Mildly surprised by Ancestry DNA results...

[tvguy]

I could be wrong, but I’m under the impression that the police have access to one DNA site that you have to upload your data to. It’s called Gedmatch Genesis.

The other sites - Ancestry, 23andme, MyHeritage, Familytreedna- do not allow access to their info.

I’m adopted so I was thrilled to get some insight into my heritage even if the ethnicity part is not an exact science yet. My biggest chunk is Jewish and I had no idea! Then I’m Italian, Greek, German, even a little Middle Eastern. What I don’t have is Polish and I was raised in a very Polish family, lol

With a court order they have access to every DNA database.

 

[MrsDuck]

My whole family has done 23 and Me. It was fun!! I'm not at all worried about my DNA exposing someone... if someone commits a crime, I hope DNA helps people solve the case. There have been so many cases recently where DNA databases have helped crack cold cases. I'm here for it!

 

[Chuck S]

They would need to show "just cause" to get a court order, like when getting a search warrant. Meaning there is already enough circumstantial evidence that the judge agrees. Not just, oh, we don't know who did this random bad thing, let's look at your entire DNA database to see if something pops up. And no, it totally wouldn't bother me if my Ancestry DNA got someone in my family arrested. It was their choice to do the crime, they need to pay the penalty. Them getting arrested has NOTHING to do with your decision to have your DNA checked. Apples and oranges.

 

[Moliphino]

It's really not that simple. There are very, VERY few groups who have distinctive genetic markers. For the life of me I cannot figure out how to paste links on DH's tablet but there was an article in Scientific American in October 2018 by Adam Rutherford and another in Popular Science in December 2019 by Jack Herrera that talks more about these issues.

I was going for simple, not an in depth explanation of genetics.

 

[JimMIA]

They would need to show "just cause" to get a court order, like when getting a search warrant. Meaning there is already enough circumstantial evidence that the judge agrees. Not just, oh, we don't know who did this random bad thing, let's look at your entire DNA database to see if something pops up.

This probably varies some from state to state, but the threshold for a search warrant is MUCH higher than needed for a subpoena (which would be the only thing needed to access DNA databases).

You need "probable cause" for a search warrant, which is loosely defined as sufficient evidence to convince a "reasonable person" that a crime had occurred and that evidence of that crime was contained in whatever you are asking to search.

For a subpoena, there is actually no burden of proof at all. All you need is the legal authority to issue subpoenas. All prosecutors have subpoena power, and there really is not much needed to get a subpoena. In fact, quite often NO evidence is disclosed to get a subpoena, and sometimes even the target of the subpoena is not disclosed to the prosecutor. For example, in my now-legendary law enforcement career we got subpoenas daily citing nothing more than "For Investigation." (Obviously, there is a history of trust involved between police and prosecutors.)

 

[JimMIA]

On the question of "nationality," as I understand it the companies are not saying that you are a particular nationality.

What they are saying is that your specific DNA profile is most common in certain geographic locations. I don't believe there are specific genetic markers which say a person was born in a particular region -- they're saying people like you are more common in this area.

Here's how mine looks on a map (four of the smaller percentages are missing due to the way I snipped it.)



I suspect the very detailed percentages of various areas of England and Scotland are due to this company (LivingDNA) being based in England, and therefore having extensive data there.

Of course, I could be (and frequently am) wrong!

 

[pweyl36]

So, I have to ask, none of you were concerned that submitting your DNA could expose a family member as a criminal? We have several major cases here where police linked DNA information from the testing sites to relatives of those who submitted the DNA who committed crimes and left DNA behind.

If someone in my family committed a crime then that's on them.

 

[Turn the Page]

On the question of "nationality," as I understand it the companies are not saying that you are a particular nationality.

What they are saying is that your specific DNA profile is most common in certain geographic locations. I don't believe there are specific genetic markers which say a person was born in a particular region -- they're saying people like you are more common in this area.

Here's how mine looks on a map (four of the smaller percentages are missing due to the way I snipped it.)

View attachment 474515

I suspect the very detailed percentages of various areas of England and Scotland are due to this company (LivingDNA) being based in England, and therefore having extensive data there.

Of course, I could be (and frequently am) wrong!

Yes, but people read it as the percentage of their DNA coming from a particular country and that just isn't the case.

 

[piccolopat]

Well, if you look at the history, some Scandavian ancestry for those of us who are mostly English/Scottish/Irish should not be a surprise. If you look at Scandanavian expansion to Iceland and Greenland (and eventually to North America), you pretty much can't get there without passing right by the UK.

Also, the VIkings had a present in the British Isles and that may explain at least some of the Scandavian showing up for many that have UK roots.

 

[JimMIA]

Also, the VIkings had a present in the British Isles and that may explain at least some of the Scandavian showing up for many that have UK roots.

Right, that's what I was talking about. They not only raided the British Isles, they also had a longtime trading relationship -- especially with Scotland. If you look at a map, Scotland and Norway are not that far apart and the Shetland Islands are in between.

 

[Kaleidodad]

With a court order they have access to every DNA database.

Ancestry and 23andMe have never provided their databases for law enforcement purposes, and it would probably take a major court loss for them to ever be forced to do so.

 

[Kaleidodad]

My mom did hers... She thought she was mostly German with German surnames going back on both sides of her family, maybe with a little French thrown in. One of my cousins claims to have traced their genealogy back to Germany. (Although, honestly, I'm not sure how much I'd put into this particular cousin's research skills.) Her ancestry results came back mostly England/Wales/Northwest Europe and Ireland/Scotland. Only 2% from Germanic Europe, France is not listed at all, unless it's grouped as part of Northwest Europe.

Ancestry's "England, Wales & Northwestern Europe" does include most of the northern half of France, fyi.

 

[JimMIA]

Ancestry and 23andMe have never provided their databases for law enforcement purposes, and it would probably take a major court loss for them to ever be forced to do so.

No company which maintains any kind of personal records -- bank, medical, financial, anything -- just opens their books to law enforcement. And if they did, whatever evidence was revealed would probably be inadmissible.

They do, however, comply with lawfully-issued subpoenas and other legal process. They can contest the demands for info through legal actions, but they would have to do whatever the courts decided. They are not immune from the law.

 

[Kaleidodad]

No company which maintains any kind of personal records -- bank, medical, financial, anything -- just opens their books to law enforcement. And if they did, whatever evidence was revealed would probably be inadmissible.

They do, however, comply with lawfully-issued subpoenas and other legal process. They can contest the demands for info through legal actions, but they would have to do whatever the courts decided. They are not immune from the law.

Yes, which is why I specifically said "it would take a major court loss for them to ever be forced to do so." Both companies are absolutely beefing up their legal teams to fight these coming court battles. (And I suspect a big part of why this isn't already in the courts is probably that law enforcement agencies know that they will lose anyway.)

 

[fortwildernessishome]

Well, I guess all families are different. I can say that in the two court cases here it has DEVASTATED the families. I think it would devastate my family.

I think most families are devastated if their loved ones turns out to be a murderer, serial rapist etc. Heck, I often feel devastated when I hear of these terrible stories in the news and I don't have a loved one involved.

However, if a family member was caught, because I did a DNA test, I wouldn't be devastated per se because it was my DNA test that caught them, I would be devastated because my family would never be the same. I would be devastated because someone that I loved and cared about turned out to be a monster. I would NOT be devastated because my DNA helped catch them. In fact, after I got over the shock, I think it would be the complete opposite. I would be grateful! That as sad as I was, that my illusion of my family member being an upstanding and wonderful person was now over, I would feel grateful to find out that they are in reality a monster.

Honestly, I think most people would want to know if they have a monster in the family. Personally, I wouldn't want to go to the family cook out to hang out with Uncle Frank, who appears to be the best Uncle in the world, but is actually a Ted Bundy type!!! If my DNA test brought him to justice, I would be thrilled. Would a part of me mourn (feel devastated) the Uncle I thought I knew? Sure. But, I would be at peace that they couldn't hurt anyone anymore and were caught and brought to justice.

 

[JimMIA]

Yes, which is why I specifically said "it would take a major court loss for them to ever be forced to do so." Both companies are absolutely beefing up their legal teams to fight these coming court battles. (And I suspect a big part of why this isn't already in the courts is probably that law enforcement agencies know that they will lose anyway.)

Actually, the reason why the issue hasn't been in the courts (to my knowledge) is that the law enforcement groups (including the FBI) were operating outside the normal legal channels for gathering evidence. In some cases, investigators just uploaded DNA to sites which allow anyone to upload DNA, but do not do DNA testing themselves. In other cases, individual investigators went directly to people they knew personally within the companies and got their help -- in at least one case, in clear violation of the company's own Terms of Service.

Here's a link to a good article which describes some of the things that were done: https://www.theatlantic.com/science...-dna-database-criminal-investigations/599005/

What we don't know is what the investigators did once they got a lead in those cases. Normally, once they got pointed in the right direction, investigators would make sure they used proper legal methods to actually gather evidence...as opposed to developing leads.

But that legal process requires a great deal of specificity. You can't just subpoena a company and say, "Let me see all your records." You have to clearly specify what you are looking for -- fishing expeditions are not allowed. If an agency asked to compare DNA evidence from a crime scene against a company's entire database, that would almost certainly NOT pass legal muster.

If law enforcement failed to follow proper legal procedures, their evidence would be ruled inadmissible, and the bad guy would walk.

You are right that 23andme and Ancestry do not allow law enforcement to upload DNA or search their records. They are doing nothing fancy there; they are simply complying with the 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure -- just like any bank, doctor's office, or any other business would.

The vast majority of DNA-solved cases are always going to come from law enforcement databases -- NOT from private companies. Many states have requirements that convicted criminals of various types submit DNA samples, and those samples form a vast database owned and operated by law enforcement. There is no need to go to private companies in most cases. They simply search their state's database, or the FBI database, and identify the subject.

Given all that, I think the chances of my DNA on file with an ancestry company is extremely unlikely to be used in any criminal investigation.

 

[tvguy]

Ancestry and 23andMe have never provided their databases for law enforcement purposes, and it would probably take a major court loss for them to ever be forced to do so.

To be clear, no they won't let Police rifle through there files, but yes, absolutely they will release information is a warrant or other court order is presented. They would be on Contempt of Court if they didn't.

FROM 23andme. "spokesman for 23andMe, Christine Pai, said in an emailed statement, “We never share customer data with law enforcement unless we receive a legally valid request such as a search warrant or written court order"

FROM ANCESTRY :"
Law Enforcement Requests in the United States:
Contents of communications and any data relating to the DNA of an Ancestry user will be released only pursuant to a valid search warrant from a government agency with proper jurisdiction."

 

[Moliphino]

I just saw this story linked on Neatorama and thought of this thread. DNA databases can also exonerate the wrongfully convicted.

California man freed after 15 years in prison thanks to genealogy website data

 

[FlightlessDuck]

You have to take these DNA tests with a grain of salt, by the way. They aren't always completely accurate.

https://www.livescience.com/63997-dna-ancestry-test-results-explained.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-accurate-are-online-dna-tests/
https://now.tufts.edu/articles/pulling-back-curtain-dna-ancestry-tests

 

[DisneyDebbie]

I know this discussion is mostly about the ETHNICITY accuracy, which is not exact.

The DNA chromosome matching most definitely IS accurate (just needed to clarify)

You have to take these DNA tests with a grain of salt, by the way. They aren't always completely accurate.

https://www.livescience.com/63997-dna-ancestry-test-results-explained.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-accurate-are-online-dna-tests/
https://now.tufts.edu/articles/pulling-back-curtain-dna-ancestry-tests