Law enforcement use of genetic genealogy databases in criminal investigations: Nomenclature, definition and scope

Oliver M. Tuazon , Ray A. Wickenheiser , Ricky Ansell , Christi J. Guerrini , Gerrit-Jan Zwenne , Bart Custers
{"title":"Law enforcement use of genetic genealogy databases in criminal investigations: Nomenclature, definition and scope","authors":"Oliver M. Tuazon ,&nbsp;Ray A. Wickenheiser ,&nbsp;Ricky Ansell ,&nbsp;Christi J. Guerrini ,&nbsp;Gerrit-Jan Zwenne ,&nbsp;Bart Custers","doi":"10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Although law enforcement use of commercial genetic genealogy databases has gained prominence since the arrest of the Golden State Killer in 2018, and it has been used in hundreds of cases in the United States and more recently in Europe and Australia, it does not have a standard nomenclature and scope. We analyzed the more common terms currently being used and propose a common nomenclature: investigative forensic genetic genealogy (iFGG). We define iFGG as the use by law enforcement of genetic genealogy combined with traditional genealogy to generate suspect investigational leads from forensic samples in criminal investigations. We describe iFGG as a proper subset of forensic genetic genealogy, that is, FGG as applied by law enforcement to criminal investigations; hence, investigative FGG or iFGG. We delineate its steps, compare and contrast it with other investigative techniques involving genetic evidence, and contextualize its use within criminal investigations. This characterization is a critical input to future studies regarding the legal status of iFGG and its implications on the right to genetic privacy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36925,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100460"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X2400007X/pdfft?md5=01a36b7c0b70e3eb0a399ab8f30c1621&pid=1-s2.0-S2589871X2400007X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science International: Synergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589871X2400007X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although law enforcement use of commercial genetic genealogy databases has gained prominence since the arrest of the Golden State Killer in 2018, and it has been used in hundreds of cases in the United States and more recently in Europe and Australia, it does not have a standard nomenclature and scope. We analyzed the more common terms currently being used and propose a common nomenclature: investigative forensic genetic genealogy (iFGG). We define iFGG as the use by law enforcement of genetic genealogy combined with traditional genealogy to generate suspect investigational leads from forensic samples in criminal investigations. We describe iFGG as a proper subset of forensic genetic genealogy, that is, FGG as applied by law enforcement to criminal investigations; hence, investigative FGG or iFGG. We delineate its steps, compare and contrast it with other investigative techniques involving genetic evidence, and contextualize its use within criminal investigations. This characterization is a critical input to future studies regarding the legal status of iFGG and its implications on the right to genetic privacy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
执法部门在刑事调查中使用遗传系谱数据库:术语、定义和范围
尽管自 2018 年金州杀手被捕以来,执法部门对商业遗传系谱数据库的使用日益突出,在美国以及最近在欧洲和澳大利亚的数百起案件中都有使用,但它并没有一个标准的术语和范围。我们分析了目前比较常用的术语,并提出了一个通用术语:调查性法医遗传系谱学(iFGG)。我们将 iFGG 定义为执法部门在刑事调查中使用遗传系谱学与传统系谱学相结合的方法,从法医样本中获取可疑的调查线索。我们将 iFGG 描述为法医遗传系谱学的一个适当子集,即执法部门在刑事调查中使用的 FGG,因此称为调查性 FGG 或 iFGG。我们对其步骤进行了划分,将其与其他涉及基因证据的调查技术进行了比较和对比,并对其在刑事调查中的应用进行了背景分析。这一特征描述对今后研究 iFGG 的法律地位及其对基因隐私权的影响至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
75
审稿时长
90 days
期刊最新文献
A transdisciplinary integrated approach to improve identification outcomes for decomposed decedents in medicolegal death investigations Manner of death prediction: A machine learning approach to classify suicide and non-suicide using blood metabolomics Digitalisation of forensic expert activity in Ukraine: Organisational and legal framework Impact of harassment and bullying of forensic scientists on work performance, absenteeism, and intention to leave the workplace in the United States Barriers to human remains identification using forensic odontology in resource-constrained settings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1