Posted on 06/29/2019 10:30:45 AM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
A jury convicted a Washington state man Friday in the killings of a young Canadian couple more than three decades ago — a case that was finally solved when investigators turned to powerful genealogy software to build a family tree of the then-unknown suspect.
Tanya Van Cuylenborg, 18, and her 20-year-old boyfriend, Jay Cook, disappeared in November 1987 after leaving their home near Victoria, British Columbia, for what was supposed to be an overnight trip to Seattle. Their bodies were found in separate locations in northwestern Washington state about a week later.
Investigators preserved DNA evidence that was recovered from Van Cuylenborg's body and pants, but they didn't know whose it was until last year. Authorities used genetic genealogy to identify the suspect as William Earl Talbott II, a construction worker and truck driver who was 24 at the time of the killings and lived near where Cook's body was discovered.
The genealogy technique has revolutionized cold-case investigations across the U.S. in the past year. It involves entering crime-scene DNA profiles into public genealogy databases, finding relatives of the person who left the DNA and building family trees that lead detectives to a suspect.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Bookmark
Did you learn that from “Deadwood”?
Think again. I know a woman that gave a kid up for adoption and never told anybody whom went on to have a family of her own. The DNA tests her sister took let the cat out of the bag. She didn’t want to relive the issues again. Pretty much destroyed her and she was doing the right thing.
You are nuts if you think your DNA will not be in a data bank in the future and the info will be used against you to discriminate against all types of things.
Publishing your DNA tests puts you on express train for lack of privacy.
No. Long before “Deadwood” there was a serial killer that was a hog farmer in British Columbia that abducted prostitutes and killed them, subsequently feeding them to his hogs. Only when they suspected him of the deeds and his disposal they checked the hogs feces for human DNA after a recent disappearance. They were able to confirm the DNA from the hog feces matched that of the missing prostitute. They linked him to dozens of other disappearances but could not prove it. I believe the “Deadwood” writers may have heard of this and incorporated it into their story.
“She did earn her bones making a willie brown, so to speak...”
BOL! If I go there, Jim would have to suspend me.
Thanks, please help spread the word on how K woman ignored and did not fund the thousands of rape id kits in California while she was the state AG!
Your explanation is hard to follow.
I think that you are saying that a female submitted her DNA to (presumably GEDmatch since they are almost the only site doing this). Her sister got pregnant and put the child up for adoption and did not tell anyone. That child submitted their own DNA and that child discovered who their mother was.
Of course, that situation is one of the top reasons that people submit their DNA to GEDmatch. Are you suggesting that that child, now an adult, had no right to use their own DNA as they see fit? Does that person have a right to search for their birth family? While DNA has provided another way for a children to learn who their parents are, many other ways have always existed including through the courts. When that day comes, there are ways to deal with it.
I’m not sure that you understand how this works. My DNA is not “published” anywhere (and not at all at GEDmatch). Probable matches are identified by proxy numbers. Both parties have to agree to disclose their names and to decide if that information becomes availble with name associated with it. You don’t insert your DNA into a machine that spits out your name. There is a statisical probability that comes from a comparision of two or many samples thats determines how much of your DNA is shared with the other samples. That has to be done that way since everyone’s DNA, except for identical twins, is different.
Sorry to hear about your friend’s troubles.
That would be preferable, but face it, Laz, your DNA is everywhere!
Nothing is foolproof. DNA tracing is quite a bit more reliable than fingerprints. But....
One potential problem is that the tests may be too sensitive. You leave DNA traces on everything that you touch in every place that you have ever been. You may shed hair or skin cells in places where you never touched anything. And DNA traces can be spread by secondary contact to places that you have never been.
Tests can pick up trace DNA in very small amounts. Signatures from multiple individuals can be identified from one sample. Which one is the correct identification? The nature of the samples is important.
If the authorities are specifically looking for a match with your DNA, they may find it in places you cannot imagine. And if one of those places crosses the path of a crime victim, you are instantly a prime suspect - Err, "person of interest".
Better have an iron-clad alibi.
“”saw him discard a coffee cup and then tested the DNA from the cup,””
That seems a little suspicious. Isn’t that the same way they say they caught the Golden State Killer in CA a couple of years ago?
Have you heard of Ancestry.com?
They’re the number one site for doing this. For $70 they’ll sequence your DNA.
Also, National Geographic is also doing this for a fee.
Why? You drink from a cup, and your lower lip transfer your DNA to the cup surface.
Pick it up when thrown away, and you have that person’s DNA.
And possibly the DNA of the Barista... But that can be tested out if the coffee seller agrees.
Wow. That is amazing.
"Hey, kid! You're the new one in the forensics lab, right? Come on over here...got a job for you."
I think you may be right. You see that all the time on tv detective shows.
If you use all the available services, how closely do their results match? I don’t think I’ve read comparisons of the accuracy of the service. My saliva went to 23AndMe a couple weeks ago. Expecting the results any day now.
Ever persons DNA is linked to somebody else.
The results that you describe is called an admixture report. It is a marketing tool, useful only for entertainment purposes. This report is based on a database of samples that have been collected by the 23 and me, Ancestry.com, or some other organization. Each of these organizations have their own database and hence different results. Over time as these databases grow and the results change. They are measuring a probability of likihood that your test includes shared DNA with certain historical populations: Native Americans, Irish, Russian, Middle East, etc. It’s no more than a guess, but usually a good guess.
To discover a real match, you need at least the tests of two real individuals, not a database. They don’t tell you that until your check has cleared.
Robert William “Willie” Pickton.
http://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/pickton-robert.htm
I had it bookmarked. This is one of my favorite sites to read.
OK if you believe in coincidences, I guess. Two alleged murderers apprehended in the past couple of years after being wanted for the past 30+ years using the same method?
Too bad, that’s the service falsifying results
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.