PDA

View Full Version : DNA database leads to crime tip




RockEnds
01-10-2012, 07:37 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/09/justice/washington-cold-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t3


DNA may help Seattle-area sheriff's deputies find a suspect in a 20-year-old killing after a comparison with genealogy records connected a crime-scene sample to a 17th-century Massachusetts family.

The DNA sample was taken in the death of 16-year-old Sarah Yarborough, who was killed on her high-school campus in Federal Way, Washington, in December 1991. The King County Sheriff's Department has circulated two composite sketches of a possible suspect -- a man in his 20s at the time with shoulder-length blonde or light brown hair -- but had been unable to put a name to the sketch.

In December, though, the department sent the DNA profile to California-based forensic consultant Colleen Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick compared the profile to others in genealogy databases and found the closest match was to the family of Robert Fuller, who settled in Salem, Massachusetts, in 1630 and had relatives who came over before him on the Mayflower.

While the descendents of Robert Fuller are likely to number in the thousands after nearly 400 years, geography and physical characteristics can help detectives narrow their search, Fitzpatrick said. In fact, Fitzpatrick said, since the DNA trace follows male descendants, there was "a high degree of probability" that the man police are looking is named Fuller.

"The most important thing is having a last name," Fitzpatrick told CNN. "People get excited about having a Mayflower connection, but the most important thing is having a probable last name for this guy."

King County investigators disclosed the test results Monday.

Fitzpatrick said the DNA she used came from one of several major collections of genetic profiles, a practice she said was "really hot these days for genealogy." She said the people who donated DNA profiles to the database had either done their genealogy or had their DNA tested to trace their connections.

"It allows you to connect with relatives you can't trace through traditional documentation," she said.

Has anyone here done DNA testing? I had mine done through 23andme. One of my sons also went through that company, while the other tested his Y-DNA through Family Tree DNA. It has many advantages, although this highlights one of the side effects of making one's DNA public.

I'm guessing the Y-search database was used in this case.

I'm not completely sold on the health benefits of DNA testing yet. It's still a developing science. I have, however, found previously unknown relatives using DNA.

fisharmor
01-10-2012, 07:54 AM
They're kidding, right?
Please tell me the cops aren't actually saying that they're looking for a guy named Fuller based on a 400 year old DNA match.
I know cops are stupid, but for crying out loud, this is supposed to be the smart ones, and they're following a lead dies if only one guy in 350 years with no birth control available knocks up a prostitute or slave.

You know this is going to result in no-knock raids, too.

RockEnds
01-10-2012, 08:18 AM
That's kind of the trick, isn't it?

They're correct in saying that the probabilities point to someone named Fuller, but the fact of the matter is, there's no shortage of non-paternal events.

We got into DNA testing because I found that my (ex)husband's grandfather's surname was changed between the 1850 census and the 1860 census. We have no records aside from that. We know he took the surname of the man who raised him, but we don't know if that man's wife was his mother, if he was orphaned, if the surname on the 1850 census was the surname of his father, etc. All we know is the surname my sons carry is not the original surname.

Discovering non-paternal events is not uncommon through DNA testing. It is interesting that law enforcement is utilizing public DNA databases to help solve cold cases. I'm not sure how effective it will prove.

Birdlady
01-12-2012, 11:43 AM
What a timely post. I literally just sent in my sample into 23andme. I am getting mine tested for health reasons and not genealogy though. I agree this is one of the weird things they can do with DNA that worries me a bit. I figure at some point insurance companies will start to discriminate as well.

RockEnds
01-12-2012, 11:53 AM
Well, at this point, insurance companies cannot deny anyone health coverage based on the results, but who knows in the future? The big issue right now is that the FDA would very much like to require these tests to be conducted only under the supervision of a doctor. Apparently, they don't think people are capable of rational, objective analysis of their own results. That really boils down to the AMA being upset that the middle man (them) has been cut out. The testing is unbelievably affordable, and that certainly wouldn't be the case if we were all required to obtain a prescription and test through expensive labs.

Birdlady
01-13-2012, 10:00 PM
Well, at this point, insurance companies cannot deny anyone health coverage based on the results, but who knows in the future? The big issue right now is that the FDA would very much like to require these tests to be conducted only under the supervision of a doctor. Apparently, they don't think people are capable of rational, objective analysis of their own results. That really boils down to the AMA being upset that the middle man (them) has been cut out. The testing is unbelievably affordable, and that certainly wouldn't be the case if we were all required to obtain a prescription and test through expensive labs.

Yeah they are trying to limit access to this information. I think it will probably happen eventually, which is honestly one of the reasons why I am testing now. Who knows what will happen in 6 months to a year. You are absolutely right, the price of the test would go up if it had to be done through a doctor and a special lab.

RockEnds
01-14-2012, 08:03 AM
The price will go up, and access will be very limited.

Since I've been networking with other adoptees, I've been kind of amazed. I know people (adoptees) who have genetically predisposed cancers, such as breast cancer, who cannot get a referral from an insurance company to have a genetic test to determine if they have a BRCA mutation. The reason they can't get the referral is because there is no known family history of breast cancer. Of course, there's no known family history at all of any kind. One would think that someone who has developed breast cancer and has a total blank for family history might be the first in line to qualify for genetic testing. No such luck. 23andme is a very nice service for individuals in that predicament.

I've had great fun with the genealogy end of it. It's fun making confirmed relative matches. I've made some of those, and one of them was on a line that has just been a complete mystery. Unfortunately, my match didn't have the family history any further back than I do, but at least we both know that this couple did, in fact, exist. There are times I've kind of wondered.

And even without a confirmed ancestor match, the test helped me locate the birth of a 3rd-g-grandfather. His surname was Miller, and all that was previously known was that he was born in France or Germany. Pretty wide open, there. We did have a birthdate from the gravestone. I had a number of relative matches originating in an area of France where I had no known ancestors. So I went searching the records there, and I found my Miller ancestor--and 3 more generations back. That was exciting. I emailed a cousin who had been researching the family. She said she'd been looking since 1962 with no luck. 23andme was definitely helpful on that one.

IMO, genetic testing is just about the greatest thing since sliced bread. :)

I don't have nearly as much enthusiasm for the way the government is using it here. They're trying to use it backwards, and there are way too many variables to think it will be effective.

Birdlady
01-14-2012, 09:10 AM
Oh I can understand why the genealogy side is so very important to you with you being an adoptee. There have been some incredible stories on there. I have been reading the community forum a lot and some of the stories bring tears to my eyes!

The more I read other people's stories, the more interested I am becoming in the genealogy side of 23andme. I'm sure I will be sitting there for hours looking at Relative Finder once I get my results. lol I'm pretty clueless on my family history to be honest.

Lots of the posts are like a foreign language to me though. Lots of technical terms I know nothing about, so there will be quite a learning curve. No one else in my immediate family is getting tested, so I really won't be able to look at close matches. But maybe in time some of my family members will try it out too.

It seems so stupid that a doctor wouldn't acknowledge that an adoptee may not know their family's health history... Often times adoptees don't even know who their parents were for crying out loud. I swear doctors are becoming dumber as technology and science advances. Their common sense is gone. :eek: For me I've been sick since I was a child, so I'm hoping something shows up on the health side of things. Maybe I have a genetic mutation of some sort causing my problems. No one knows! Doctors sure as hell don't care...

RockEnds
01-14-2012, 09:38 AM
Well, I'm adopted, but I searched and found my parents 25 years ago. I've just always been interested in genealogy. I've done my adoptive family's genealogy as well.

The doctors (more specifically the insurance companies) do recognize that many adoptees don't know family history. That's WHY they won't order the test. They require a known family history of a disease, and many adoptees don't qualify because they have no known family history. At all. So, in the tangled logic of the insurance companies, no known family history = the disease must not run in the family. It's crazy, but it's how they justify not approving the test. We're paying a couple hundred bucks at 23andme, but through a doctor, it could cost $1000 or more just to test for the mutations of one genetic illness. The free market sure beats the pants off of the medical industry's monopoly, and they're really pushing hard to shut it down. Unfortunately, they'll probably get it done.