Live data from Hacker News

Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

geekwire.com

161–170 of 183 posts

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I blame the Predictably Irrational guy for making opt out so popular world-wide. I personally find it abhorrent. I used to be an organ donor before they made it opt-out in argentina: after that in protest I took myself out.

Can you elaborate about this? I can't really see reasons for outside of superstition and clinging to false hopes to be against it being opt out; and even on an opt out system, I find that doctors still "request" the permissions to the family because no one wants to deal with unnecessary legal trouble. Even following the anti authoritarian reasoning, which I'm kind of fond, I find it silly to worry about this, with al…

It reverts the burden of proof. It is now on you and your family to prove otherwise.

> I find that doctors still "request" the permissions to the family because no one wants to deal with unnecessary legal trouble.

Until they don't need to. In argentina for example, the legal requirement of getting consent from family members was lifted with the introduction of the opt-out. Funny thing about the opt-out, its an online registration!

I've seen opt-out described as a "libertarian paternalism" proposal to say that you have the liberty to choose anything but that there is an opinionated default. I find such reasoning to always lead to a death by a thousand cuts: if every single policy was implemented opt-out, you would definitely be able to manipulate the population into something.

> with all the stuff the state decides over your life.

I worry about any of them. And I don't find it comforting at all to argue that because individual liberties are breached many times, whats does one more stripe do to the tiger.

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#162
post #146
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you are dead it is no longer your body. The dead have no rights. None whatsoever.

This is a faith statement not based in objective fact. Materialism has this to say about the dead; other religions express their beliefs differently.

This is not a statement of faith, it is a statement of law. Once you are dead you have no rights and any possessions, claims, and liabilities pass to that legal fiction we call your estate. Perhaps there is some non-Western culture that handles things differently, but other than the estate being more of a familial construct rather than a legal one in some instances I am not aware of any deviations from this of any significance and look forward to being shown a counter-example.

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "serial killers never stop" is a myth. In fact it's pretty common. Life happens to even the worst people, and they are unable to carry out their previous hobbies... In this car being murder.

Source? Once you cross the bridge for "your thing", it feels to good to stop. Be it murder, rape or sex with minors. This is actually one of the reasons why it is so important to catch a criminal. Not to punish for previous crimes but to prevent new ones.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/26/health/serial-killers-gol...

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm beginning to seriously hear people discuss that it's perfectly okay to use DNA people submit in these ways and even that it would be okay for the government to collect trash and other things that would contain DNA to add people to databases. Such arguments are usually emotional It's also "emotional" to not want your remains to be compared to a serial killer's DNA. There is admittedly a property rights argument t…

It's not bits of litter, is information you may not want to share. What if they use it to convict your descendants for sending their kid to the wrong school district? All headways into new ways to use technology and pry into privacy will start with the most egregious cases, murders and serial killers, and eventually wind up being used for anything. It is a tool from the state against the citizenry: I personally find…

> It's not bits of litter, is information you may not want to share.

I'm sympathetic to that, and if someone wants to draw up legislation around the use of DNA without some kind of due process I'd be supportive of that idea.

But it would be very difficult to regulate the collection of DNA, given existing law on property rights + the fact we spew it everywhere we go in the form of spittle, skin cells, sweat, etc.

Also, the utility of DNA for the purposes in the article is only present when it's tied to a person. It would be a massive undertaking to plan out sifting through everyone's garbage 1 by 1 to build a DNA database.

There's much less of a privacy threat from someone collecting unknown garbage, and if you're not a suspect in a murder it's unlikely in the near future anyone will steal your trash specifically.

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate about this? I can't really see reasons for outside of superstition and clinging to false hopes to be against it being opt out; and even on an opt out system, I find that doctors still "request" the permissions to the family because no one wants to deal with unnecessary legal trouble. Even following the anti authoritarian reasoning, which I'm kind of fond, I find it silly to worry about this, with al…

It reverts the burden of proof. It is now on you and your family to prove otherwise. > I find that doctors still "request" the permissions to the family because no one wants to deal with unnecessary legal trouble. Until they don't need to. In argentina for example, the legal requirement of getting consent from family members was lifted with the introduction of the opt-out. Funny thing about the opt-out, its an online…

There’s always an opinionated default about everything. Having the default be no organ donation is as much a decision of the state as having the default be the opposite.

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Furthering the cause of logic and reasonability? Advocating for evidence-based forensic science winning out over superstition and other lesser concerns? Calling somebody out over something incredibly subjective, on an HN comment, seems like a terribly weak effort towards that end.

Oh no, a weak effort, how terrible.

More like "pathetic".

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#168
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of this new class of DNA searches, including the one in the article, are being carried out by Parabon NanoLabs: http://docs.parabon.com/pub/Parabon_Snapshot_Scientific_Post... https://www.genomeweb.com/applied-markets/parabon-nanolabs-g... [sorry, paywalled]: "Parabon uses Illumina’s SNP microarray platform. It doesn't disclose which particular array product it uses but said that the array contains more than 98…

DNA is not medical data? It's obvious that it is and disingenuous to pretend it is not in order to avoid compliance with the law. Galvin's sample, along with other cold cases, was pulled out of evidence storage and analyzed in 2002. Your assertion is that that analysis did not in fact use the legal tools at the time for this, but instead used the microarray Paradon currently uses with the same ~700k SNP points, and t…

You keep doubling down on this?

The article says that DNA from the clothing sample was sent to Parabon for analysis in July of 2016, and was used in a GEDmatch search at that time. There's nothing remarkable about my claim, it is right there in the article. Also it simply isn't possible to submit a CODIS profile to GEDmatch, they only accept SNP array data, the matching algorithms only work for dense SNP array data, and CODIS markers are not even SNPs, they are STRs.

I did not claim genetic information isn't "medical data". I said that 23andMe is not a "covered entity" under HIPAA. HIPAA only applies to "covered entities". Maybe you should say specifically what it is you think 23andMe is doing that is improper?

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#169
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because our society believes in body autonomy, to the point that it won't use your body's organs to save other human beings, without your express consent. > Your body is your property, and it takes a damn good reason for someone else to access your property, contrary to your will. The way I see it, we're a guest on the planet, and after we are done for, there's a few things we leave behind: our direct ancestors (fa…

If the host is the planet, what is the claim on the other guests to your body. There is a great danger in the state being able to use dna this way: it is against privacy, and privacy is a tool against attacks on liberty. It is also a tool for crime. You can't live free without crime. Once the state has this information, it can only be used against you, not in your favor.

> You can't live free without crime. Once the state has this information, it can only be used against you, not in your favor.

I understand there is risk, all things have potential extremes, but the idea that data on me can only be used against me is false on it's face.

Re: Seattle police use family DNA, latest science to identify killer 52 years later

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DNA is not medical data? It's obvious that it is and disingenuous to pretend it is not in order to avoid compliance with the law. Galvin's sample, along with other cold cases, was pulled out of evidence storage and analyzed in 2002. Your assertion is that that analysis did not in fact use the legal tools at the time for this, but instead used the microarray Paradon currently uses with the same ~700k SNP points, and t…

You keep doubling down on this? The article says that DNA from the clothing sample was sent to Parabon for analysis in July of 2016, and was used in a GEDmatch search at that time. There's nothing remarkable about my claim, it is right there in the article. Also it simply isn't possible to submit a CODIS profile to GEDmatch, they only accept SNP array data, the matching algorithms only work for dense SNP array data,…

> specifically what it is you think 23andMe is doing that is improper

23andMe acquires, analyzes, stores, and trades in private medical data and does not comply with HIPAA in any way when doing so.

We both know that the DNA data you have is personal medical data. You have a PhD and are an executive at one of the largest companies in the world that is trading in DNA data so we both know you are very aware this is true.

> DNA from the clothing sample was sent to Parabon for analysis in July of 2016

We both agree the Galvin DNA sample was acquired and analyzed in 2002 as CODIS data and yielded no hits.

The article says "In July 2018, the suspect DNA from Galvin’s clothing was submitted to Reston" and then goes on to say "The suspect’s profile was reformatted and entered into GEDmatch". Parabon was not sent the actual original DNA from the underwear. Parabon was sent the DNA profile that was created in 2002. It was then reformatted by their data scientists so that they could do a cold hit search on GEDmatch. It yielded possible distant match on two individuals. They found a common ancestor, and created a descent tree of thousands of people, looking for people with a connection to Seattle. They exhumed one and did a modern microarray on that person, and compared that to the extremely sparse data from the 2002 test. They did not do a modern ~700k size microarray on the Galvin data.

You have professional colleagues at Parabon. Ask them. They will confirm what I have said.

Also as a professional biological statistician, you more than almost anyone know that cold hitting a sparse sample against a massive database, finding a possible remote connection, and then expanding the search from a 1800s possible ancestor to include all descendants who live in a large metropolitan area near the crime in a city many people migrated to over the decades is quite likely to find many matches and this sort of match is far from conclusive at all. In fact, you are even qualified to be an expert witness in such a case and testify regarding the actual odds.

We also both know that there are serious problems with testing amplified DNA samples on clothing that has been stored for 35 years and possibly handled by dozens of people.

We also know that even finding high quality single person DNA samples on clothing of a murder victim which exactly matches a suspect (which we did not do at all in this case here) does not prove that the person it matches was the killer and can not reasonably be deemed so without a trial in which a competent defense is presented and considered.

Post reply on HN