Posted on 02/05/2019 2:57:54 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
One of the questions jokingly asked in ASA units was who possesses a larger dossier on each of us.
Our own government or the KGB / GRU.
So the letter from familytreedna was not correct?
I agree. Put that possibility in the PRO column.
In the other column, employees who were convinced that some dna sample was "close enough" (or were just wrong about a match) might finger an innocent person.
You don't have to agree, but personally I hold a huge amount of concern about the FBI (not individuals, the bureau as an entity).
fruser1 wrote: “I’d only put the family dna test about one small notch higher than hearsay, as far as “evidence” goes.”
There are multiple kinds of DNA tests. Do you really think a prosecutor would present the results from FamilyTreeDNA as evidence?
“In the other column, employees who were convinced that some dna sample was “close enough” (or were just wrong about a match) might finger an innocent person.”
DNA would actually clear a person wrongly associated. But you are correct that it is possible the wrong distant relative could initially be associated.
Direct DNA analysis would clear him unless he had an identical twin he didn’t know about.
As far as FBI, I am now of the opinion it should be discontinued.
It’s served its purpose and is obsolete.
In a FISA court? They used the "dossier."
“FamilyTreeDNA”
That’s exactly what the article of the original post is talking about.
You didn’t think the FBI was using it for fun did you?
“Start your own business. Problem solved.”
The last place I worked at drug tested consultants.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Weissmann used it.
Data from FamilyTreeDNA would be used only to identify suspects. The final match would be done with DNA they collected from the suspect using formal police procedures.
“collected from the suspect using formal police procedures”
Your missing the other half of the equation - the sample collected at the crime scene. What you imply is that the “more perfect” sample from the suspect makes it definitive and most juries would likely agree with you.
But what if that crime scene sample is not so good? You can actually have DNA from two people in one sample that would result in an unrelated third person match.
See paper in link of post 39.
“Great, the solutions then is to ban all evidence in criminal trials. Who can prove that any form of evidence cannot be ‘faked’.”
When enough people do not trust government/police, you will have some on every jury rejecting their evidence. We had recent cases here of cops planting crack on people just to become promoted.
The solution is for government to be far more transparent and stop lying through their damn teeth
Finally! A post that makes sense... Like people who buy newly built homes near an airport and then spend all their time bitching and/or suing about the noise...
couple this with the messed up corrupt legal system and doj and you have a condition straight out of the gestapo.
the fourth amendment does not functionally exist any longer.
I received the letter from FTdna president. In order to get access to the data, the need to subpoena the data at which time the data is shared. It has to be for a cold case crime and a serious crime.
Personally, I have no problem with that.
The great majority of “good” govt. workers (an oxymoron, if ever there was one) are only looking for a steady deposit in their bank account, all those perks they’re given, and a golden parachute retirement and healthcare package. They’re not gonna rock the boat, no matter what they’re told to do.
I can’t stop anybody from using these dna testing companies. But once they have the data, I believe they have it forever. And like in the facebook story, the temptation is great to sell it. How else will they make money?
Whether LE receives the data from its own account or from another user, what LE can do with that data is a more consequential concern than what a user would do with his own data.
There is also the likelihood of victims' groups putting pressure on these companies or their employees to "help solve crimes" (even if that would really not help).
Absolutely right. They want to ride the gravey train as long as they can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.