DNA Testing for Paternity, Maternity, Sibling and Immigration
DNA Identifiers has been offering clients peace of mind since 2001. Our service is quick, confidential and compassionate. We are commited to excellence in customer service!
Contact Us Today (888) 362-4339
Se Habla Español!
Did You Know?
Over 30% of all men tested for paternity are NOT the father!
Article Categories
- Child Custody
- Child support
- Crianza de los Niños
- Crime/Criminal
- Custodia de los Niños
- Divorce
- Divorcio
- DNA Banking
- DNA Tip of the Month
- En Español
- Family Law
- Family Reconstruction
- Forensic Testing
- Health & Wellness
- Home DNA testing
- Immigration
- Immigration Law
- Parenting
- Parents Rights
- Paternity Laws
- Paternity Testing
- Pruebas De ADN
Resources
The Truth About Sex in America Today
Co-authored by our own Meagan Thompson
Article Archives
- March 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
Archive for the ‘Crime/Criminal’ Category
New Hope for Old Cases: Full DNA Profile of Ted Bundy Now Available
New Hope for Old Cases: Full DNA Profile of Ted Bundy Now Available
Twenty Two years after Ted Bundy’s execution, and at least 30 dead, a full DNA profile of Bundy is now available though CODIS the FBI DNA database. It is hoped that his profile can bring closure to open homicide cases nation wide.
DNA was extracted from a vial of blood discovered in a courthouse where it had been stored for the last three decades. The profile was assembled by David Coffman, chief of forensics at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Coffman says that police departments can now enter DNA evidence they might have from cold cases into the system and see if there is any match with Mr. Bundy’s DNA
Coffman also said in an interview that he typically receives four or five calls a year from investigators located nation-wide asking about Bundy’s DNA in connection with unsolved cases. He went on to state that until now there has been no full DNA profile available. Because of the length of time Bundy was actively killing, and because he was active on both the west and the east coasts, many investigators would like to confirm or eliminate him as a suspect. Unfortunately, his crimes took place well before the advent of DNA technology and therefore, his DNA was not secured before his death. In 2002 a partial DNA profile was created from a tissue sample taken during Bundy’s autopsy, but the profile from the tissue sample was not complete enough to enter into the F.B.I. database CODIS. Until now.
Coffman’s department was contacted earlier this year by the Tacoma Washington Police Department for a cold case that involved an 8-year-old girl who disappeared from her house in 1961. They suspected Bundy because he was living in Tacoma at the time and alway claimed that he got is start as a teen. He was 14 at the time. Bundy denied responsibility for her disappearance.
Coffman’s department made an effort to extract DNA from two dental molds held at the department’s forensics laboratory. The impressions, which had been taken in the 1970s, matched bite marks on the left buttock of 20-year-old Lisa Levy, one of two students at Florida State University Mr. Bundy was convicted of killing. But the DNA in the dental molds was too degraded to use for a profile.
Coffman’s department then started calling contacts around Florida to see if any evidence might still exist that could contain DNA. Fortunately, a vial of blood was found in the evidence vault at the Columbia County courthouse. The blood had been taken in 1978 in connection with the death of 12-year-old Kimberly Leach in Lake City, Fla., the third murder Mr. Bundy was convicted for.
Despite being 33 years old, the sample was perfect and a full profile was created and uploaded into the F.B.I.’s DNA database, CODIS.
According to Coffman, at this time there have been no hits on any cold cases. The Tacoma police hope to test any DNA they can find from the Burr case against the Bundy profile. Cold-case detective in the Tacoma Police Department’s homicide unit, Gene Miller said his office was shipping biological material from the Burr house to the state’s crime laboratory and that if DNA can be extracted, it would then be uploaded into the F.B.I.’s database. He and his office feel that this could be “a huge step forward,” Detective Miller said. Even if it does not, “it will still be a great step forward,” because it will finally eliminate or confirm him as a suspect. It is likely that police departments in other areas where Bundy passed through will do the same.
New Jersey To Require Violent Crime Convict DNA Samples
Bill A-2594, that passed the New Jersey Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee and now heads to the full Assembly, will increase law enforcement’s crime-fighting powers buy requiring DNA samples from individuals arrested on suspicion of certain violent crimes. An identical version of the bill has already been approved by the Senate today.
Bill A-2594 amends New Jersey’s “DNA Database and Databank Act of 1994” so that it requires DNA samples from anyone arrested on suspicion of crimes. These include: murder; manslaughter; second degree aggravated assault; attempts to or causes serious bodily injury to another, or causes bodily injury while fleeing or attempting to flee a law enforcement officer; kidnapping; luring or enticing a child; engaging in sexual conduct which would impair or debauch the morals of a child; or aggravated sexual assault; sexual assault; aggravated criminal sexual contact; criminal sexual contact, or an attempt to commit any of these offenses.
Currently the FBI uses a system called CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) which provides for the storage and exchange of law enforcement DNA records on a national basis. CODIS consists of two separate indexes. The first is a “forensic” index containing DNA profiles from crime scene evidence. The second is an “offender” index, with DNA profiles of convicted offenders. It also allows for an electronic comparison of the DNA profiles from those two indexes. Often “hits” (matches) between DNA found at crime scenes and DNA profiles of convicted offenders are made. Analysts can also link multiple or unsolved crimes to a single perpetrator by comparing profiles in both indexes.
The New Jersey bill stipulates that if the charges against a person from whom a DNA sample was collected are dismissed, or if a person is acquitted at trial, the sample and the profile would be destroyed, and all related records expunged, upon request by that individual.
The bill also gives law enforcement the teeth to be able to ensure compliance by making it a crime for any person who knowingly refuses to submit to the collection of a blood or biological sample. The penalty would be a term of imprisonment of up to 18 months, or a fine of up to $10,000, or both.
That’s right, April 25th is National DNA Day! In 2003, it was proclaimed as such by both the US Senate and the House of Representatives. DNA Day is a remembrance of the advancements in DNA technology. Among them: a ground breaking article on the structure of DNA which was first published in 1953; and the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003.While you might not have the day off, you might want to stop and think about just what DNA has done for us.
Whether you are in the industry as a geneticist, scientist, doctor, of just a regular citizen, you probably understand how big of a contribution mapping our human genome has made to our lives. From medicine, cancer and disease research, the more we understand the better equipped we are to provide personalized medicine to each and every person. So this April, honor these advancements by taking some time to think about DNA and some of it’s many uses:
1. In archeology, DNA helps record genetic information of life on earth many centuries ago. This creates a data base that can be used to learn more about our planet’s past.
2. Genetic testing is used to determine the paternity or maternity of a child.
3. DNA testing can be used to help create a family tree or genealogical chart. Through genetic databases one can trace lost relatives or find their ancestral heritage. Using both the Y-Chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA people can use DNA testing to establish ancestral lines (both remain unchanged for generations). Now, technology is improving and recent advancements have been made in using non-sex chromosomes for ancestral research.
4. Prenatal genetic tests can help doctors determine whether or not the unborn fetus are predisposed to have certain health problems.
5. DNA tests are also used to help solve murders and other crimes. In recent years, many unsolved mysteries have been solved due to new and better types of analysis, as well as clearing many people found guilty of crimes that they did not commit.
6. DNA testing finds great use in the health field as DNA sometimes is the cause of rare medical conditions or heritable diseases.
7. Genetic testing is used in healths checks. For example it can be used to help determine the presence of viruses or cells that have mutated (causing cancer).
8. DNA tests are often used to reunite lost siblings or families or identify remains of the unknown. The genetics of a person leaves an indelible mark and this is used by police, military and authorities, as well as individuals to confirm relationships.
9. DNA tests on new species, or on material from outer space, help scientists and researchers determine the origins of a species and where they stand with reference to known living forms.
There are even more applications then the 9 mentioned, but this might give you a glimpse into the basic importance of our genetic relationship with ourselves and our surrounding. So, on April 25th, celebrate DNA Day!
- By Briana Rogers
The National Institute of Justice will auditing the Austin, TX Crime Lab. They are looking into the lab’s use of the nation’s Combined DNA Index System. This is part of an already scheduled inspection that has taken on a new focus once complaints about the lab by a former employee, Cecily Hamilton, hit the news. Cecily Hamilton allegations may lead to another independent audit. Hamilton doesn’t imply that any mistakes were made at the lab, prosecutors are bracing for the worst.
Hamilton who worked at the APD’s lab for three years before leaving earlier in 2010, wrote a memo to supervisors in February which consisted of a laundry list of complaints about the lab. It notably, makes no complaints about the scientific work done by its analysts but instead focuses on personal conflicts with various employees that she alleges made the lab a “hostile work environment.” Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo said that Hamilton’s allegations had been investigated and deemed unfounded.
The lab, which opened in 2005, has never failed any of its audits, which are conducted by both the FBI and the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors. Never the less the Austin Police Department has requested that the Travis County District Attorney’s Office select a company or individual of their choosing to come in and conduct another audit.
John Neal, first assistant Travis County district attorney, stated that prosecutors have begun to notify all defense attorneys in pending criminal cases about the allegations. He also stated that they are now considering the logistics of how to notify defendants who have already been convicted in cases that involve work done at the APD lab. The effect of Hamilton’s allegations on the day-to-day workings of the criminal justice system remains to be seen.
On Wednesday October 13th the Supreme Court justices asked about an hour’s worth of questions regarding Henry Skinner’s request that a Texas district attorney turn over all existing DNA evidence in the triple murder he was convicted of in 1995.
In an interview Skinner said, “Turn over the evidence and test it, and let the chips fall where they may. If I’m innocent I go home. If I’m guilty, I die. What’s so hard about that?”
The justices, the two attorneys representing Skinner, and district attorney Lynn Switzer referred to around a half-dozen Supreme Court precedents in addition to the difference between a civil rights claim, using federal habeas law to attack a wrongful conviction, the respect owed state courts when the justices are interpreting state statutes and even the definition of the word “necessarily.” The issue that they never came close to was the question of whether DNA evidence that might prove a person guilty or innocent should always be available to the convicted.
This is because in a 2009 decision involving an Alaska man who was convicted of kidnapping and rape, the court ruled 5 to 4 that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to DNA evidence. The court did however acknowledged that such DNA testing had an “unparalleled ability” to separate the guilty from the innocent, the majority of the court said that the decision on when prisoners have the right to such DNA testing are best left to state legislatures and Congress. While this appears to be a roadblock to prisoner’s requests for additional DNA testing the justices left a small loophole. The Justices allowed that for civil rights claims, if the prisoner could show that he was denied due process to obtaining evidence that could lead to his exoneration they should be allowed additional DNA testing.
That is the argument that Skinner and his attorneys are seeking to use. Skinner has always proclaimed his innocence, despite acknowledging that he was in the home during the brutal killings of his girlfriend and her two children on New Year’s Eve 1993. Skinner has always claimed that he was passed out on what tests later showed to be a near-lethal combination of codeine and alcohol and that he could not have overpowered and killed the three in his condition. He said he woke to find them dead; the blood on his clothes came from examining them.
When the trial occurred prosecutors tested some of the DNA evidence from the home. They did not test material from a rape kit, or skin cells under Busby’s fingernails, or hairs and other evidence from the scene. This is the evidence that Skinner is claiming will prove his innocence. At the time it seems a strategic decisions was made by both the prosecutors and the defense. Prosecutors did not feel they needed the extra evidence. While Skinner’s lawyer feared more testing would only make the case against his client stronger.
After the trial Skinner and his supporters, including Northwestern University’s Medill Innocence Project, have pointed out that Busby had expressed fear of her uncle, Skinner contends that the now deceased uncle is the possible killer, and Skinner states that he always wanted the evidence tested.
Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing was based solely on technical arguments. Skinner’s attorney told the court that the only issue was whether Skinner could use the federal courts to press his civil rights claim to the evidence. He cited a previous court ruling that gave prisoners access to some evidence as long as the claim would not “necessarily imply the invalidity of a conviction or sentence.”
“I would interpret his complaint is what he wants is the DNA. He thinks it’s going to be exculpatory. He doesn’t know that till he gets it,” stated Justice Stephen G. Breyer. While Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said “In the real world, a prisoner who wants access to DNA evidence is interested in overturning his conviction,” and so his request for the DNA could not be separated from his attempt to get off death row.
Gregory Coleman, who represented district attorney Switzer, agreed with Justice Samel A. Alito Jr. stating that, “this is an attack on the criminal proceeding.” Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan both pointed out that this places Skinner in a Catch-22, because he couldn’t challenge the wrongfulness of his conviction without knowing the results of the DNA test.
At this time there has been no ruling on the case.
In 2006 and 2007 there was a big push to create genetic passports for, plants, animals, microorganisms and even people this now seems to be a dream of the past. What happened to genetic passports? Why was there so much interest in them? How were they going to be used?
Read more »
Familial DNA Testing May Target Minority Communities
Concern spreads as familial DNA testing becomes more widespread. Familial DNA is becoming more widely used to help capture suspects, the worry is that familial DNA testing may result in minority communities being unfairly targeted.
Peter Bibring, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California stated that, since familial DNA was successfully used in the capture of Lonnie David Franklin Jr., the alleged Grim Sleeper who killed 11 victims between 1985 and 2007. Because of this successful use of familial DNA testing, prosecutors have begun to argue that it should be more widely used. However, groups like the ACLU argue that the technique not only raises issues of constitutionality and rights to privacy, but fairness.
While in a traditional DNA forensic analysis, police take a DNA sample that has been recovered from a crime scene. That DNA is analyzed (a profile is created) and then the profile is compared to a database of DNA taken from convicted felons. This search is looking for an exact match between a convicted felons’ DNA profile and the profile from the forensic sample.
Familial DNA looks not for an exact match but for partial matches. They both use a database of convicted criminals DNA profile. In Familial DNA testing if there are partial matches, then there is an assumption that the forensic sample may be from somebody who is related to the convicted felon whose DNA was a partial match. All the police have to do then is look at the person’s family (including obtaining DNA samples) and see if one of them might be the perpetrator.
The issue that the American Civil Liberties Union is that because Familial DNA testing relies on partial matching they are not completely accurate and that they widen the number of people who could fall under suspicion and be investigated by police.
The American Civil Liberties Union believes that because the criminal justice system disproportionately arrests and convicts people of color, they are therefore over-represented in the DNA databases used to conduct these test, leading to communities of color being adversely affected by familial searches which extend beyond the offender and include the offender’s family.
Attorney Daniel Grimm wrote in an article that, “the databank system is not racially neutral. Over time this scenario risks constructing stigmatic myths about ethnicity and criminal conduct that can be devastating to those affected.” The arcicle titled “The Demographics of Genetic Surveillance: Familial DNA Testing and the Hispanic Community” was published by the Columbia Law Review. Grimm goes on to point out that due in part to population growth, high arrest and conviction rates the Hispanic community will be affected more by Familial DNA testing than any other racial group.
While the ACLU worries about the over representation of minority communities professor Erin Murphy, with the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, is concerned with the possible contamination of samples, and intentionally malfeasant analysts. According to Erin Murphy Familial DNA testing, relies not just on the genetic information being accurate, it also on a DNA analyst’s ability to reason, processes of elimination, subjective judgment calls and inferences.
The only fair solution is to have a universal DNA database, where all members of society have their DNA logged, or to to restrict familial searching to extremely serious cases where all other leads have been exhausted, according to Jennifer Mnookin a professor of law at UCLA.
In the Grim Sleeper case, California Attorney General Jerry Brown only allowed Familial DNA searching after all other investigative leads had been exhausted. Investigators did not knock on doors for all the possible matches. Instead they refined their list of suspects based on additional DNA tests and circumstantial evidence. Such as evidence that revealed the suspect lived in the area where the murders took place or that the suspect could have committed the crimes over the two decades which gave insight as to his possible age. In addition prior to going public, investigators obtained an exact DNA match between their Familial search suspect and the forensic evidence.
What worries organization like the ACLU and many others is that widespread use of Familial DNA testing is that there will be a lack of oversight and law enforcement will not take the same strong precautions that were taken in the Grim Sleeper case. According to reports, the Denver District Attorney has already used familial DNA testing in less serious crimes, such as car thefts and burglaries. Familial DNA testing is something that is in use and probably won’t be going away. It is now up to the courts to determine how widely used the process becomes.
Attorney General Investigates North Carolina Crime Lab
In August a report was released regarding an investigation into North Carolina’s State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) crime lab. Two retired FBI agents were assigned to conduct the investigation following the release of Greg Taylor after he spent 16 years in prison for a crime it appears he did not commit.
Reason Magazine who first reported the story stated that, “The report found that SBI agents withheld exculpatory evidence or distorted evidence in more than 230 cases over a 16 year period. Three of those cases resulted in execution. There was widespread lying, corruption and pressure from prosecutors and other law enforcement officials on crime lab analysts to produce results that would help secure convictions.”
The 2009 National Academy of Science Report, “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” was critical of many aspects of the current forensic sciences process reported that crime laboratories need to be independent from the direction of law enforcement.
The report went on to state that while there are many forensic field screening tests that look for the presence of blood there are many substances that will produce a false positive result for the “presence of blood”. This means that it is very important that field screening is followed up with “confirmatory” lab testing to confirm the field findings.
Agents with The News & Observer reported that, “according to the review, the cases involved SBI lab reports that were overstated, misleading or omitted important information about negative test results that would have been favorable to the defendants. The SBI’s lab work is often powerful evidence in criminal cases, shaping decisions at the heart of a defense that include decisions about plea bargaining or how to cross examine witnesses. The SBI has followed more updated procedures on blood analysis since 2003, and more recent work is not under scrutiny. The tests that are examined in the bulk of this report are no longer in use.”
According to lab notes discovered in 2009, the North Carolina Crime Lab had performed more specific tests, which registered negative results for the presence of blood when examining evidence from the Taylor case. During the hearing an analyst never mentioned those results or any additional. The analyst testified that his superiors taught him to write his reports like that.
The ACLU is challenging the California law that requires police to collect the DNA from all suspected felons. Michael Risher an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union told the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco court that the government should not be allowed to take the “genetic blueprint” of someone who hasn’t been convicted of a crime. One-third of the 300,000 Californians arrested on felony charges each year are never convicted. This does not stop the police from talking their DNA sample.
Read more »
Illinois Becomes First State to Require Testing of DNA Evidence in Sex Crimes
Illinois is now the first state in the country to require testing of DNA evidence from sex crimes. Their new law requires local police to submit rape kits collected from victims to state police for analysis. This must be done with 10 business days of the crime.
Attorney General Lisa Madigan said, “By using this DNA evidence we will be able to get sex offenders out of our communities and into prisons where they belong. Most importantly we will finally be pursuing justice for women and children who have been victims of this horrible and violent crime.”
It’s estimated more than four thousand rape kits are sitting untested in evidence rooms. Madigan says they could include vital DNA evidence to help prosecute offenders and exonerate others.
The other new law protects the confidentiality of statements victims make to rape crisis personnel. This new law passed the General Assembly unanimously and will go into effect January 1st, 2011.