E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Today's arrest in the "Grim Sleeper" serial-killing case demonstrates how the sins of the father can be found out through a son's DNA - and why the technique can be controversial.
A 57-year-old one-time LAPD garage attendant named Lonnie Franklin Jr. was arrested in Los Angeles in connection with the string of 10 murders, committed between 1985 and 2007. The killer was nicknamed the "Grim Sleeper" because there was a 14-year break within that string, from 1988 to 2002.
The case puts an unorthodox forensic tool known as familial DNA analysis at center stage. The method is specifically allowed only in two states - California and Colorado - and it's specifically banned in Maryland. New York is OK with using the method, but only if it's an "inadvertent" side effect of a more rigorous data search. The FBI currently has no firm policy on familial DNA matching but is willing to let states share their DNA data for use in the procedure.
Now that familial DNA analysis has come up with a high-profile match, you'll probably be hearing much more about whether it should be used more widely.
Not-quite-perfect match
Why is the technique so controversial? It's because investigators look for not-quite-perfect matches between the DNA left behind at a crime scene and DNA markers taken from a wide sampling of people who may or may not have committed a crime themselves. The goal isn't necessarily to find the suspects, but rather the potential relatives of suspects. If there's a close match, investigators could focus their search on close relatives of the person who matched up - in hopes that the trail will lead to suspects who haven't left a DNA trail themselves.
It's basically a crime-lab variant of the tests widely used to trace your genealogy, but these would be relatives you might not want to feature on your family tree.
Familial DNA searches have been done in Britain for years, and California Attorney General Jerry Brown gave investigators the go-ahead to do the same in the Grim Sleeper case two years ago. A database search came up with a partial but significant match between DNA collected during the investigation and a routine sample taken from Franklin's son. Brown said the son was given a cheek swab after his conviction on a felony weapons charge. LA Weekly reported that the results of the DNA analysis "lit up like a Christmas tree."
The investigators followed up by snagging DNA samples from Franklin himself. A relative of one of the Grim Sleeper victims who was briefed by police said that the sample was left on a restaurant cup, while the Los Angeles Times reported that the DNA was recovered from a discarded piece of pizza. The most likely scenario is that forensic sleuths tested the pizza, the cup and any other items that Franklin might have put to his lips while dining.
District Attorney Steve Cooley told the Times that the arrest "shows the legitimacy" of using partial DNA matches and promised to provide more details at a Thursday news conference.
If the arrest leads to a conviction, the feat will take forensic genetics to a whole new level. But it could raise a whole new crop of questions about genetic privacy as well.
Lifetime genetic surveillance?
In California, for example, the DNA samples are collected after every felony arrest, and may be retained even if the suspect later goes free. That has sparked a legal challenge from the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU noted that about a third of all those arrested for felonies in California are not convicted of any crime, and said that "thousands of innocent Californians will be subject to a lifetime of genetic surveillance because a single police officer suspected them of a crime."
The ACLU also said the system could have a "huge racial impact" because a disproportionate number of people of color are already represented in California's criminal justice system, which serves as the main channel for the state's DNA sampling flow (at a rate of roughly 25,000 samples per month). The latest figures show that California has the biggest statewide DNA database in the country, with more than 1.5 million samples. ACLU calls it the third-biggest forensic DNA database in the world, behind the FBI's nationwide CODIS system (which includes the California samples) and Britain's national data bank.
We're right in the midst of a massive crime-lab experiment in DNA collection. The federal government and all 50 states require those convicted of felonies to provide DNA samples, but California is just one of the 23 states that require DNA for felony arrests. Congress and several states, including New York and North Carolina, are currently talking about widening their DNA collection programs to cover arrests as well as convictions.
Proponents of wider DNA testing say that such measures will prevent crime, save lives and provide more protection to the innocent. Opponents say that such measures will put more of a burden on the innocent, and that familial DNA analysis could turn even distant relatives into "genetic informants." I say that the Grim Sleeper case will increase the pressure on lawmakers to bulk up DNA databases across the country, and will lead to wider use of familial DNA as well. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? What do you say? Weigh in on this issue by leaving a comment below.
More on genetic sleuthing:
- Who's keeping your genetic keys?
- Interactive: Your genetic fingerprints
- DNA collection raises ethical questions
- Gaps in DNA databanks lead to tragedy
- DNA pioneer wants cuts to criminal database
Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And if you really want to be friendly, ask me about "The Case for Pluto."
Leave a Comment:
I wanted to find out more about this particular case, the grim sleeper. This is a link to "all possible information regarding Los Angeles's infamous grim sleeper..."
http://thegrimsleeper.com/
Skip,
you and I had wondered what the killer (most likely Lonnie Franklin) had been doing in between his "inactive" yrs. There's a lot of speculation and info on the various websites. Some think that he might have gone out of state or that there are more bodies in LA. (In no way am I trying to sensationalize this but would like to know a few things.)
According to KTLA-TV:
'Franklin has twice been convicted of felonies, according to court records, both for receiving stolen property.
One was in 1993 and the other was 2003.
He served a year in jail for the first conviction and was sentenced to 270 days in jail in the 2003 case.
In 1997, he pleaded guilty to one count of misdemeanor battery.
As part of a plea deal, a charge of false imprisonment was dropped, according to court records.
In 1999, he was convicted of misdemeanor assault with a deadly weapon. He was sentenced to 90 days in jail.
Details of that case were not immediately available.'
*So where was his DNA in the database?
Also, another source pointed out that the LA citizens didn't know for yrs. that there was a possible serial killer on the loose. I really think that some in LAPD dropped the ball.
Another case similar to this happened in Cleveland (I think). The victims were prostitutes. You have to wonder if the police do as good a job if the victims are middle class and "upstanding" citizens. I personally don't think so.
One more example then I'm through. In the case of Jeffrey Daumer and the young Vietnamese man who was found running away from. He told the police that Daumer was trying to kill him. What did they do? After Daumer told them that they were having a lover's quarrel, they "released" him into the arms of that monster. I'm just sayin without really sayin, if you know what I mean.
* correction* to the one addressed to Skip.
You have to wonder if the police would do a better job if the victims were middle class, "upstanding" citizens (and possibly white). I think they would bust their asses in using all this new technology and most likely save some lives. It's happened too many times.
@Darrah:
I was wondering about this, as well, so I did a bit of checking and found an MSNBC Nightly News video report that explains the sequence of events and why the father's DNA was not in the state prison DNA database . . .
The summary version is that while the father was arrested 15 times over 40 years, he never was in the state prison system, and this is the reason his DNA was not in the state prison DNA database . . .
However, his son was convicted of a crime and did time in the state prison system, so the son's DNA was sampled and added to the state prison DNA database, which soon led to a "familial" match that put the father on the list of potential suspects, at which time the detectives began observing the father and then obtained a sample of the father's DNA from a discarded piece of pizza . . .
So, while it is a truly strange sequence of events, it makes sense, and it is logical . . .
Nevertheless, while I think that it is within reasonable bounds to use the "familial" DNA testing strategy for general identification purposes, if I were on the jury in what one might expect to be one or more criminal trials, then I certainly would need more than a DNA match to vote "guilty" . . .
And being a huge fan of all the various versions of the television shows "CSI", "House MD", "Law and Order", "Monk", "NCIS", and the various crime documentaries that the educational and news channels do, some of the things that are more convincing are fingerprints, other types of crime scene evidence (which can include blood, fingerprints, hair, skin, and so forth), what one might suppose are called "mementos" of the crime that perpetrators keep to remind themselves of the crime, and so forth and so on . . .
For reference, I am not a big fan of so-called "eye-witness" identification in a general sense, although it depends on the "eye-witness" and the circumstances, where I base everything on my ability to recall people . . .
If I were a victim of a crime and saw the perpetrator for just a second or so, I would not be comfortable stating definitively that a person was the "one" without any doubt, but as the time for observing the perpetrator increases, so does my comfort level . . .
And it also depends on something that for lack of a better word or phrase might be called "specific culture awareness", where for example I have a lot of Vietnamese friends, and while some folks might think that all Vietnamese look alike, this is not the case, and it is not the case for any other group of people . . .
Over the years, I have worked in various jobs where for all practical purposes I was the only person of my particular type, and while at first it can appear that all "fill-in-the-blank" people look the same, this is never the case, and it mostly is simply a matter of taking the time actually to interact with people without bias and prejudice, so I think the circumstances and experience of the "eye-witness" are very important, as are a lot of other factors, which is a Gestalt type of thing where one of the realities is that it probably is more common that people do not actually see other people in any real and tangible way other than as vague caricatures, and while I am not certain that there is a definitive way to determine whether an "eye-witness" is testifying about a caricature or a real person, I think that there are clues that provide a bit of insight into the appropriate level of credibility to assign to an "eye-witness" . . .
From my perspective, accusing and convicting the wrong person is considerably worse than doing nothing, because the result ensures that the perpetrator "gets away", either for a while or perhaps forever, which is another reason that I use the most literal reading of "beyond a shadow of a doubt" . . .
And since I have wandered into the more esoteric aspects of justice, if I were running the legal system, then the rule for capital murder cases where the death penalty is on the table would be that at the end of the trial when there is a jury verdict, then one of two things will happen instantly, as follows:
(1) "guilty" ~ the defendant is executed on the spot in the courtroom . . .
(2) "not guilty" ~ the entire prosecution team (attorneys and paralegals) is executed on the spot in the courtroom . . .
And while this certainly would have a damping affect with respect to the quantity of capital murder cases that go to trial, I think it clearly removes all the "playing a game" nonsense from the equation . . .
In other words, if prosecutors are not sufficiently convinced to risk their lives, then my view is that they should not allow a case to go to trial, and this certainly is an excellent way to ensure that the only cases that go to trial are as foolproof as possible . . .
It is not a "game", and when there are few if any consequences for prosecutors other than perhaps a bit of embarrassment, there is a greater likelihood that prosecutors will "play games" for a variety of very bad reasons . . .
And I like the fact that my strange system maps to the jury being the ones who actually push the button, pull the lever, or whatever, which creates real and tangible consequences for the jurists, as well . . .
In my universe, for example, all the people in the firing squad at an execution have real ammunition--as contrasted to one person having a "blank" and nobody knowing which person fired the "blank"--and there are no doubts regarding their roles in the execution . . .
It requires a lot more diligent work to be certain, but so what . . .
So what!
Britain and California have the right idea. Familial DNA is just another investigative tool and should definately be used. The Grim Sleeper may have never been arrested otherwise. He will still have a defense attorney, the right to a fair trial, and all other evidence will be used. However, without the familial DNA technique, prosecutors would never have the opportunity to bring this suspect to trial. I am certain that if you asked the families of the victims of these henious crimes, they would be emphatically support the use of this technique.
There are instances where DNA tells the wrong or only part of the story. I saw an interesting story about a lady who was tried for child support and welfare fraud because her children were "not hers" according to genetic testing. Eventually it was discovered that she was a chimera (Google it if not familiar).
Also I personally believe it's sinister and inhuman to give up freedom in the interest of 'security"' When I was a kid I read George Orwell's "1984" and thought that was chilling. Not to mention "Enemy of the State" and "Minority Report". It seems that much of Orwell's vision was phophetic. We're there! And the tech from "Enemy of the State" movie is old news now. Cell phones, GPS satellite spy cams etc...
Question: How many folks here are cool with say putting a tracking chip in your child's skull or heel at birth for tracking in the event of a runaway or kidnapping? How about a speed sensor with an automatic ticket generator if the car is driven over the posted speed limit? Just questions...
Approximately 6% of our population will ever be arrested for a felony. The fact that they get released without being charged, or the charges are dismissed, DOES NOT MAKE THEM INNOCENT. OJ got off, as do many criminals, on many charges. It is often a case of so much work for a minor case that it doesn't get persued. 40% of all people arrested for committing burglaries have already committed a murder, rape or other heinous crime. When their DNA is taken on arrest it will match, 40% of the time, to evidence collected at a serious crime. Without checking that DNA, that person, more than likely, would have been released back into our communities.
Collecting DNA on arrest does not make a person guilty. Only a jury can find a person "guilty" or "not guilty." DNA only identifies a person; much like a bar code does on products at the store. This is what a DNA profile looks like: The ACLU tries to make it out to be scary information that "Big Brother"shouldn't have. It doesn't have any medical, psychological,nor racial information. It's like a bar code on products at the store. This is what a DNA profile looks like: 06,09,11,12,10,10,22,24,9.3,10,08,09,14,14,15,17,17,22,25,12,12,9,10,09,13
The ACLU tries to make it out to be scary information that "Big Brother"shouldn't have. It doesn't have any medical, psychological, nor racial information. It's like a bar code on products at the store.
In a familial search many of these "markers" will be the same, which would indicate a relative. Why should law enforcement not look at this lead. It would be negligent to look the other way.
We need all 50 states to start collecting DNA on Arrest. NC just passed their bill this morning. They are the 24th state. Hopefully, NY will realize they need to do the same. Speaker Sheldon Silver is the one holding up DNA on arrest in NY. There are over 30,000 unsolved crimes in NY.
Collection of DNA on Arrest saves lives, time, money and prevents so many crimes. It protects the innocent and keeps the innocent out of jail. 252 wrongfully incarcerated people have been exonerated by DNA. DNA is about the truth. It will help balance the scales of justice. No one should get away with murder,rape, nor any other heinous crime. With DNA, we can identify them, prosecute them successfully and stop them.
The ACLU tries to make it out to be scary information that "Big Brother"shouldn't have. It doesn't have any medical, psychological,nor racial information. It's like a bar code on products at the store. This is what a DNA profile looks like: 06,09,11,12,10,10,22,24,9.3,10,08,09,
14,14,15,17,17,22,25,12,12,9,10,09,13
This really irks me to no end!
Here we are with the LAPD and the Calif. law bragging themselves up about familial DNA and how it can help. Here we are discussing what should and shouldn't be done with our DNA!
People, the LAPD pulled another fast one. It's called the "Law and Order" trick, where they grab a piece of the Grim Sleeper's pizza, as if they're so damn smart.
Guess what people? NBC reported tonight (Sat.) that he's been arrested 15 times! They NEVER took HIS DNA because they basically said that it didn't warrant it--because he never went to prison. They even made plea deals with him!
Does LAPD and the good citizens like us really think that he wasn't killing before and after he got out of jail each time? I worked around criminals for 11 yrs. The most important thing you learn is:
NOT to overlook the plain and simple things. For God's sake, they knew they had a serial killer on their hands. They knew there were yrs. where nothing seemed to be happening. Serial killers are psychopaths. They don't just stop doing what they love to do which is prey on someone they think is vulnerable. And they sometimes prey on people who probably would be cut off from their families to a degree.
Another thing is that they found all the bodies within a ten mile radius of where he lives. I think there are more bodies to be found. He wasn't "sleeping" at all. They need to change his nickname.
Check out the websites. Evidently, the folks at http://thegrimsleeper.com/ have been keeping up with the case for 2 yrs. Who should have doing their homework? Those people evidently have been doing it for free. The LAPD needs to go back to criminal justice school--assuming that they've been there in the first place.
So I suppose we should be worrying about familial DNA, if Ca. is any indication of what could go wrong.
I think it's a good thing.
Do you actually work in a scientific field related to genetics or biology, James, or are you just another armchair "scientist" who's read one too many issues of Popular Mechanics and fancies himself an expert? "Jailed people seldom produce offspring?" Are you joking? We have, literally, generations of evidence to dispute that statement alone. Tell us, do you sit in the dark thinking up these sociopathic "better world" scenarios, or are you parotting someone else's nightmares?
You sound like an "expert" that watches too much Nat Geo prison series. I worked for 2 prison systems. Fl & Tex and I can assure you that a significant number of the ones I came in contact with had kids. many of which they ran out on the mothers when they came up pregnant.
I think it would be a good thing for everybody be DNA printed. There a lot of people in John or Jane Doe graves that wouldn't be if they had been in a data base. My fingerprints and pictures are in a lot of databases because of sensitive positions I had. I don't care. I'm clean. If I am in an accident and burned unrecognizable I hope my data base somewhere will I D me.
According to LA Weekly, The LAPD sat up a stake-out in 1988, THREE DOORS FROM THE GRIM SLEEPER'S HOUSE.
Why were they in the neighborhood? Survivor Enitra Margette Washington took them to the neighborhood. She pointed out a house (three doors down from Lonnie Franklin, Jr.). She thought that was the house. You have to remember that she had just survived a horrible attack. At least SHE was extremely close.
Did the LAPD go from house to house near the house they were staking out? No.
Couldn't they go from house to house in plain clothes? Evidently not. The neighbor who lived right next door to Franklin was never questioned , even though the type of car the killer had was seen on that street.
Did the LAPD see the killer's car (described by Ms. Washington) coming and going from the house they were staking out? No.
Did the LAPD tell the victims families and the neighborhood that a serial killer was to blame for the murders in the first time frame? No. It was left up to LA Weekly to tell the families, to hold vigils with the families, to continue to put pressure on the LAPD, to suggest the first reward money, etc. etc.
this is the link to the article:
http://www.laweekly.com/2010-07-15/news/missing-the-grim-sleeper-by-a-hair
There's not much mention here about all the people in prison who have had their convictions overturned thgough dna analysis. One of these was on the Internet just a day or two ago. He spent 19 years in prison due to a misidentification by a rape victim. I believe that the data in the hands of agencies can protect the innocent as well as catch the guilty. I would like to see all fingerprinted, all guns bore tested, dna records for everyone. But this should be kept in a central depository, not states, and not be availble to any hacker such as the Australian (Assanger?) recently publicized.
Skip Nicholson: I have read your posts on other topics and find that they are always well thought out and well written.
I guess there is no going back, but I have conflicting thoughts on this type of thing. Being searched on the way into a ball game. Pee samples for employment along with credit history checks. Industry databases for insurance companies (water damage to a home).
On the one hand I like cameras in public places as they can be very helpful in say finding a kidnapped child. I think the use of DNA sited in this article is a good thing.
But some small voice within me longs for a simpler time. It all feels a little too much like the film "Gatica". It simply feels like to much control by government, too much contact between government and the average citizen.
But in the end I would be happy if these intrusions helped convict someone that killed a loved one or helped to stop a terrorist act.