Golden State Killer Suspect Was Caught Through Genealogy Data, Revealing the Pri

[Zaphod]

Dusn wrote:

what difference does it make? This man raped, tortured, killed, and terrorized countless people. I’m glad the DNA helped them catch this vile thug.

And frankly I’d give a sample of my DNA if it helped them catch more criminals like this. What are they going to do with it to hurt you? And just think about how easy it is to get someone’s DNA already.

Click to expand...

What could they do? All kinds of things. You have to not only predict responsible use and stewards of your privacy (which no foundation exists for a priori trust in corp) right now in the current paradigm, but any future changes in that company, the laws, genetic knowledge in general about conditions and ramifications and how that may be used against you and possibly your family for generations to come.

What if all your descendants couldnt get health or life insurance going forward? Taking any medical decision making from you. Unnecessary anxiety, testing, etc...Job discrimination, partner discrimination, etc...Just extrapolate knowledge and situations into the future and it expands its scope of unintended negative consequences. These are just super obvious and direct issues, its usually the non obvious at first and indirect issues that cause much of the harm.

It may be easy to obtain dna, but thats different than willingly giving it to some faceless corporation who aims to make as much money as possible off your genetics.

[portlandia]

Dusn wrote:

And frankly I’d give a sample of my DNA if it helped them catch more criminals like this. What are they going to do with it to hurt you?

Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/10/20/another-week-another-crime-lab-scandal/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.987d49a1ab7e

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/csi-is-a-lie/390897/

[Zaphod]

portlandia wrote:

Dusn wrote:

And frankly I’d give a sample of my DNA if it helped them catch more criminals like this. What are they going to do with it to hurt you?

Click to expand…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/10/20/another-week-another-crime-lab-scandal/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.987d49a1ab7e

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/csi-is-a-lie/390897/

Click to expand...

Exactly. Though an incomplete and only recent list, 3 people were inappropriately executed, in a single states audit! Thats the kind of stuff that can happen. No thanks.

[Donnie]

I don't understand why anyone is against this, but I think it is awesome.  Hopefully many criminals woke up very nervous after reading how they caught this dude.  People always cite hypothetical slippery slopes or one-off cases like Michael Usry.  I feel bad for Michael and hopefully he was compensated if he was falsely accused, but no system is perfect.  Using anecdotes is a demonstrably bad way to make a decision.  When these databases are used for these hypothetical "terrible" purposes people have brought up, we can debate the database use then.

[Hatton]

Zaphod wrote:

Exactly. Though an incomplete and only recent list, 3 people were inappropriately executed, in a single states audit! Thats the kind of stuff that can happen. No thanks.

Click to expand...

I think more have been let go from Death Row because of DNA.  I think it would be fine to bar this data from insurance companies.  I think law enforcement needs to use whatever advantage they have on murder, rape, and pedophilia.  I would wager those of you who think this is wrong have never been touched by these types of criminals.  I have examined many rape victims over the years and testified in several trials and the damage is immense.  I was not a Ted Bundy victim but it scared the ************************ out of me when I was in college.  Bundy's last victims were in Tallahassee, FL.  I was a sophomore at Auburn about 200 miles away.  Bundy bought a bus ticket to a college campus.  My roommate's parents called to make sure we were safe after the news of his sorority house rampage broke. As the details about Bundy came out I was freaked out again when I saw how his victims resembled me at the time.  So 200 miles may of saved me.  I never forgot how I felt about this so I think anything that can solve a serial killer case is worth doing.

[CordMcNally]

Donnie wrote:

I don’t understand why anyone is against this, but I think it is awesome.

Click to expand...

I think the big issue is if it is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Granted, I don't know what rights users signed away when they sent their DNA in and I'm guessing we'll find out. I think we can all agree that getting serial killers/rapists off the street is a great thing but I think it's also important that we follow the ideals and laws our nation was founded on.

[Donnie]

CordMcNally wrote:

Donnie wrote:

I don’t understand why anyone is against this, but I think it is awesome.

Click to expand…

I think the big issue is if it is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Granted, I don’t know what rights users signed away when they sent their DNA in and I’m guessing we’ll find out. I think we can all agree that getting serial killers/rapists off the street is a great thing but I think it’s also important that we follow the ideals and laws our nation was founded on.

Click to expand...

Why do people refer to the constitution as some kind of infallible source of divine wisdom?  Pretty sure the authors didn’t know anything about DNA, and no, combing through publicly available DNA samples is not similar to searching someone’s house or workplace that the founders were concerned with.

Even going back to the constitution, how exactly was this guy’s constitutional rights infringed upon anyway?  He didn’t even upload his own DNA.

[portlandia]

Donnie wrote:

Why do people refer to the constitution as some kind of infallible source of divine wisdom?

Click to expand...

Strawman

 

[Zaphod]

Donnie wrote:

I don’t understand why anyone is against this, but I think it is awesome.  Hopefully many criminals woke up very nervous after reading how they caught this dude.  People always cite hypothetical slippery slopes or one-off cases like Michael Usry.  I feel bad for Michael and hopefully he was compensated if he was falsely accused, but no system is perfect.  Using anecdotes is a demonstrably bad way to make a decision.  When these databases are used for these hypothetical “terrible” purposes people have brought up, we can debate the database use then.

Click to expand...

Incredible when used correctly, but that wont be the damage. The damage comes from the incorrect use when things like this are allowed to flourish first, regulate second. Thats really the issue. We're very reactive instead of proactive.

The other is incentives and bias, far too many sloppy "csi" cases where they just railroad people. Now theyll use dna and call it infallible and so many jurors would believe it. Heck there is a woman on trial for allegedly murdering her husband and the DAs case is based largely that her DNA was found in her husbands car, and they admit to never looking for another suspect ever, only thinking she was it and building their whole investigation and case around it. Its not the tech its the users and how applied and the consequences.

Lots of these people can be caught with other means, just look up the Murder Accountability Project. They needed nothing other than common sense, a database and want to to identify potential problems. Some times theyve tried in vain for years to get police to look into something, to no avail only to be proven right later. Irresponsible not to think of the consequences in real life from an action, not the world we wished we lived in. Same for medical procedures, screenings etc...Its a basal rate fallacy issue.

[Donnie]

portlandia wrote:

Donnie wrote:

Why do people refer to the constitution as some kind of infallible source of divine wisdom?

Click to expand…

Strawman

 

Click to expand...

Nope.  Arguments relying on the constitution alone are ridiculous.  Let’s examine things on their own merits without basing arguments on some extrapolations on writings from 230 years ago.  As a society we are allowed to evolve our thinking on everything other than the constitution, which is treated by some as perfect and unchangeable.

[Donnie]

Zaphod wrote:

Donnie wrote:

I don’t understand why anyone is against this, but I think it is awesome.  Hopefully many criminals woke up very nervous after reading how they caught this dude.  People always cite hypothetical slippery slopes or one-off cases like Michael Usry.  I feel bad for Michael and hopefully he was compensated if he was falsely accused, but no system is perfect.  Using anecdotes is a demonstrably bad way to make a decision.  When these databases are used for these hypothetical “terrible” purposes people have brought up, we can debate the database use then.

Click to expand…

Incredible when used correctly, but that wont be the damage. The damage comes from the incorrect use when things like this are allowed to flourish first, regulate second. Thats really the issue. We’re very reactive instead of proactive.

The other is incentives and bias, far too many sloppy “csi” cases where they just railroad people. Now theyll use dna and call it infallible and so many jurors would believe it. Heck there is a woman on trial for allegedly murdering her husband and the DAs case is based largely that her DNA was found in her husbands car, and they admit to never looking for another suspect ever, only thinking she was it and building their whole investigation and case around it. Its not the tech its the users and how applied and the consequences.

Lots of these people can be caught with other means, just look up the Murder Accountability Project. They needed nothing other than common sense, a database and want to to identify potential problems. Some times theyve tried in vain for years to get police to look into something, to no avail only to be proven right later. Irresponsible not to think of the consequences in real life from an action, not the world we wished we lived in. Same for medical procedures, screenings etc…Its a basal rate fallacy issue.

Click to expand...

Sloppy police work and railroading people have nothing to do with DNA.  These abuses can be done with anything.  Blame the carpenter not the tool.

What are these “things like this” you speak of?  It’s like some kind of bogeyman.  Ridiculous to prohbit law enforcement from using tools that are available to the public to assist their investigations.

[Hatton]

Zaphod wrote:

Lots of these people can be caught with other means,

Click to expand...

Nope Look how long the Golden State Killer was unknown.  I view this as a tool just like fingerprints are a tool.

[Zaphod]

Donnie wrote:

Zaphod wrote:

Donnie wrote:

I don’t understand why anyone is against this, but I think it is awesome.  Hopefully many criminals woke up very nervous after reading how they caught this dude.  People always cite hypothetical slippery slopes or one-off cases like Michael Usry.  I feel bad for Michael and hopefully he was compensated if he was falsely accused, but no system is perfect.  Using anecdotes is a demonstrably bad way to make a decision.  When these databases are used for these hypothetical “terrible” purposes people have brought up, we can debate the database use then.

Click to expand…

Incredible when used correctly, but that wont be the damage. The damage comes from the incorrect use when things like this are allowed to flourish first, regulate second. Thats really the issue. We’re very reactive instead of proactive.

The other is incentives and bias, far too many sloppy “csi” cases where they just railroad people. Now theyll use dna and call it infallible and so many jurors would believe it. Heck there is a woman on trial for allegedly murdering her husband and the DAs case is based largely that her DNA was found in her husbands car, and they admit to never looking for another suspect ever, only thinking she was it and building their whole investigation and case around it. Its not the tech its the users and how applied and the consequences.

Lots of these people can be caught with other means, just look up the Murder Accountability Project. They needed nothing other than common sense, a database and want to to identify potential problems. Some times theyve tried in vain for years to get police to look into something, to no avail only to be proven right later. Irresponsible not to think of the consequences in real life from an action, not the world we wished we lived in. Same for medical procedures, screenings etc…Its a basal rate fallacy issue.

Click to expand…

Sloppy police work and railroading people have nothing to do with DNA.  These abuses can be done with anything.  Blame the carpenter not the tool.

What are these “things like this” you speak of?  It’s like some kind of bogeyman.  Ridiculous to prohbit law enforcement from using tools that are available to the public to assist their investigations.

Click to expand...

Not saying to prohibit law enforcement to use them, Im saying just widespread acceptance of giving all this powerful information en masse without strings to some random company isnt very bright without first delineating some regulations, etc...

They will do the same with DNA, only issue is people believe its infallible nor do they understand statistics, we dont know how good these companies reports are from a quality standpoint, etc...I do blame the carpenter, and frankly dont trust them with any tool right now, let alone the most powerful one we know of.

Usually in these kind of long run cases mistakes were made early and things were overlooked due to certain biases, etc...

http://www.murderdata.org/

@donnie, not a boogeyman at all, lots of bad forensic work has been done and exposed leading to very bad outcomes, even executions of innocent people. Thats only what has recently been documented. Whole system needs an overhaul bad before I have any confidence this kind of thing will actually improve things on a going forward basis. Maybe helping cold cases. Its not like the death penalty keeps murder rates low, as if killers are rational in aggregate about such trade offs.

Remember murderers and violent criminals are very much a small minority of people. You're unlikely to be changing much in the way of frequency with this tool, while possibly increasing real life problems for the great majority. Any tool that is not 100% specific and sensitive, with 0 chance of error will give you far more false positives than true positives when it is applied to a large population just given the sheer size and frequencies of the sets in question.

[AR]

hatton1 wrote:

Nope Look how long the Golden State Killer was unknown.  I view this as a tool just like fingerprints are a tool.

Click to expand...

While it's not relevant to the topic of discussion, if you ever have a chance, spend some time on the validity of fingerprint analysis in forensics.  The difference between the actual accuracy and the perceived accuracy (which most believe is 100%) is scary.

[Lithium]

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-golden-state-killer-dna-20180504-story.html

Looks like there were some Michael Usrys in this case too.  Warrants issued for people who had a DNA mutation occurring 2.3% of the time that matched the crime scene.  That's like issuing warrants because a POI is the same height as the killer, also has red hair, or also is Native American.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-cant-opt-out-of-sharing-your-data-even-if-you-didnt-opt-in/

Good article elucidating the fundamental problem this case presents.  Privacy is no longer a personal choice an individual can make.