All he has to do is say they were resisting arrest and he'll get off.

I read that they positively matched him via some trash outside his home but I'm curious how they knew to focus on him. I'm wondering if they narrowed him down via commercial DNA testing services. I know that law enforcement has been taking advantage of their databases to find matches for relatives that submit their DNA for testing.

...how the hell does the article not mention Patton Oswalt and his late wife Michelle? She died of a (I think they're saying unintentional) drug interaction/overdose while working on a book about the then-uncaught Golden State Killer. He finished the book with some help from private investigators/journalists after she died in 2016, and got it published just 2 months ago.

they are apparently saying specifically that it was not a tip that led them to him, so who knows?

It would be interesting to see 23 & Me's TOS.

https://www.23andme.com/legal/privacy/

timed out when i tried to see it....

If you (or a family member) are arrested by federal authorities your DNA is collected (buccal swab) as well. The national child identification program allows you to volunteer your children’s DNA. Also, an individual may volunteer their own DNA to CODIS.

Not my wheelhouse, but my understanding is that you cannot get a warrant that forces 23&me (as an example) to run a sample you have (overly broad search).

This is an issue that has arisen since I left law school and I haven't kept up on it. However several issues jump out. Most notably that a defendant would not have standing to challenge the act of a company handing over his family members DNA. The family member might have a case against the company, but that would not get the evidence excluded.

23&me has a transparency report.

Appears they’ve received 5 requests for 6 individuals and have rejected all of them. On their about page it appears they don’t even collect the information that would be needed in court.

Again, not my wheelhouse and maybe I’m biased, but if LE is trying to get your DNA for comparison because you left some in another person, maybe you aren’t injured if we just take a look.

Personally, I’d have every US citizen in the database.

Barring that extreme, I think all government law enforcement should have to submit their DNA to make sure the system isn’t co-opted by insiders. Would have solved this situation earlier I believe.

The interesting (read: sad) situation would be if you made it mandatory in 6 months, to see the number of people that retired or resigned.

Personally, I’d have every US citizen in the database.

Fuuuuck. Really? I would not condone that in a million years.

Why?

As it is, you’re fine with anyone who’s ever been arrested (even if not convicted) of being in the database. (Well I shouldn’t say you’re FINE with it, it’s just the way it is right now)

It gives unfair preferential treatment to those that have never been arrested, committed a crime, etc...

Basically if you’ve never been caught/arrested before, and successfully go around raping people leaving your DNA everywhere, we’re shit out of luck because you’re a boy scout or really good at your ‘work’.

There are a thousand ways to abuse that knowledge and information. Stolen data is just one. Not unlikely considering current events. Can DNA information be commoditized? And what about all those people who's lives will be disrupted because they were at the scene of a crime at a different time? Felons who are convicted should be the only ones who's DNA is on file. I understand the purpose behind wanting the information, but that doesn't mean it's sufficient to legitimize the violation of my personal space and privacy.

May as well ask for adult fingerprints, retina photographs, and measuring overall physical attributes. Government photo albums of every citizen, fed into face recognition software. Yearly, of every citizen. That would aid in law enforcement as well, yes? Because Big Brother needs to know your every move. We are already subject to tracking, and anybody entering this country if suspicious is required to expose their entire life before being granted entry.

I realize we live in a time where the private, commercial sector knows shitloads about our lives, and trade that information for profit. Requiring DNA for every citizen seems like over reach and taking a skate down the slippery slope.

Not to mention the ultra slippery slope of insurance companies using the information to deny you just about any kind of coverage due to "genetic pre-disposition to", or "unacceptable risk of."

Or warrants based on genetic predisposition to violence.

That was actually one of Steven Spielberg's main reasons for wanting to produce Minority Report - when all the draconian thought police style laws were getting ramrodded through using the heels of 9/11 as the justification for it.

Why would insurance companies have access to law enforcement databases?

Fine, you can say “oh they will!” but recognize you’re fundamentally changing how slippery this slope has become.

I trust the police about as much as I trust the insurance companies.

Do you own insurance?

But that’s the thing, you’re willing to give up the personal space and privacy of felons. If you (and all of us) were willing to give up the same thing you would do to others, maybe the people in the article wouldn’t have had to die. Now, I’m not saying a DNA database is going to be the end all solution to all crime everywhere, but I’m betting the guy above would have been caught a hell of a lot sooner. Especially considering the evidence he was leaving at the scene.

Without a warrant, we can collect the majority of the identification you listed (retina might be tricky) by waiting until you discard it. It’s really just a matter of us waiting you out. Wouldn’t it be easier (and less invasive) to just eliminate you as a suspect from the get go?

The facial recognition is already a thing. It doesn’t know who you are, but it knows if you boarded a flight identifying as one person and when you land identifying as another person.

Corporations don’t use this information to prevent murders. LE can and does.

Wouldn’t it be easier (and less invasive) to just eliminate you as a suspect from the get go? For whom? The burden of proof is on law enforcement. No one has any need to be eliminated as a suspect until the police have made a prima facia case against them.

I’m agreeing the burden of proof is on law enforcement. LE can put in the effort to get the DNA of a suspect. I’m thinking people would rather not be investigated at all. Everyone is eligible for investigation. If we can show from the get go that you are not involved, you never even see an officer, or car following you, and your discarded trash is no longer a target.

The guy in the article is caught the first time he leaves a load at the scene.

Anonymous rape becomes untenable because the perpetrator is immeadiatly identified.

Again, I have been out of law school a long time and have never done criminal law, but even back then there were many cases of people using a condom and forcing the women to shower after. While that may have been cutting edge criminals at the time, under your rule it will be everyone. The good stuff never works as well as you hope and the negatives will always be worse than you feared.

I’m not a woman, but if you were going to get raped, like it was going to happen no matter what, wouldn’t you want the national DNA registry’s unintended side effect of “now they always wear a condom” to be in play?

As I said, it doesn’t solve everything, but in your example things got better albeit only slightly. Plus if the girl scratched her attacker, or he left behind hair, or any number of variables the criminal was unable to account for, BAM caught.

The good stuff does work. The Bank Secrecy act, Suspicious Activity Reports, and Currency Transaction Reports, are the bread and butter of some agencies. Criminals (and the public’s) lack of knowledge of the financial systems and how they are monitored cause otherwise solid laundering schemes to fall apart.

Criminals that think they are safe are not. Not to get political, but look at the Cohen raid. Think he was expecting that? Think he has any idea what was used to initiate that search and seizure warrant? Methods and means are no longer required to be revealed. There’s no way for the criminals to adapt to LE’s methods.

If there was a national DNA database, generations from now would forget about it. FBI would find a match, and instead of revealing the DNA is what caught the guy, would simply place him at the scene with no alibi. They know he was there, no need to tell the world how.

Holy shit, lets throw due process out the window. You can't say there is evidence that places him at the scene and not reveal what it is except in very few exceptions that national security allows. Or are you saying that every routine criminal case should be considered one of national security?

You consider the article situation a routine criminal case?

Without question. As horrific as it is, it is still a violation of domestic law and not an attempt to overthrow the government or and attack on the nation by a hostile power. It is in no way an existential threat to the survival of our nation. It varies from regular crimes in scope but not in type. Further, your last statement was not, or did not seem to be, about this case in particular, but that such could become the norm. If we start locking people up on the basis of evidence that the defense can not even attempt to counter since it is hidden from them, that would represent an existential crises our constitutional system.

Apologies then, maybe I’m being unclear. I am not implying we should convict without evidence, just that the means and methods of obtaining said evidence not be blasted from the rooftops. Al Capone would technically not be a “national security” situation, but extraordinary measures were taken (all visibly passed in law) to target an extremely dangerous civilian threat (surprise! we didn’t release the names of our undercover agents). The same goes for the article, assume the national dna database was there, you would still provide that the first woman he raped and left dna in matched him in the database. You’re simply not releasing methods.

Again, they have not publicly explained what led them to target DeAngelo, only that once they did, LOOK DNA match!

Those are good points but you have to distinguish between things that are kept confidential because it would endanger informants and those methods that law enforcement would just rather not reveal. It seems, therefore, to me that what you are arguing is more analogous to not wanting to reveal things like cellphone tracking methods. Of, for example, this

https://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-refuses-to-release-tor-exploit-details-evidence-thrown-out-in-court/

All the (limited number of ) cases I have seen on these types of issues have ended about the same way, with the state withdrawing the charges or the evidence rather than revealing methods. Which is probably based upon if the evidence was foundational or cumulative. There has also been a bit of a scandal in law enforcement that I haven't followed up on were intelligence agencies with their increased leeway in evidence gathering were leaking data to criminal investigators and working with them to fabricate the source.

While I don't know the details of it as she was appropriately discreet, my ex wife was one of the prosecutors in a very important case followed world wide as well as on the old SE were a bunch of charges were dropped rather than disclose methods. So this has been going on for a while. I don't know if any have even reached the circuit court level, but I would guess it would be unlikely to reach the supreme court anytime soon as LE would drop a case rather than risk an adverse precedent binding everywhere.

Well I’ll admit I don’t have a real dog in the fight. Our department doesn’t need DNA as much as one might expect from my ramblings. ;-)

But yes to everything you said. Best to let one criminal go, than lose the means to stop hundreds. The irony being that those trying to serve are in an adversarial relationship with those they are trying to protect. Nature of the beast.

I’m simply suggesting that a DNA database, held solely by LE, would catch several criminals (like in the article) and leave the general populace unscathed. Again, it already exists, it just requires that you to have slipped up first before it can be used.

Everyone is eligible for investigation.

Not without probable cause.

Civil performs audits on about .1 % of the population every year. No probable cause.

Anyone can be looked into so long as the information doesn’t require a warrant.

It gives unfair preferential treatment to those that have never been arrested, committed a crime, etc...

By that argument, so does being in prison.

Right, people in prison have no genetic privacy either, both groups for their own good apparently.

Personally, I’d have every US citizen in the database.

Idly, I've wondered if there would be a way to use some representation of a person's genome as a key for asymmetrical cryptographic signing, particularly to replace the overuse of SSN. Obviously there are edge cases - blood transfusions, marrow transplants, etc. And nothing is perfectly secure - if you just need DNA to impersonate someone then we've somehow ended up in a future where people have to be careful with toenail clippings, etc because of the dark magic criminals can work against them. But I feel Sir Pratchett would appreciate us ending up there.

I think the idea is called “credsticks” from shadowrun? Don’t they use DNA mapping?

I’d be for this as well. All money digital, traceable, and any identity theft falls on the government to handle. After several millions (if not billions) in reimbursements to the general populace, an anti theft task force would put an end to it.

Like block chain, multiple dna verification devices requires an exponential amount of energy to hide from, especially when your literal body becomes the enemy. I’m sure some will try to be Vincent Freeman, but I personally think this is unsustainable.

That is why you don't save anything for the swim back. Every contest is win or die.