* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download DNA databases Rape in the US Victims States with Offender Laws
DNA sequencing wikipedia , lookup
DNA barcoding wikipedia , lookup
Molecular evolution wikipedia , lookup
Comparative genomic hybridization wikipedia , lookup
Agarose gel electrophoresis wikipedia , lookup
Maurice Wilkins wikipedia , lookup
Vectors in gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Bisulfite sequencing wikipedia , lookup
DNA vaccination wikipedia , lookup
Artificial gene synthesis wikipedia , lookup
DNA profiling wikipedia , lookup
Community fingerprinting wikipedia , lookup
Transformation (genetics) wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding DNA wikipedia , lookup
Nucleic acid analogue wikipedia , lookup
Gel electrophoresis of nucleic acids wikipedia , lookup
Molecular cloning wikipedia , lookup
2/5/2013 Justification for DNA Databasing DNA databases FRNSC 100 Dr. Jeni Smith Rape in the US Victims 1993 Rape Att. Rape 1994 160,000 168,000 152,000 149,000 312,000 Sexual Assault 173,000 Unknown Suspect 1 in 5 317,000 117,000 1 in 3 Source: “National Crime Victimization Survey” Bureau of Justice Statistics April 1996, September 1996 (Preliminary) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs Opposition to DNA Databasing In the early 90s, the DNA community realized that DNA types could be used to do more than just “confirm” an individual was present or involved in a criminal act. DNA types (RFLP profiles), stored in a database, could be used to proactively link and solve crimes just like fingerprints were being used. Also, DNA could be used to identify human remains of missing persons. Rapes could be linked together by DNA typing the various “unknown” semen from rapists and crime scenes. This created “investigative” leads. Statistics showed that rapists were “recidivists” (i.e. they repeated their crimes overagain). If a person was convicted of rape, then their DNA could be stored in a database to be compared to “unknown suspect” rapes. If they continued to rape women after their release from prison, they would be caught again because their DNA type was in the database and cases would be solved. Rape in the US- Recidivism Mean Age at First Offense Detected Sexual Assaults Undetected Sexual Assaults More than 1 Offense 18.8 2.8 5.2 67.1% Source: “Undetected Recidivism among Rapists and Child Molesters” Groth, Longo, McFadin, 1982 States with Offender Laws October 1997 The concept of DNA databasing was hotly contested and there was a strong opposition from the ACLU and attorneys such as Peter Neufeld and Berry Scheck. These are the two attorneys who started project innocence. Also involved in the OJ Simpson case. Privacy concerns were at the center of the discussion 15 Enacted (48) Pending (2) 10 5 0 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1 2/5/2013 Building of the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) Building of the CODIS System Today, over 180 public law enforcement laboratories participate in NDIS across the United States. Internationally, more than 60 law enforcement laboratories in over 30 countries use the CODIS software for their own database initiatives. International laboratories using the CODIS software do not have any connectivity to the United States CODIS system. COmbined DNA Index System (CODIS) FBI sponsored software development Software provided free to all states and various countries States passed laws to establish their local and state databases CODIS was built “from the bottom up”- Each state had to pass DNA legislation in order to set up the DNA databasing capability. It took several years for this to happen The DNA Identification Act of 1994 authorized the use of DNA data for forensic analysis and formalized CODIS. It is the first Federal legislation concerning forensic Science By October 1998, CODIS became operational on a national level (NDIS) because all 50 states had passed laws allowing them to collect and store DNA profiles from convicted offenders As of 2004, all 50 states along with Puerto Rico, the U.S. Army and the FBI were CODIS participants. Addition of Arrestee's DNA into CODIS States began expanding their DNA laws to include more categories of convicted offenders. The original laws only collected from individuals who committed serious felonies like murder and rape. For example, the addition of DNA profiles from individuals arrested for burglary increased the number of cases linked together by DNA typing. Some states have enhanced their DNA database laws to allow for the collection and comparison of DNA from people who are arrested for crimes. This means that even though a person has not been convicted of a crime, their DNA can be compared to profiles in the Forensic index. If an arrestee's profile matches, they can then be charged with that crime. There is currently not a federal law that allow for DNA collection from people arrested for a federal violation. CODIS Hierarchy US CODIS System The CODIS project began in 1990 as a collaboration among 14 forensic laboratories. The FBI developed the CODIS software and then provided it for free to laboratories as they developed the capability to do DNA typing CODIS is implemented as a distributed database with three hierarchical tiers. All three levels contain forensic and convicted offender indexes NDIS State Databases (SDIS) Local City/county Databases (LDIS) Local DNA Index System (LDIS) is installed at crime laboratories is operated by police departments or sheriffs' offices. DNA profiles originated at the local level can be transmitted to the State and national levels. State DNA Index System (SDIS) allows local laboratories within that State to compare DNA profiles. SDIS is operated by the agency responsible for implementing and monitoring compliance with the State's convicted offender statute. National DNA Index System (NDIS) is the highest level of CODIS enables qualified State laboratories that are actively participating in CODIS to compare DNA profiles. NDIS is maintained by the FBI under the authority of the DNA Identification Act of 1994. Tallahassee, FL 2 2/5/2013 Several Indexes Categorize the Profiles Entered into CODIS CODIS Indices Convicted Offender – contains DNA profiles of individuals convicted of crimes. Arrestees – contains profiles of arrested persons (if state law permits the collection of arrestee samples). Forensic – contains DNA profiles developed from crime scene evidence, such as semen stains or blood. Missing Persons – contains DNA reference profiles from missing persons. Convicted Offender or Arrestee Forensic Index Crime Scene Samples Unidentified Humans (Remains) – contains DNA profiles developed from unidentified humans and remains. Unidentified Persons CODIS Searches Missing Persons Biological Relatives of Missing Persons – contains DNA profiles voluntarily contributed from relatives of missing persons. In 2000 the FBI Laboratory developed the National Missing Person DNA Database (NMPDD) Program for the identification of missing and unidentified persons. STR, Y-STR and mtDNA can be entered into the Missing Persons indexes of CODIS. NMPDD uses 3 indexes in NDIS to enter DNA profiles that can be searched against each other Unidentified Human (Remains) Missing Persons Biological Relatives of Missing Persons NDIS-National Database Has STR (nuclear and Y) and mtDNA profiles in database contains over 10,484,400 offender profiles and 412,500 forensic profiles as of January 2012. “Investigation Aided,” tracks the number of criminal investigations where CODIS has added value to the investigative process. As of January 2012, CODIS has produced over 171,800 hits assisting in more than 165,100 investigations. NDIS DNA profiles from an “unknown” sample from a crime can be searched against other unknown samples in the Forensic Index. These searches link crimes together. DNA profiles from an “unknown” sample from a crime can also be search within the Convicted Offender and/or Arrestee Indices, if that state is authorized to collect and database DNA samples from arrestees). If there is a candidate match, the laboratory will go through procedures to confirm the match and, if confirmed, will obtain the identity of the suspected perpetrator. Once a match is identified, the laboratories involved in the match exchange information to verify the match and establish coordination between their two agencies. The match of the forensic sample against a record in the index may be used to establish probable cause to obtain an evidentiary DNA sample from the suspect. The laboratory can then perform a DNA analysis on the known biological sample from the suspect so that this analysis can be presented as evidence in court. DNA data is accepted at NDIS DNA data generated through PCR STR technology, Y chromosome STR (Y STR) technology, and mtDNA technology are accepted at NDIS. Y STR and mtDNA data is only searched with the missing person related indexes. Core CODIS Loci for PCR-STR CSF1PO, FGA, THO1, TPOX VWA, D3S1358, D5S818, D7S820 D8S1179, D13S317, D16S539, D18S51 D21S11 3 2/5/2013 Data Acceptance “rules” The DNA data must be generated in accordance with the FBI Director’s Quality Assurance Standards; DNA Identification Act of 1994 Established regulations controlling DNA forensic/database laboratories Provided for funding for establishment/improvement of state and local forensic DNA Labs Required the FBI Director determine DNA standards for the community via DNA Advisory Board Standards issued in October of 1998 Compliance required for participation in NDIS and receipt of federal DNA funding All forensic DNA laboratories must be accredited within 2 years of issuance of the standards The DNA data must be generated by a laboratory that is accredited by an approved accrediting agency; The DNA data must be generated by a laboratory that undergoes an external audit every two years to demonstrate compliance with the FBI Director’s Quality Assurance Standards; The DNA data must be one of the categories of data acceptable at NDIS, such as convicted offender, arrestee, detainee, legal, forensic (casework), unidentified human remains, missing person or a relative of missing person; The DNA data must meet minimum loci requirements for the specimen category; The DNA PCR data must be generated using PCR accepted kits; and Participating laboratories must have and follow expungement procedures in accordance with federal law. DNA Identification Act of 1994 FBI Director’s DNA Standards Participation in the National DNA Index and or receipt of federal funds for improvement required: Compliance with the FBI Director’s standards Protection of the privacy of the individual’s DNA profiles in the database Mandatory external proficiency tests every 180 days FBI Director’s DNA Standards Issued in October of 1998 Compliance required for participation in NDIS and receipt of federal DNA funding All forensic DNA laboratories must be accredited within 2 years of issuance of the standards FBI Director’s Quality Standards (Now called FBI Director's Quality Standards) Quality Assurance Program Organization and management Personnel Facilities Evidence Control Validation Analytical Procedures Equipment Calibration & Maintenance Reports Proficiency Testing Corrective Action Audits Safety Subcontractors 4 2/5/2013 CODIS In Pennsylvania Audit Document The FBI Laboratory developed a single comprehensive audit document: Specific for monitoring compliance to the FBI Director's quality assurance standards There are 4 CODIS labs in PA. The PA State Police are in charge of the SDIS. The statistics for PA SDIS as of Nov. 2011 are: • 261,207 offender profiles • 9,733 casework profiles Applies to both casework and convicted offender DNA laboratories • 3,973 investigations aided http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/codis/clickmap.htm First Technical Working Group in Forensic Science (TWGDAM) Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (TWGDAM) Members of TWGDAM included forensic scientists from various local, state and federal laboratories. Issued QA/QC Guidelines in 1991. These guidelines were very important in admissibility hearings concerning the admissibility of DNA typing Revised TWGDAM Guidelines were issued in 1995 to include mitochondrial DNA testing Became SWGDAM Familial Searches of DNA databases DNA is inherited from parents so DNA profiles from siblings and off spring will share portions of a DNA profile. “Familial Searching” is an intentional or deliberate search of the database conducted after a routine search for the purpose of potentially identifying close biological relatives of the unknown forensic sample associated with the crime scene profile. Scientific Working Group on DNA Methods (SWGDAM) Formerly TWGDAM SWGDAM, serves as a forum to discuss, share, and evaluate forensic biology methods, protocols, training, and research to enhance forensic biology services as well as provide recommendations to the FBI Director on quality assurance standards for forensic DNA analysis. Maintains and updates the FBI Director's Quality Assurance Standards Maintains and updates the audit documents associated with the Quality Assurance Standards. Familial Searching is still not done in every state as it has been controversial Three States conduct familial searching Colorado-Denver California Virginia Pennsylvania has legislation pending to consider familial searching 5 2/5/2013 Grim Sleeper case in California solved by familial search of DNA database Serial killer responsible for at least 10 murders in Los Angeles, CA beginning in the mid 80s. The murders stopped from 1988-2002 and then began again. DNA search of California database found a profile that was a partial match to the crime scene samples from the Grim Sleeper. The son of the suspect had been arrested for felony weapons charge and his DNA profile had been added to the SDIS. References http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/codis/codisand-ndis-fact-sheet http://www.dna.gov/solving-crimes/coldcases/howdatabasesaid/ 57-year-old Lonnie David Franklin Jr has been arrested for the crime 6