U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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 05-04-2018, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Canada
4,338 posts, read 2,982,113 times
Reputation: 5677

Advertisements

Excellent article with a lot of detail not mentioned on this thread on exactly how the killer was found:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.6b354be0e5c7

“10 to 20 distant relatives of the killer, roughly the equivalent of third cousins” were discovered on Gedmatch and a detective created 25 trees on Ancestry and each tree was meticulously followed down from the common ancestor from the early 1800s.

Quote:
They used census data, old newspaper clippings and a gravesite locator to find the deceased relatives. When they got to the current day, they turned to police databases and websites such as LexisNexis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2018, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
9,255 posts, read 14,298,122 times
Reputation: 12070
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63 View Post
But there were some apparent misunderstandings about DNA data on the program. The guests seemed to think that if you upload your raw data to a site like Gedmatch then others can see it. But they do not have access to your raw data file, they can only run your kit # through tools on the site and compare your DNA to themselves and other people. Other people cannot use Gedmatch to find your genetic health risks.
I think some people who have never taken a DNA test or used Gedmatch are having trouble understanding the difference between the "raw DNA data" and the "comparison tools" or reports run on your DNA, even when it's noted and explained. What people don't understand, they fear, and it's difficult to convince someone to think rationally when they are in a state of fear

Quote:
Also, the fact that law enforcement submitted a DNA sample that they didn't have consent to submit according to the rules of Ancestry was glossed over.
Law enforcement have the legal authority to use crime scene DNA and compare it with other DNA samples. I am not sure if you mean "Ancestry" the company Ancestry.com or not - but Ancestry.com was not involved in this case whatsoever, so their rules don't matter in this case. Gedmatch was the only DNA company involved and Gedmatch's exact wording says: "Please acknowledge that any sample you submit is either your DNA or the DNA of a person for whom you are a legal guardian or have obtained authorization to upload their DNA to GEDmatch". Like I say, law enforcement had legal authorization to do so because it was crime scene DNA. So no laws or policies were broken, which is probably why it wasn't discussed.

Quote:
Personally I wouldn't like to see this as a trend toward merging of forensic and genealogical databases. What happens if law enforcement starts to zero in on the family of a suspect, and needs to test family members in order to narrow down their search. Will these family members then be subject to requests for submitting DNA samples to help solve crimes? Seems like a slippery slope.
If they've already zeroed in on the family of a suspect using Gedmatch, they would likely want to test that suspect, not more family members of the suspect. In any case, law enforcement already ask suspects or relatives of suspects to submit DNA samples all the time even when Gedmatch or consumer DNA testing hasn't been involved whatsoever (ie, when they've zeroed in on a suspect or family of a suspect through other, non-DNA methods) - they simply run the DNA only to make a direct comparison to crime scene DNA rather than to a public database. People are free to refuse to submit their DNA sample, of course, regardless of how it's to be used. So none of these particular concerns really have anything to do with Gedmatch or consumer DNA testing.

Quote:
Then again, I have a few years of experience finding family for adoptees using DNA. The same skills are needed for identifying suspects through DNA. Is there a way I can offer my services to law enforcement to help solve crimes using genetic genealogy?
Doubtful. They likely consult genetic experts who have degrees in the field. Besides, even if you were to assist, you would probably then have to testify in court to your methods and findings, and have to deal with cross examination trying to discredit you and such (which is precisely why law enforcement need someone with a degree in the field, not just experience).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 05:47 PM
 
3,483 posts, read 5,139,862 times
Reputation: 5192
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post
Law enforcement have the legal authority to use crime scene DNA and compare it with other DNA samples. I am not sure if you mean "Ancestry" the company Ancestry.com or not - but Ancestry.com was not involved in this case whatsoever, so their rules don't matter in this case. Gedmatch was the only DNA company involved and Gedmatch's exact wording says: "Please acknowledge that any sample you submit is either your DNA or the DNA of a person for whom you are a legal guardian or have obtained authorization to upload their DNA to GEDmatch". Like I say, law enforcement had legal authorization to do so because it was crime scene DNA. So no laws or policies were broken, which is probably why it wasn't discussed.
On Gedmatch's homepage they say they "understand" their database was used in this case, indicating they were unaware of it until after it happened. So the raw data must have been in a format accepted by their site such as Ancestry.com. Currently they only accept Ancestry.com, 23andMe, FTDNA, MyHeritage, and WeGene. Do you have a source that says they used none of those companies?

According to the Washington Post: "A representative for Ancestry.com said the company has “not been in contact with law enforcement regarding the Joseph James DeAngelo case.” " -- That statement does not mean the sample wasn't submitted to them. It leaves plenty of room for us to think they very well may have processed the sample with no knowledge of its source and without being contacted by law enforcement. But you say they "were not involved in this case whatsoever." Source please?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 06:38 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
33,679 posts, read 15,463,831 times
Reputation: 24270
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63 View Post
On Gedmatch's homepage they say they "understand" their database was used in this case, indicating they were unaware of it until after it happened. So the raw data must have been in a format accepted by their site such as Ancestry.com. Currently they only accept Ancestry.com, 23andMe, FTDNA, MyHeritage, and WeGene. Do you have a source that says they used none of those companies?

According to the Washington Post: "A representative for Ancestry.com said the company has “not been in contact with law enforcement regarding the Joseph James DeAngelo case.” " -- That statement does not mean the sample wasn't submitted to them. It leaves plenty of room for us to think they very well may have processed the sample with no knowledge of its source and without being contacted by law enforcement. But you say they "were not involved in this case whatsoever." Source please?
It would be easy to create a file matching the format of any one of those services listed, it's just a text file, the Ancestry file is named "AncestryDNA.txt" I have an excel macro to convert an ancestry file to 23andme format, I've used it occasionally on 3rd party sites that don't accept ancestry.

This is what appears in the heading of the ancestry text file:

Quote:
#AncestryDNA raw data download
#This file was generated by AncestryDNA at: 06/24/2017 05:06:09 UTC
#Data was collected using AncestryDNA array version: V1.0
#Data is formatted using AncestryDNA converter version: V1.0
#Below is a text version of your DNA file from Ancestry.com DNA, LLC. THIS
#INFORMATION IS FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE AND IS INTENDED FOR GENEALOGICAL RESEARCH
#ONLY. IT IS NOT INTENDED FOR MEDICAL OR HEALTH PURPOSES. THE EXPORTED DATA IS
#SUBJECT TO THE AncestryDNA TERMS AND CONDITIONS, BUT PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THE
#DOWNLOADED DATA WILL NO LONGER BE PROTECTED BY OUR SECURITY MEASURES.
#WHEN YOU DOWNLOAD YOUR RAW DNA DATA, YOU ASSUME ALL RISK OF STORING,
#SECURING AND PROTECTING YOUR DATA. FOR MORE INFORMATION, SEE ANCESTRYDNA FAQS.
#
#Genetic data is provided below as five TAB delimited columns. Each line
#corresponds to a SNP. Column one provides the SNP identifier (rsID where
#possible). Columns two and three contain the chromosome and basepair position
#of the SNP using human reference build 37.1 coordinates. Columns four and five
#contain the two alleles observed at this SNP (genotype). The genotype is reported
#on the forward (+) strand with respect to the human reference
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
25,219 posts, read 30,079,605 times
Reputation: 31347
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63 View Post
On Gedmatch's homepage they say they "understand" their database was used in this case, indicating they were unaware of it until after it happened. So the raw data must have been in a format accepted by their site such as Ancestry.com. Currently they only accept Ancestry.com, 23andMe, FTDNA, MyHeritage, and WeGene. Do you have a source that says they used none of those companies?

According to the Washington Post: "A representative for Ancestry.com said the company has “not been in contact with law enforcement regarding the Joseph James DeAngelo case.” " -- That statement does not mean the sample wasn't submitted to them. It leaves plenty of room for us to think they very well may have processed the sample with no knowledge of its source and without being contacted by law enforcement. But you say they "were not involved in this case whatsoever." Source please?
The DNA was processed by an outside company, not any of the usual genealogy companies, and the results formatted to be compatible with Gedmatch. The lab has not been identified, but my suspicion is that it was one that is used to dealing with samples that may be degraded.

See cdnirene's link in her post #91.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 07:58 PM
 
3,483 posts, read 5,139,862 times
Reputation: 5192
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
The DNA was processed by an outside company, not any of the usual genealogy companies, and the results formatted to be compatible with Gedmatch. The lab has not been identified, but my suspicion is that it was one that is used to dealing with samples that may be degraded.

See cdnirene's link in her post #91.
The article states "A lab converted the sample into a format that could be read by GEDmatch" -- very vague, and it doesn't mean it wasn't one of the commercial labs for genealogy. Again I think it could have been the Ancestry lab that processed the sample. But we don't know. I would love to know the answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 08:03 PM
 
3,483 posts, read 5,139,862 times
Reputation: 5192
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post
Doubtful. They likely consult genetic experts who have degrees in the field. Besides, even if you were to assist, you would probably then have to testify in court to your methods and findings, and have to deal with cross examination trying to discredit you and such (which is precisely why law enforcement need someone with a degree in the field, not just experience).
A genetic expert has no training in genealogy and is really overqualified for genetic genealogy searches. Law enforcement has approached CeCe Moore on several occasions for her help solving cases, which she declined. She solves cases for "Finding your Roots". According to her bio, her training is in music and theater. No "degree in the field." My degree is more relevant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 08:29 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,338 posts, read 2,982,113 times
Reputation: 5677
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63 View Post
The article states "A lab converted the sample into a format that could be read by GEDmatch" -- very vague, and it doesn't mean it wasn't one of the commercial labs for genealogy. Again I think it could have been the Ancestry lab that processed the sample. But we don't know. I would love to know the answer.
The Ancestry lab processes a bunch of saliva that has been spit in a tube provided to the buyer of the test by Ancestry. 23andMe also works this way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2018, 09:19 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
33,679 posts, read 15,463,831 times
Reputation: 24270
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63 View Post
The article states "A lab converted the sample into a format that could be read by GEDmatch" -- very vague, and it doesn't mean it wasn't one of the commercial labs for genealogy. Again I think it could have been the Ancestry lab that processed the sample. But we don't know. I would love to know the answer.
Sacramento County probably has the California Dept. of Justice or U.C. Davis sequence DNA for them, I doubt it they have that capability internally. I'm quite sure it was not done by a commercial entity like Ancestry or 23andMe because they use saliva samples. It's not all that hard to isolate the segments that are included in DNA processed by one of those firms and just put the data in the correct format in a text file.

This article lists the DNA services that GedMatch accepts A Comparison of GEDmatch and the FBI’s CODIS Database – The DNA Geek
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2018, 07:08 AM
 
Location: NJ
12,593 posts, read 22,542,583 times
Reputation: 11496
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries63 View Post
The article states "A lab converted the sample into a format that could be read by GEDmatch" -- very vague, and it doesn't mean it wasn't one of the commercial labs for genealogy. Again I think it could have been the Ancestry lab that processed the sample. But we don't know. I would love to know the answer.
Surprised to see all of the posts. I tried to give everyone links to show what LE did. IMO they did the same thing DNA Doe Project did. They probably used their specialized lab too. This is new science. Not every lab can convert the DNA into a genealogy file. I found 2 more DNA Doe Project posts that say more of what was done and by who. You really have to watch the presser I posted to understand how new and specialized this is.

According to a newer article, they found his 3rd great grandparents to start trees.

I also keep forgetting to say that when they upload to GEDmatch we probably do not see their sample just like DNA Doe Project; they're uploaded and marked research.

The first step in finding Golden State Killer suspect: Finding his great-great-great-grandparents on genealogy site - By Richard Winton, Tracey Lien, Paige St. John and Benjamin Oreskes - Apr 27, 2018 | 5:10 PM



See this post
DNA Doe Project Page Liked · April 11 ·

Quote:
DNA Doe Project is pleased to announce our first success story. We have identified Buckskin Girl, as confirmed this week by the Miami County, Ohio Sheriff’s Office. While all other forensic identification methods failed, our pioneering approach using genetic genealogy succeeded.

We participated in a press conference held in Troy, Ohio this afternoon where the news was made public by Chief Deputy Stephen Lord.

We want to extend our gratitude to our wonderful lab and bioinformatics team:

Weining Tang, PhD
Co-founder and Chief Scientific Officer, AMD Biotech

Justin Loe
CEO, Full Genomes Corporation

Greg Magoon, PhD
Senior Research Engineer, Aerodyne Research, Inc
(working in collaboration with Full Genomes Corporation)

This project would not have been possible without the resources available through GEDMatch.com. Of equal importance is the support we have received from the genetic genealogy community.

And most of all we acknowledge our fabulous, dedicated, and highly skilled team of volunteers who helped bring Buckskin Girl back to her family.

A press release with details will be issued by the Miami County, Ohio Sheriff’s Office.
DNA Doe Project Page Liked · April 15 ·

Quote:
Q: What did the DNA Doe Project do that led to the identification of “Buckskin Girl” as Marcia King?

A: When “Buckskin Girl’s” blood was sent to our lab, there was little hope that the sample would yield viable DNA because it had been stored unrefrigerated for 37 years in the anti-coagulant heparin. We were surprised to find that the compromised sample yielded enough DNA to allow for whole genome sequencing (WGS). WGS involves reading a genome many times to arrive at a file containing all 3 billiion base pairs (bps), or, in the case of degraded samples, whatever fraction of the genome has survived the degradation process.

Once sequencing was complete, our bioinformatics team created a new file that normally contains only the 600,000 or so loci (called SNPs or snips) used by most direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing companies. In “Buckskin Girl’s” case, we discovered that only about half of her genome remained. Even so, when we received the SNP file on the morning of March 28, we were able to upload the file to GEDMatch and it proceeded to batch. This is the process through which a new file is integrated with the already existing GEDMatch database. The process can take 12 hours or more to complete.

Once batching has completed, GEDMatch provides a list of DNA-cousin matches with an estimate of how closely related the tester is to each match based on how much DNA they share. Our DNA Doe Project volunteers watched this list populate in real time. Initially 2nd and 3rd cousins appeared, which we thought was promising.

After a few hours a new match popped up – a woman who appeared to be a half-cousin or a first cousin once removed to “Buckskin Girl.” This person either shared a single grandparent with our Jane Doe or was a first cousin to one of her parents. We felt this match was related closely enough to “Buckskin Girl” to lead to her identity. Around midnight our DDP volunteers put the coffee on.

Our first challenge was to figure out the match’s real name and whether she had posted her family tree online. We realized that having to create it from scratch would take time. Fortunately, we were able to track down her Ancestry identity and discovered she had posted her tree there. We started looking to see if the match could be our Doe’s half cousin by checking whether the match had a grandparent who had been married twice. Not having success, we began looking at the match’s first cousins to see whether any of them had children (and therefore would be the match’s first cousin once removed) who could possibly be identified as “Buckskin Girl.”

Because most public family trees that are available online do not provide names of living people, we normally have to fill in living family members by looking at census reports and other documents such as obituaries that might list descendants. With further searching this can help us to rule out cousins who are too old or too young to have the required relationship, or cousins who died prior to 1981 or who were known to be living after that time. In the case of large families this could take weeks.

With “Buckskin Girl” we got lucky. One of the cousins in the tree listed Marcia King as his daughter. Her birth date was about right. And Marcia’s date of death was given as “missing – presumed dead.”

We knew at that instant DNA Doe Project had identified our Jane Doe.
Edit
Post by DNA Doe pretty much saying they did not help.

DNA Doe Project Page Liked · April 29 ·

Quote:
The announcement that a serial killer has been identified by genealogical resources has brought out in the open many issues that have long been debated by both the genealogical and the forensic communities. As founders of the DNA Doe Project, we knew this day was coming.

Once DNA results are placed on any website, public or private, they are no longer under our control. We live in a data-harvesting universe where personal information is no longer sacred.

DNA data is data. It can be massaged, consolidated, downloaded, and sold to the highest bidder, with or without the owner’s consent. Our DNA results could be used for purposes we don’t anticipate – such as in generating leads in criminal investigations. When posting our personal data on public websites, we should take into consideration all possible uses of that data, not just those spelled out in statements by the companies hosting those websites.

The mission of the DNA Doe Project is to use genealogical resources in the identification of victims, not suspects. We feel that reuniting John and Jane Does with their families is not unlike reuniting adoptees with theirs. However, these same genealogical resources when used to identify suspects, exposes even distant family members to a criminal investigation they could not anticipate. Yet why should this matter? Even without the use of genealogical tools, suspects’ close family members can be implicated in investigations against their wishes, and distant family members are not relevant to the ultimate identification of a killer. Why should we regard the present situation differently?

The DNA Doe Project shares the widespread relief that Joseph DeAngelo, the Golden State Killer, has been taken off the streets. We are also relieved to hear through media reports that the authorities took the time to review and understand the legalities of their novel approach of using public genetic genealogy databases for his capture. Our wish is that the genealogical community do likewise to use recent events to prompt intelligent discussion on informed consent.

Last edited by Roselvr; 05-05-2018 at 07:34 AM..
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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