Investigative Genetic Genealogy

Investigative Genetic Genealogy

Kylee McCluskey

Criminal Justice 1010

J. Scott Stephenson

April 24, 2022

1
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

Abstract

The controversy sparked when law enforcement revealed the use of Investigative Genetic

Genealogy to solve a high-profile cold case labeled the “Golden State Killer” in 2018. The

research included multiple viewpoints from credible journals from the Salt Lake Community

Library and government websites. The findings of the research showed that regulations with

compromise would be the best solution.

2
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

Investigative Genetics Geology

On April 25, 1953, four scientists went public with a discovery of the double helix structure of

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The names of scientists that discovered this achievement were

James Watson, Francis Crick, Maurice Wilkins, and Rosalind Franklin. This discovery paved the

way for completing the first human genome sequence on the same day in 2003 (Butler, 2019).

A scientific advancement that came from the double helix structure of DNA discovery was using

DNA databases in criminal investigations. An example of these databases is the Federal Bureau

of Investigation (FBI) database called the National DNA Index System (NDIS). These databases

worked by using a pool of DNA collected by those who entered the criminal justice system for

any violation (Butler, 2019). This tool was successful because those convicted for committing

lower-level crimes may go on to larger crimes. The FBI has solved over 545,000 investigations

since the NDIS launched in 1998 (FBI, 2021).

With the advancement of this technology, we now have Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG)

as a way to solve cold cases. IGG provides a way to solve the DNA in cases of those that

previously flew under the radar due to not having their DNA in the traditional databases. This

process uses crime scene DNA and matches it against widely personal use public data systems.

The Golden State Killer, a famous cold case, was closed by using IGG and was the case that

drew the public eye. This advancement has sparked controversy amongst the public. Many

questions and opinions have since been put out. DNA is definitive and personal. Should it be

allowed for all crimes or only violent ones? Should it be allowed at all? There are several

viewpoints when it comes to this topic.

A 2019 study surveyed more than 4,200 Americans and found that 48 percent find it acceptable

to use IGG in criminal justice, 18 percent are unsure, while the rest (34 percent) find it

3
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

unacceptable under any circumstance. The same survey found that 16 percent of Americans have

used a mail-in DNA testing service. Those with a higher income are more likely to use services

like Ancestry, 23andMe, and MyHeritage. The survey breaks down demographics to see what

age, race, and gender prefer what. Those over 50 are more likely to say that the use of IGG is

acceptable than those aged 18-49 (Perrin, 2020). Both sides of the opposing opinions over the

use of IGG have valid reasons for the argument.

Some lawmakers are going against the use of IGG by law enforcement, they want to restrict it or

stop it completely. Utah representative Craig Hall sought to ban the use of IGG, he and the

policymaker, Michael Melendez don’t see how realistic it would be to get search warrants from

the entire town to search their DNA. A nonprofit called Utah Cold Case Coalition opposed this

ban. The bill is currently in committee and has not yet gone through (Van Ness, 2022).

One worry of those that are against the use of IGG is privacy and ethical concerns. When law

enforcement first revealed that they used this method there were no set regulations. Forensics

could take any crime-scene DNA sample and send it through a direct-to-consumer genetic testing

site to identify a match of a distant relative. Investigative work is then used to attempt to identify

the offender in the case. New York has since put regulations in place on the law enforcement’s

use of IGG to protect the public.

A proposed statute with multiple-step requirements enacted by Congress would help balance the

goals of law enforcement while protecting individuals’ privacy rights (Davidowitz, 2019). Without

the framework needed to protect America’s fourth amendment right privacy and ethical breaches

will continue to be made.

Along with this issue is the fear that IGG may be misused. Within the population that was okay

with law enforcement using direct-to-consumer genetic testing data, there were still

4
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

circumstantial limits. People in that category tend to waver depending on what crime is

committed. It is easy to understand the use of IGG for violent crimes including homicide or the

harm to a child or elder. Some people aren’t opposed to IGG when crimes include assault, but

the fear of misuse is when it is used with petty crimes. Another fear is that the public may have

no choice in what law enforcement does with their DNA once it has it in its database (Hazel,

2021).

Those that are for the law enforcement use of IGG think about the current and future potential

that can come from it. It was reported in July of 2021 that 144 cases were solved using IGG, of

those cases, there were 163 homicides and 232 sexual assaults. When you break down the cost-

benefit analysis of catching the perpetrator and breaking the cycle of recidivism there is a

significant cost benefit (the business model can be found in the source). Using IGG can benefit

any case but since its use requires resources, costs, and ethical considerations it is best utilized in

high-level crimes for the time being. A survey of over 1,500 people, a smaller pool than the

previous study, found that 80 percent were for the use of IGG. 79 percent were for the use of it

involving homicide and sexual assault cases while 39 percent supported IGG use on property

crimes as well (Ray, 2021).

IGG can also be beneficial in other ways. IGG can help find the identification of Jane/Jon Does

and with this technology available there is a non-profit organization that helps to identify these

unidentified people. It is called DNA Doe Project and both law enforcement and medical

examiners throughout America work together with the non-profit. DNA Doe Project

organization’s main goal is to reunite Does with their loved ones. As more people use direct-to-

consumer genetic testing the gene pool will widen and help even more Does be reunited with

their families (DNA doe project. DNA Doe Project Cases, 2022).

5
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

In 2019, the Department of Justice put out a statement “the Department of Justice announced its

Interim Policy on forensic genetic genealogy (FGG), an emerging investigative technique that

will combine technological advancements in DNA analysis and searching with traditional

genealogy research.” (Department of Justice, 2020). This policy states that law enforcement must

use every traditional way of solving a crime before resorting to IGG.

IGG is a helpful tool in solving cold cases and identifying Does while beneficial cost-wise by

preventing future crimes. IGG also comes with downsides including ethical and privacy concerns

and the fear of this tool being misused. Some believe that this is a breach of the fourth

amendment while others interpret it differently and view it as a helpful constitutional tool under

the right protective procedures (Selvin, 2020).

In comparing all of the research it is easy to see why it is controversial. The spectrum of whether

law enforcement should use IGG or not is vast. There are people on either side of the controversy

but also many that would like a happy medium. As legislation is passed for the regulation of the

use of IGG there could be a balance in the future for what works best. Until that time there will

be a tug-a-war of lobbyists along the spectrum fighting for what they believe to be right and that

could take a long time. The laws around it may change several times throughout the years as

norms change or technology advances.

6
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

References

Butler, J. (2019, April 25). National DNA day and the birth of investigative genetic genealogy.
NIST. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/national-
dna-day-and-birth-investigative-genetic-genealogy

Davidowitz, S. (2019). 23andEveryone: PRIVACY CONCERNS WITH LAW

ENFORCEMENT’S USE OF GENEALOGY DATABASES TO IMPLICATE
RELATIVES IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS. Brooklyn Law Review, 85(1), 185–
215.

Department of Justice Announces Interim Policy on emerging method to generate leads for
unsolved violent crimes. The United States Department of Justice. (2020, November 19).
Retrieved March 18, 2022, from https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-
announces-interim-policy-emerging-method-generate-leads-unsolved-violent

DNA doe project. DNA Doe Project Cases. (2022, April 28). Retrieved April 29, 2022, from
https://dnadoeproject.org/

FBI. (2021, May 21). The FBI’s combined DNA index system (CODIS) hits major milestone.
FBI. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/press-
releases/the-fbis-combined-dna-index-system-codis-hits-major-milestone

Hazel, J. W., Hammack-Aviran, C., Brelsford, K. M., Malin, B. A., Beskow, L. M., & Clayton,
E. W. (2021). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: Prospective users’ attitudes toward
information about ancestry and biological relationships. PLoS ONE, 16(11), 1–20.
https://doi-org.libprox1.slcc.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0260340

Perrin, A. (2020, August 27). About half of Americans are OK with DNA testing companies
sharing user data with law enforcement. Pew Research Center. Retrieved April 29, 2022,
from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/02/04/about-half-of-americans-are-ok-
with-dna-testing-companies-sharing-user-data-with-law-enforcement/

Ray Wickenheiser. (2021). Investigative Genetic Genealogy: Current Status and Future
Potential. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 3(100174-). https://doi-
org.libprox1.slcc.edu/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100174

Selvin, M. I. (2020). A Too Permeating Police Surveillance: Consumer Genetic Genealogy and
the Fourth Amendment After Carpenter. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 53(4), 1015–
1069

Van Ness, L. (2022, February 20). DNA databases are boon to police but menace to privacy,
critics say. The Pew Charitable Trusts. Retrieved March 18, 2022, from
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2020/02/20/dna-
databases-are-boon-to-police-but-menace-to-privacy-critics-say

7
Investigative Genetic Genealogy

Reflection

Outside of the research done my first thought when I heard they used IGG to solve a horrific

cold case was I thought that was amazing and they should use it for all cold cases like that. After

looking into it more I learned how it could easily be misused on cases that maybe don’t justify it

such as petty victimless crimes. There are also ethical and privacy concerns when you expect a

company to keep your information confidential. I think these assumptions are valid, whenever

there is a discovery there is a learning curve while adjusting to it. If we don’t tread carefully with

developments then things can get out of hand. I think more investigation of facts and data would

help Congress put regulations in place that allows the use of IGG when necessary while also

protecting the people’s rights and privacy. I think that the conclusion I came to makes sense

because every article I researched and read said that regulations of middle ground would be

necessary. It’s the fighting for what is best that will take a while. There is more than one

conclusion, some are completely against it, some completely for it, but I would say most are in

the middle. I think I asked the most important questions because I looked at each side fairly. I did

not have any previously strong connection to one side. This assignment gave me more

information to not be worried about what will happen because lobbyists are fighting for a middle

ground on regulations. This can transfer to anything new that may seem scary at first, but as

research is done there is always a middle/gray area to everything.