Posted on 02/06/2025 5:32:52 PM PST by nickcarraway
The FBI has approved changes to the Quality Assurance Standards (QAS) for Forensic Laboratories to allow DNA evidence profiles generated by Rapid DNA analysis to be searched against the national DNA database (CODIS).
On January 27, the QAS documents were posted on the website of the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM), announcing that the new standards will have an effective date of July 1, 2025.
At least seven states (Arizona, Connecticut, Kentucky, Missouri, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania) have already taken proactive steps to support criminal investigations by creating non-CODIS statewide programs to allow crime scene evidence tested on Rapid DNA instruments to be searched against their own state’s index of criminal offenders. The official guidance from the FBI and SWGDAM will allow these seven states, as well as all other states moving forward, to search the entire CODIS database. However, before having access to CODIS, law enforcement must work in partnership with public crime laboratories to develop requisite procedures.
“This is a major step forward. Crime lab outcomes are not only based on timely leads for the investigating agencies that we serve, but also potentially in lives saved,” said Dr. Ray Wickenheiser, retired New York State Police Crime Laboratory System Director, and Past President of the American Society of Crime Lab Directors (ASCLD). “Victims need justice. Families need answers. And time matters.”
We encourage all law enforcement to reach out to partners at public crime labs to discuss how to take advantage of this critical step forward. We encourage crime labs to initiate leadership discussions on how to establish this important service for the communities they serve.
“CODIS” stands for “Combined DNA Index System,” which is a national database maintained by the FBI that allows law enforcement agencies to compare DNA profiles from crime scenes to DNA profiles of convicted offenders, helping to link unsolved crimes and identify suspects across different jurisdictions; essentially acting as a searchable repository of DNA information to aid in criminal investigations.
I am very torn on this.
right to privacy
trust in the fib
wanting the worst criminals to be caught.
the possibilities of abuse are so staggering I have to say no.
we have seen the abuses and heard the horrible stories lives ruined because of bad ai facial recognition.
Coincidentally mostly minorities.
I am not saying AI is racist or that it thinks all black people look the same, but it seems that somewhere in the computer-human chain there are weak links.
Considering that the DNA is either missing persons, collected evidence or convicted offenders, I’m not bothered at all by privacy concerns.
This isn’t random citizen DNA.
“Considering that the DNA is either missing persons, collected evidence or convicted offenders, I’m not bothered at all by privacy concerns.
This isn’t random citizen DNA.”
do you know that they did not buy the bankrupt 23 and me dna profiles, or subscribe to any of the other commercial dna bank info sources so they can do familial dna ?
https://www.sciencealert.com/millions-of-peoples-dna-in-doubt-as-23andme-faces-bankruptcy
There is a separate process do familial dna searches. It is not done through Codis. Rather Codis dna profiles are sent to the private dna banks to look for matches.
possibly today, but maybe tomorrow they will think of the words “parallel construction”
They won’t do it through CODIS. They keep CODIS “clean” for evidentiary purposes. Only dna collected from evidence, convicted offenders and missing persons goes into CODIS. Then it can be sent from there to other databases to look for matches.
They may eventually create a new database to gather up random citizens but they won’t put it into CODIS. But they will submit Codis files to any database they are given access.
Collecting random dna from general citizens definitely has rights concerns and is likely unconstitutional. Collecting dna from actual evidence and convicts is already established as constitutional.
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.