Why isn’t dna collected when people die? Wouldn’t that solve a lot of unsolved crimes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most deaths don't get autopsies.

Enough do and given a criminal is likely to live a criminal lifestyle, they may just have a higher chance of getting one…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

[Anonymous]

I mean, anyone giving DNA to the genealogy websites helped with this effort willingly.

I don't have a problem with the idea.

That said I agree with the other person that DNA at the scene doesn't equate to guilt. Context matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

What is gross? I lost my uncle to a stabbing here in DC. If his killer had not been caught, his murder would be unsolved. If a family member of mine commits a crime, I firmly stand by that they need to be held responsible. In fact, I have a distant cousin who killed his gf while under the influence of multiple drugs in the 1980s and remains in prison to this day. Her family fought for justice for her. He’s guilty. Relative or not, he killed her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

What is gross? I lost my uncle to a stabbing here in DC. If his killer had not been caught, his murder would be unsolved. If a family member of mine commits a crime, I firmly stand by that they need to be held responsible. In fact, I have a distant cousin who killed his gf while under the influence of multiple drugs in the 1980s and remains in prison to this day. Her family fought for justice for her. He’s guilty. Relative or not, he killed her.

I would never serve a loved one up to the brutality of the criminal legal system. But you do you, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

What is gross? I lost my uncle to a stabbing here in DC. If his killer had not been caught, his murder would be unsolved. If a family member of mine commits a crime, I firmly stand by that they need to be held responsible. In fact, I have a distant cousin who killed his gf while under the influence of multiple drugs in the 1980s and remains in prison to this day. Her family fought for justice for her. He’s guilty. Relative or not, he killed her.

I would never serve a loved one up to the brutality of the criminal legal system. But you do you, I guess.

If you get killed, do you want your killer found and prosecuted or would you rather leave your case unsolved?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

What is gross? I lost my uncle to a stabbing here in DC. If his killer had not been caught, his murder would be unsolved. If a family member of mine commits a crime, I firmly stand by that they need to be held responsible. In fact, I have a distant cousin who killed his gf while under the influence of multiple drugs in the 1980s and remains in prison to this day. Her family fought for justice for her. He’s guilty. Relative or not, he killed her.

I would never serve a loved one up to the brutality of the criminal legal system. But you do you, I guess.

If you get killed, do you want your killer found and prosecuted or would you rather leave your case unsolved?

DP. What did I say to make him angry?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

What is gross? I lost my uncle to a stabbing here in DC. If his killer had not been caught, his murder would be unsolved. If a family member of mine commits a crime, I firmly stand by that they need to be held responsible. In fact, I have a distant cousin who killed his gf while under the influence of multiple drugs in the 1980s and remains in prison to this day. Her family fought for justice for her. He’s guilty. Relative or not, he killed her.

I would never serve a loved one up to the brutality of the criminal legal system. But you do you, I guess.

If you get killed, do you want your killer found and prosecuted or would you rather leave your case unsolved?

Human beings do not belong in cages.
Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because corpses have rights.

Ahem

More rights than pregnant women and girls.

[Anonymous]

Privacy issues

[Anonymous]

Privacy laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why isn’t dna collected during autopsy? Wouldn’t that solve a lot of mystery crimes where dna is found but not identified to a person because that person has never committed a crime before?

Desecration of a corpse is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond privacy for crime related reasons, it’s a potential nightmare for medical privacy for descendants of the deceased.

If they haven't committed any crimes, they have nothing to worry about.

You could find out your daddy isn't your daddy. You could find hereditary diseases that prevent you from getting insurance.

The same thing happens when people join Ancestry or 23andme! It’s out there already. Your family’s data is out there already!

You do realize that one is completely voluntary and the other one is not, right?

Even if Aunt Betty puts her dna in, using genealogy it still gets you onto the tree that detectives are searching.

And? Without your DNA or a warrant to get your DNA with probable cause, there is no problem.

DNA testing can identify the familial relationship between two people.

Without your sample, it can only do so much.

That’s just not true. And the information gleaned from a relative can certainly be enough to get a warrant for your DNA.

This. Read more here: https://ndaajustice.medium.com/solving-violent-crime-with-forensic-investigative-genetic-genealogy-an-in-depth-look-5ccc65f4abd8

And that would require a judge to sign a warrant based on the law. Not just indiscriminately taking DNA from everyone who dies. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make.

That's what the article says. They're getting warrants off the already existing genetic data. This article is from a prosecutorial perspective and cheerleads it a bit but people should consider how far this has already gone.

I would want my relative prosecuted for the crime they committed. Use my DNA. Find them.

Gross

What is gross? I lost my uncle to a stabbing here in DC. If his killer had not been caught, his murder would be unsolved. If a family member of mine commits a crime, I firmly stand by that they need to be held responsible. In fact, I have a distant cousin who killed his gf while under the influence of multiple drugs in the 1980s and remains in prison to this day. Her family fought for justice for her. He’s guilty. Relative or not, he killed her.

I would never serve a loved one up to the brutality of the criminal legal system. But you do you, I guess.

If you get killed, do you want your killer found and prosecuted or would you rather leave your case unsolved?

Human beings do not belong in cages.
Period.

Gonna disagree. A great many of them do indeed belong in cages.