over a period of time.
That would include people who have a callous disregard for human life, but are not actually serial killers, such as spouses who kill spouses for financial reasons, gang members and others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
I am kind of sensitive to the rape issue as an adoptee who was told by the state when I was of age to request information that I was the product of rape. For years I believed I was a "rape baby" until I found my birth mother who said she made up the story. I would later learn that it was a frequent excuse to explain an unwanted pregnancy. Murders you can't make up. See the difference?
|
I see that you are ignorant of the fact that fake murders were quite common in the US.
Ironically, it was DNA testing and other technology that has pretty much put an end to it, although it still happens occasionally.
People would murder themselves to collect on the life insurance policy, or gain other financial advantages, or avoid criminal prosecution or for other reasons.
I see you're also ignorant of the fact that unwed mothers are no longer stigmatized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63
Another concern I have is how long before law enforcement start using these databases routinely for every DNA sample they have, no matter what the crime. What's to stop them?
|
Money and time.
You would do well to go spend a day riding around in a patrol vehicle, and then a day riding around with detectives and then a day sitting in the office with them.
All police departments have a budget.
Nearly all police in the US are on salary, but their union contracts demand overtime typically after 40, or 42 or 48 hours.
All police departments must operate within their budget.
Because all of the above is true, police prioritize crimes based on two criteria: the severity of the crime and the impact on public safety.
Consequently, murders and rapes get the highest priority, because of their severity and threat to public safety.
Robberies are low priority, unless, there is a serial robber -- and there are more of those than there are serial killers -- or there is a rash of robberies in an area of town.
For example, the Clifton area near the UC campus had a rash of robberies, so the police department spent money on overtime to have more police patrolling the area and plain-clothes detectives on stake-outs to diminish the threat to public safety.
The same is true for serial burglars -- and there are more of them than serial killers -- or a rash of burglaries in a particular area.
In Ohio, there were 20,000 untested rape kits, because all of the police departments had spent all of their money on DNA testing for murders. They asked the State Attorney General to release funds from their office so the rape kits could be tested, but Democrat Richard Cordray refused.
When Cordray was running for governor last year, that fact made a really good campaign commercial for his opponent, and Cordray lost.
The point being, if police don't have the money in their budgets to DNA test rape kits, then they don't have enough money to DNA test evidence from arsons, kidnappings, robberies, burglaries, assaults, larcenies, including auto theft, and a large number of other crimes.
So, if you seriously believe the police -- who don't have the money -- are going to be DNA testing less serious offenses or minor crimes and then wasting valuable time and even more money searching through genealogy databases, you're probably not in touch with Reality®.
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.
