Category Archives: Transhuman News

UIndys molecular anthropology laboratory conducted the research.(Photo: Photo provided by the University of Indianapolis)

If an individual is arrested, and DNA is collected but prosecutors do not immediately file charges how long should the government be able to hold on to the DNA sample?

Is 30 days enough time? What about six months?

Or should the government be allowed to keep a person's DNA for a year, even if he or she has not been formally charged with a crime?

Lawmakers on Wednesday debated the question during a committee hearing for a bill that would allow police to take a DNA sample upon arrest, broadening the scope of the state's DNA database, which currently only takes samples from those who have been convicted of a crime.

Ben Davis killing:DNA, cellphone link man to student's death

DNA tests:Muncie man walks free after rape conviction set aside

First love:After wife's death 'Butler helped my fill that void'

Versions of the bill have passed both the House and the Senate, signaling support for the measure, which proponents say will help police solve crimes and could exonerate innocent people. But the proposal has also generated vigorous debate about privacy rights and the potential for government overreach.

Now, the bills are back in committee hearings as lawmakers hash out details about how the measure would actually work, if enacted.

During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, testimony centered on two questions:

Lawmakers agree that people should be able to remove the DNA sample from the system if they are arrested and never charged, but the time frame is up for debate.

In the version ofHouse Bill 1577that passed the Indiana House of Representatives, a person could remove a DNA sample from the system if no charge was filed within 30 days. But as lawmakers are working to align that bill with the similarSenate Bill 322, which passed the Senate, they altered the provision so that prosecutors now have a full year to file charges before an individual can remove a DNA sample from the system.

"When someone is arrested on a felony warrant, it may take some time to get charges filed," said Chris Naylor, assistant executive director of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council, adding that 30 days may be too short for more complex cases.

But the provision received pushback from some lawmakers, who saw it as a violation of privacy for someone who is not charged with a crime.

"If I was a prosecutor I could overcharge everybody because I would get everyones DNA," said Sen. Michael Young, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Larry Landis, executive director of the Indiana Public Defender Council,offered something of a compromise, suggesting that people should be able to remove a DNA sample if no charges are filed within 185 days.

"If a prosecutor hasn't decided after 185 days, it likely never will be filed," Landis said.

Rep. Greg Steuerwald, who authored the House version of the bill, pointed out that the bill has been amended to contain safeguards to protect innocent people. The House adopted an amendment that says a judge must find probable cause for an arrest before a DNA sample can be entered into the system.

The bills also say that a DNA sample can be removed if an individual is acquitted, if charges are dismissed and if a felony charge is bumped down to a misdemeanor.

Lawmakers also debated about who should be responsible for removing the DNA sample, if an arrest doesn't lead to a conviction. As the bills read now, the person arrested must submit the request for approval by prosecutors.Steuerwald noted that the arrestee has the greatest incentive to pursue this. Under the bill, police must offer information about the removal process upon taking the sample.

But some committee members suggested the state should bear the responsibility, so as not to put undue burden on someone who may have been wrongfully accused, particularly if the individual is indigent.

"For me, putting the burden on an innocent person, I don't see a public policy reason to do that," Sen. Greg Taylor said.

The issue gained traction last year whenDNA from an Ohiodatabasethat includes arrestees helped solve boththeslaying of an elderly Zionsville manin November andattacks on two Indianapolis police stations.

Upon a felony arrest, a person's DNA sample would be submitted to databases that would allow police across the country to compare it to DNA collected at crime scenes.

Call Star reporter Madeline Buckley at (317) 444-6083. Follow her on Twitter:@Mabuckley88.

Should police take a DNA sample when making arrests?

Read or Share this story: http://indy.st/2mQsdc0

Read the rest here:
How long should the state keep your DNA? - Indianapolis Star

It was a high-profile crime in New York Citya jogger was murdered while running in a local park, anddetectives had few leads. As the months passed and the crime remained unsolved, the victims family began pushing for wider use of familial DNA, or searching DNA databases for partial matches to DNA evidence that might represent a family member of the killer (the technique has been successfully used). Detectives eventually identified a suspect without it, but the idea of familial DNA testing is not going away.

But how does it work? After amplification and controls against contamination, linking a DNA sample to an individual depends on Short Tandem Repeats, or STRs. STRs are very short segments of DNA, only a few base pairs long ( base pairs are pairs of nucleotides making up each strand of the double stranded DNA molecule; there are 3 billion base pairs on the human genome). The number of times each STR repeats at a given loci (location on the genome) is highly variable between people. To ensure that STRs match a particular individual, the U.S. standard is to examine the STRs at 13 different loci plus a sex-linked gene called amelogenin. Since each individuals genome consists of a set of DNA from each of their parents, it is really 26 different STR loci being compared (13 times on different chromosomes). The probability of all 26 loci matching is as low as 1 in a trillion.

Familial DNA searches extend the potential privacy consequences to millions of more people.

Only a complete match can lead to a conviction, but since we share 50% of our DNA with siblings and parents, and lesser amounts with cousinsand other families members, a partial match might indicate a family member. How close a match is required to indicate a family member versus a match that occurs by chance? It depends on how rare the matching alleles are. If particularly rare variant is present, as few as 5/26 matching alleles may be sufficient; when only common alleles are present 15/26 matches are required to establish a family relationship. Investigators need to obtain DNA from specific family members to establish a direct match with a crime scene sample.

DNA is collected and archived all over the country. Many states only keep samples from those who are convicted, but some states keep samples simply upon arrest, or even from witnesses and other voluntary submissions. The databases contain millions of people, and familial searches extend the potential privacy consequences to millions more, most of whom are unconnected to a crime. Expanding the use of these tools also threatens to further ensnare groups that are already over-represented in the criminal justice system. Each state has its own policy about familial DNA searches, and there are no national familial searches, which causes some confusion. The trick is to balance these concerns against the benefit to society of identifying dangerous criminals.

By: Melissa Lee Phillips

BioScience, Vol. 58, No. 6 (June 2008), pp. 484-489

Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences

By: David R. Paoletti, Travis E. Doom, Michael L. Raymer and Dan E. Krane

Jurimetrics, Vol. 46, No. 2 (WINTER 2006), pp. 161-175

American Bar Association

Comments are closed.

Read more:
A New Kind of DNA Evidence - JSTOR Daily

In late February, a dog named Capone escaped from his yardin the city of Aurora, Colo. It was the only time in seven years living on the property, his owners said, that their fence could not contain Capone. The animal, a rescue dog his owners believed to be aGerman shepherd with black Labrador mixed in, made his way toward a nearby residents home.

He failed to charm the neighbors. There was an aggressive dog in my backyard and he tried attacking us when we tried to get him off our lawn, Diana MontoyatoldCBS 4. He would just run to us and try to jump us.

Aurora Animal Control captured Capone and held him at the local shelter. Animal controlgrew suspicious that Capone was not a typical dog there was something wolfish about Capones character, behavior and body, they determined.

The responding officer assessed the dog, which had been at the (neighbors) residence for five hours, and noted continued aggressive behavior, including approaching with bared teeth, low growling, hard stare and lowered head, Aurora officials told the Aurora Sentinel in a statement.

From the outset, Tracy Abbato, Capones owner, disputed that her dog was part wolf. She alsodenied he was athreat.

Hes not aggressive. Capone is a very mellow, laid back dog, she said to Timemagazine on March 16. Hes a typical dog. Hes a family member. He doesnt bother anybody. Had Capone turned out to be part wolf, it was possible that animal control would have had him euthanized.

After catching the escapee, Aurora officials declined to release Capone to his family. They demanded that Abbato and her family wait until a genetic testcould determine that Capone was not part wolf.

A DNA test later vindicated Abbatos assertion that Capone was not a wolf. The results came back negative, she told Denver7.Not an ounce of wolf. On Wednesday, the Aurora Municipal Court cleared Capone to return home.

It marked the close of a nearlymonth-long separation.Its hard waking up and hes not there, Abbato said to CBS 4 on March 15. Its been heartbreaking. Hes our family member and we dont have him here with us.

A cityordinancebans animals or livestock that are wild, exotic or dangerous, which includes the unusual suspects would-be owners of gorillas and crocodiles are out of luck in Aurora. Coyotes, foxes and wolves are banned, too. As are wolf-dog hybrids. Dogs are allowed, although pit bulls and certain restrictedbreeds were outlawed in 2006.

The city is wary of dangerous dogs. Its not just a wolf-hybrid issue by itself, Michael Bryant, a city of Aurora spokesman, told Time. The 11-year-old dog bit a person on his familys property in the past. Aaron Acker, an attorney for the dogs owners, describedthe incident as Capone protecting against an intruder,Fox 32reported.

Capones owners were charged with several offenses: keeping a wild anddangerous animal, not having a license for Capone, not vaccinating the dog against rabies and allowing the dog to roam unrestrained.

Republicans in Colorados state senate took up Capones case. Big government is at it again,reada post on the senators website.An Aurora family is in danger of being split up because a local animal shelter suspects their family dog, Capone, could be distantly related to wolves. More than 600 people signedthe state Republican petition to spare Capone.

I felt we should speak up for an animal who cant speak for himself, Tim Neville, a Republican state senator, told the Colorado Statesman. We wanted to put attention on what appears to be local government overstepping and separating a pet away from its loving family and placing unnecessary charges against them.

Those concerned about wolf-dog pet ownershipcite the animals large size, high levels of energy and their unpredictability. A1993 incident involving a wolf-dog who, although vaccinated, reportedly contracted rabiesalsoraised questions about whether vaccines were as effective in hybrid animals.

A few hundred thousand wolf-dog hybrids are thought to live in the United States, although many wolf-dogs advertised as such are mislabeled dogs.

Wolf-dog behavior may be hard to generalize, said Kim Miles, a member of the wolf-dog advocacy group now known as the National Lupine Association,if the generational distance between wolf and dog is unknown.

Wolf-dogs arent easily pegged because theyre essentially a combination of wild and domesticated animals, Miles said to the Bark.A dog is like a 12-year-old child, and a wolf is like a 35-year-old man. The dog will generally do what you want it to, but the wolf will do what you want only if he wants to do it himself.

The animals can be difficult to keep as pets, too, because several states and municipalities outlaw thehybrids. (In D.C., for instance, it is illegal to own wolf-dog hybrids, cat-ocelot hybrids and other exotic pets. Whether exotic should be defined to include backyard chickens was amatter of recent debate.)

Although wolves and dogs are closely related, specific genetic differences may exist between wolves and their domesticated cousins. One test performed at theveterinarygenetics lab at the University of California at Davis, for instance, checks for some two dozen shortDNAmarkersthat are unique to wolves. Such an analysis may be able to tell whether a dog had wolfgreat-grandparents, although tracing any wolfish lineage to older generations is difficult.

The University of California at Davis test, conducted with a sample of Capones blood, seemed to sufficiently absolve the dogof any recent wild ancestry. We got some good news last night, Abbato said Sunday toFox 31. Capone is not wolf at all. He doesnt have an ounce of wolf in him.

The Aurora Sentinel reportedthat Serrano pleaded guilty to three of five charges failing to inoculate Capone against rabies, allowinghim to roam free and not registering Capone with the city. After a hearing at the Aurora Municipal Court, Capone was able to return home as of Wednesday afternoon.

We believe this resolution strikes a balance between keeping the family and their longtime pet together, and addressing the safety of the community as a whole, Aurora Animal Services manager Jenee Shipmantold the Aurora Sentinel in a statement.

The dog will return homevaccinated. And, as part of the resolution, Capones owners have agreed to construct a taller fence around their property.

More from Morning Mix

The stray dogs smile made him famous. Now, police say he looks too dangerous to stay in his new home.

Jack, Britains oldest dog, killed in savage terrier attack

A starving wolf stalked a woman and her dog for 12 hours. Then along came a bear.

See the rest here:
Wolf or dog? DNA means difference between life and death for beloved Colo. pet. - Washington Post

Related Coverage

LONDON (AP) Britains Newcastle University says its scientists have received a license to create babies using DNA from three people to prevent women from passing on potentially fatal genetic diseases to their children the first time such approval has been granted.

The license was granted Thursday by the countrys fertility regulator, according to the university.

In December, British officials approved the cautious use of the techniques, which aim to fix problems linked to mitochondria, the energy-producing structures outside a cells nucleus. Faulty mitochondria can result in conditions including muscular dystrophy and major organ failure.

Mitochondria diseases can be devastating for families affected and this is a momentous day for patients, said Doug Turnbull, director of the research at Newcastle University. The university has said it is aiming to treat up to 25 patients a year.

To help women with mitochondria problems from passing them on to their children, scientists remove the nucleus DNA from the egg of a prospective mother and insert it into a donor egg from which the donor DNA has been removed. This can happen before or after fertilization. The resulting embryo ends up with nucleus DNA from its parents but mitochondrial DNA from a donor. The DNA from the donor amounts to less than 1 percent of the resulting embryos genes.

The license granted to Newcastle University relates only to the clinics capacity to perform the techniques, Britains fertility regulator said. The clinic must apply for each individual patient to be treated and no patient application has yet been approved.

Last year, U.S.-based doctors announced they had created the worlds first baby using such techniques, after traveling to Mexico to perform the procedure, which has not been approved in the United States.

Critics have raised concerns about the treatment, saying it will put people at unnecessary risk of an untested procedure. Some say women with faulty mitochondria should choose simply to use egg donors and that using the new techniques will open the door to genetically modified designer babies.

Go here to see the original:
UK grants 1st license to make babies using DNA from 3 people ... - KRON4.com

BOISE, Idaho An Idaho man who experts say was coerced into a false murder confession was freed Wednesday after spending half of his life behind bars.

A judge released Christopher Tapp after vacating his rape conviction and resentencing him to time served for the 1996 killing of Angie Dodd.

The release came after years of work by Tapps attorney, public defender John Thomas, and advocates, including Judges for Justice, the Idaho Innocence Project and the victims mother, Carol Dodge.

Angie Dodge was 18 and living in an Idaho Falls apartment on June 13, 1996, when she was sexually assaulted and killed at her home.

Tapp was a 20-year-old high school dropout at the time. He was interrogated for hours and subjected to multiple lie detector tests by police before confessing, but DNA evidence taken from the scene didnt match Tapp or any of other suspects in the case.

The release doesnt exonerate Tapp his murder conviction still stands under the plea agreement that transformed his 30-years-to-life sentence to time served. But the agreement allowed Tapp to leave the courtroom as a free man after 20 years in prison. He otherwise wouldnt have been able to seek parole until 2027.

Chris Tapp is innocent, his attorney, Thomas, said. Still, Thomas said, the plea deal was the right decision because it came with the certainty of freedom.

In court Wednesday, Carol Dodge said she was overwhelmed and felt great sadness that Tapp had lost 20 years of his life to prison.

The Idaho Falls Police Department announced Wednesday that it has a sketch of a suspect, but didnt release it.

Most of the recent developments in the case have focused on DNA at the scene.

Dodges body was found by co-workers. She had been raped and stabbed. Investigators were able to obtain DNA at the scene.

The initial investigation spanned months, and by the start of 1997, detectives began to suspect that Benjamin Hobbs and Tapp may have been involved. Hobbs was arrested in Ely, Nevada, in connection with a rape and accused of using a knife during the crime. Tapp, who was friends with Hobbs, was arrested in January and questioned about Hobbs suspected involvement in Dodges killing.

Over the next few weeks, Tapp was interrogated nine times and subjected to seven polygraph tests. At various times, police suggested he could face the death penalty, told him that he was failing the lie detector tests, suggested he may have repressed memories of the killing and offered him immunity if he implicated Hobbs and another suspect. He eventually confessed to being involved in the death.

But none of the DNA matched any suspect..

Under the deal, Tapp cant continue efforts to get his conviction overturned and must pay into Idahos victim compensation fund.

Go here to see the original:
Idaho man who didn't match victim's DNA free after 20 years - Press Herald