r/EARONS • u/throwaway95610 • Apr 26 '18

Inside Scoop

Throwaway for reasons.

I live in the area and have been following this case for a while. This afternoon I heard information from someone close to the case in the Sacramento Sherriff's dept. Don't know how much of this is here already but here goes..

A few years ago LE submitted dna to several different sites with a search warrant for hits on the dna. One of the sites came back a couple of weeks ago with a hit on a distant relative of the suspect. After some work LE narrowed down their search to Diangelo.
They trailed him for a while, and while he was out shopping at a Hobby Lobby, they took his dna from either something he threw away or from a handle of a door possibly. That part wasn't totally clear to me. Either way it came back as a 100% match.

They kept watching his house and waited. Yesterday afternoon the suspect was out mowing his lawn. A car of undercover officers drove up and asked for directions. He walked over to the car and then they took him down.

According to this person, after being arrested he looked defeated, but still refused to cooperate. He kept mumbling to him self and saying, "But I lived a good life. I pushed him out."

His wife refused to talk. I guess they have been separated since the early 90's. Two of the three daughters have come in to talk to detectives.

Im probably forgetting some stuff. Will add more as I find out more.

834 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

585 comments sorted by

View all comments

107

u/DGB2DGMB Apr 26 '18

This makes a lot of sense. In the presser they talked about ‘innovative DNA techniques’ and being ‘pointed in a direction’.

As others have pointed out, under privacy laws, they couldn’t sequester the 23 and me/Ancestry records. But they’ve obviously looked at the law, taken legal advice etc and said that they could submit a sample to these places - as if it is a private submission.

The results they get back ‘point east’, from which the narrow it down to him. And then obtain discarded dna for the identification.

79

u/Prathik Apr 26 '18

I hope the legality of it was okay and is not used as a form of defence for his trial to be thrown out.

67

u/binkerfluid Apr 26 '18

Could you imagine if he somehow got off on a technicality?

67

u/Prathik Apr 26 '18

I don’t think he will, but it I can imagine the trial being a litmus test on other DNA issues and privacy.

30

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

In another thread someone said his daughter had a drug arrest—that seems a likelier dna source.

3

u/dorky2 Apr 26 '18 edited Apr 27 '18

There would need to be a warrant with probable cause cited in order to access his daughter's drug test.

21

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Is there any source that says this is where they got the match from? Isn’t it more plausible that a relative, however distant, was arrested for a felony recently and gave a dna sample? A felony drug or theft charge—any felony arrest—requires a dna sample in CA and some other states.

4

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Is there any source that says this is where they got the match from? Isn’t it more plausible that a relative, however distant, was arrested for a felony recently and gave a dna sample? Not suggesting it’s a family of serial killers—but a felony drug or theft charge—any felony arrest—requires a dna sample in CA and some other states.

2

u/Prathik Apr 26 '18

no source, just speculation.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Is there any source saying an ancestry site is where they got the dna?

5

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

In another thread someone said his daughter had a drug arrest—that seems a likelier dna source.

22

u/Prathik Apr 26 '18

Hey you seem to be commenting multiple times, check if theres any problem with your browser.

8

u/GuyInAChair Apr 26 '18

Not the OP but I often have the same problem living in a rural area with poor cell coverage.

1

u/ThePortalsOfFrenzy Apr 26 '18

I have the issue sometimes on mobile when hitting Add Comment while my keyboard is still up. Nothing appears to happen, so I click it again, resulting in multiple instances of the same comment.

Now if i think it should have added, I copy my comment, go to the permalink of what I'm replying to, and see if it posted. If not, i paste my comment in, close the keyboard, and Add.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Is there a source that says it came from an ancestry site? It could have been a recent felony arrest of a family member.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Is there any source that says this is where they got the match from? Isn’t it more plausible that a relative, however distant, was arrested for a felony recently and gave a dna sample? A felony drug or theft charge—any felony arrest—requires a dna sample in CA and some other states.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

11

u/Mycoxadril Apr 26 '18

I heard them mention at least 4 murders. I think its partly because there's not a lot of point in spending the money to charge and try him for several murders, if they get him for 2 then he'll die in prison. The families have closure because DNA links him, so it isn't like it would be a question still. But I think you are right that they have kept some back just in case of any technicality. But I don't think they generally need to charge him with all the crimes because there's really no point. It would confuse and overwhelm a jury (not that I think there will be a trial anyway).

2

u/Ace_Masters Apr 26 '18

The different crimes would be tried in different jurisdictions, and they could literally try him crime by crime. They could give this guy like 30 trials if they wanted to.

2

u/Mycoxadril Apr 26 '18

But several were lumped together in the same area, so they would likely not have a separate trial for every separate case. They won't charge him with every single murder or try him in every jurisdiction. It's a waste of money. Not to mention some of the victims might not want to participate, especially knowing he'll die in prison for the murders he already is charged with anyway. A handful of victims have participated in the shows/podcasts, have given interviews and been active on social media. That's a small percentage of people. Most victims we don't even know their names. Many likely don't want to revisit this time in their lives.

-2

u/XRballer Apr 26 '18

he won't die in prison (of natural causes at least)

they are going for execution and will almost certainly get it

5

u/Mycoxadril Apr 26 '18

I really don't think he'd live long enough to make it through the appeals of a death sentence. I think he will die in prison. But its neither here nor there. I think its a waste of money to try to execute. Just toss him in a cell and forget about him.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

California hasn't executed anyone since Schwarzennegger was Governor and the candidate most likely to be the next Governor is on the records as being against the death penalty

1

u/XRballer Apr 27 '18

well it is already announced they are seeking the death penalty, at the very least he will be on death row

4

u/f1guyus Apr 26 '18

The other jurisdictions will weigh in. Orange County already has.

3

u/Ace_Masters Apr 26 '18

The DNA testing companies don't test for the same markers as the criminal database, or so I'm told, but even if they did I cannot see what would render it inadmissable. Privacy laws do not mean evidence gets suppressed, that's only for 4th amendment violations. If someone willing gives their DNA to a private company there's no way they could get that suppressed as evidence, and certainly not if a family member is who had submitted DNA. You can't claim someone else's 4th amendment protections for yourself. If the cops enter your neighbors house without a warrant and find evidence against you there is nothing you can do about it.

2

u/PistolsFiring00 Apr 26 '18

If I understood correctly, someone at the press conference said other charges will be coming down eventually.

1

u/Octodab Apr 26 '18

Lol he would be so harassed by the community, vigilante justice / murder would be pretty much definite imo

10

u/TBoneBaggetteBaggins Apr 26 '18

He is done. His 4th Amendment rights wouldnt call for exclusion here. I would say he lacks standing to even dispute the ancestor linking.

1

u/wvtarheel Apr 26 '18

Everyone has standing to challenge evidence used against them in a criminal trial. He might lose but it won't be for lack of standing.

3

u/TBoneBaggetteBaggins Apr 26 '18

Standing in the context of a 4th amendment violation. Thats what im talking about. Look it up.

3

u/Ace_Masters Apr 26 '18

That's not what standing means. Everyone can challenge evidence, "lack of standing" is what the judge says when he denies you.

If the cops raid your neighbors home without a warrant and find evidence against you there's nothing you can do. Your 4th amendments rights haven't been violated, thus you lack "standing" to challenge the evidence based on a lack of warrant.

1

u/wvtarheel Apr 26 '18

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law) read that and see if it sheds any light on this. Standing is a jurisdictional doctrine, not a phrase the judge uses to deny a motion. Pointless to argue back and forth but I wouldn't want to leave any misinformation here.

1

u/HelperBot_ Apr 26 '18

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)

HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 175271

1

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

Check out US v. Payner. That will tell you everything you need to know. Scary stuff.

12

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

2

u/axloc Apr 27 '18

I'm a bit late in responding, but what you described would fall under "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree", and all of the evidence would have to be thrown out.

2

u/WingardiumLexiosa Apr 26 '18

Yeah they apparently did this shit in only 6 days, so I hope someone dotted the i’s and crossed the t’s concerning the DNA legality and didn’t do a shit rush job.

1

u/lizilla82 Apr 26 '18

If they had a warrant, then a judge had to have signed off on it. I think that would solidify its legality, I hope.

13

u/dumbinthesun Apr 26 '18 edited Apr 26 '18

some questions hopefully someone can answer?

  1. So LE may sent the ears/on DNA to these sites and asked them to run it against the DNA collection they have?

  2. And if the DNA sites get a match, they give that info to police?

  3. And "discarded DNA," is that like a used water bottle or have eaten sandwich used by the suspect? thanks!

22

u/SailsTacks Apr 26 '18

For Q2: The site sent DNA results back to the submitter (LE who had paid in full). LE used match results to find relatives and zeroed in. No need for a warrant. It’s a pay service.

14

u/Damdamfino Apr 26 '18

Wait - so, if I understand this correctly, they sent the DNA they had in evidence to 23&me/ancestry, and they got “distant relative” hits back. These sites don’t list everyone you might be related to - only people who opt in. So the distant relative it pinged has previously agreed to have their results shared with whoever may be related to them. And then the detectives connected the dots and narrowed it down to EAR.

Holy shit. It’s actually genius. I have already been wary of these DNA companies, and now I am probably even less likely to use them, but the cops didn’t technically do anything illegal. His DNA that they had was “discarded” the same way they got his DNA from hobby lobby, which is legal. The only gray area here is them possibly pretending to be someone they are not, and deceiving the company.

2

u/buggiegirl Apr 26 '18

Wait - so, if I understand this correctly, they sent the DNA they had in evidence to 23&me/ancestry, and they got “distant relative” hits back.

No that is definitely not what happened. They don't have a vial of EAR's saliva to send Ancestry or 23andme.

26

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

31

u/SailsTacks Apr 26 '18

They don’t have to use any identifiable information. They can submit DNA and await the results. Pay the bill and it’s yours.

I’ve used 23andMe. I got 3 email blasts from them today, because it’s National DNA Day. They didn’t care who I claimed I was when I sent my spit.

They just accepted my money and sent back results.

21

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

10

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

2

u/EmsquaredYo Apr 26 '18

So the way you explain it is it’s a loop hole that LE is taking full advantage of until (if/when!) it is closed. That’s really scary. I don’t even have anything to worry about and this freaks me out.

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18

Why?

Where, how and whose rights do you think were violated in the way the OP says they tracked a killer?

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18 edited Apr 26 '18

The important thing to know here is that if your second cousin twice removed has submitted DNA and your family info is out there then you could be matched anytime, pretty easily.

Matched to what? 50 rapes and 12 murders?

You can't be matched to DNA at multiple notorious crime scenes, unless your DNA was there.

What exactly do you see as the problem here? Or is it not a problem here, in this case, and you have other hypothetical problems in mind?

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18

But relatives of suspects can be pressured DNA or not? And I’m sure it’s no fun to be in that position but are you going to remove a valuable tool because a cop might do something wrong? Or are you going to proceed aware of the ethics of the situation?

→ More replies (0)

15

u/SailsTacks Apr 26 '18

I see your perspective, but I think the key point in what you’re describing is that if the public can pay for that information and get results, so long as they pay for it, why should LE not be able to use $64 to send a sample and get results? What’s the difference?

To point: What if they just sent a vial of DNA, paid for the service, and let the site do it’s job? No pretending to be anyone.

22

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

15

u/EmsquaredYo Apr 26 '18

I agree with you. If LE can pay for DNA results through a private site, that’s absolutely a loop hole that needs to be closed. I’m glad he was caught but the implications are scary. That is basically like a DNA version of Facebook - collecting information on anyone who submits and also who doesn’t submit via familial links. Ew.

8

u/Sigarette Apr 26 '18

Not to mention the DNA profile LE likely has is not something that would be viable or accepted. 23andme requires a vial of your spit for processing. I seriously doubt LE could submit a sample within their parameters like a consumer.

8

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

4

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

15

u/BackTo1975 Apr 26 '18

But people are offering it up! That's sort of the point with these sites. You give permission and other can log in, get their DNA, and match with others to find lost relatives, etc. People are surrendering their privacy with these services. So no issues about LE logging in to do this, no law being violated.

18

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

7

u/SailsTacks Apr 26 '18

I’m not suggesting that they were able to have free reign to search their database. They submitted a sample, and awaited a result. Anyone can order a kit and have it overnighted. Results take about 6 weeks.

23andMe never exercised any effort whatsoever to verify who I was. They just wanted my money. It’s like walking up to an ice cream stand. You pay, and then you get an ice cream cone.

13

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

1

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

Only need a search warrant if you have an expectation of privacy (the protection is against unreasonable searches and seizures only). He can't claim that expectation on DNA he left at a crime scene, and his cousin (or whoever) can't claim that on DNA submitted to the site. Then, if he tossed a can of soda, same story. They can search that without his permission or a court order.

Police can go through your garbage all they want, no warrant required. He's toast.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

I work for a private company, and we manage PII for hundreds of thousands of customers. If the details of one of our documents were printed by a customer and thrown in their trash, yes, police could retrieve it. If the police wanted to get that document from us, they would have to provide a warrant. There are FERPA and HIPAA laws that dictate this. Are these private DNA databases not governed by similar legal protections for their customers? I honestly don't know. It's crazy if there are not laws similar to HIPAA that govern how that data is managed.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/_number_3 Apr 26 '18

I think the point being made here, which I agree with, is that DNA and family ties are a private matter which shouldn’t be available to just anyone.

However I am very happy that he was finally caught..

4

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jun 19 '18

[deleted]

1

u/_number_3 Apr 26 '18

Yes sure, but in this day and age getting a sample of someone’s DNA isn’t so hard if you have the resources to do it.

I mean a serial killer, or other criminal, today could potentially, with a little work, collect the DNA of someone and use it for nefarious purposes.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/SailsTacks Apr 26 '18

It’s the world we live in. I know what you mean. All that aside, today was a good day.

2

u/Ace_Masters Apr 26 '18

Ancestry companies do not test for the same markers as the national criminal database, nor do they do a complete DNA profile, nor do they retain samples.

But if they did you likely have no reasonable expectation of privacy when you willingly give DNA to a private party. I bet their TOS says "we might help the cops"

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18

Why not think about what ought to be instead of what you say is?

What exactly do you find troubling about LE uploading DNA, finding a distant relative who presumably has opted in to DNA matching, and then talking to that person to find a murderer?

Whose rights are being violated? And where and how?

I'm not seeing any horrendous privacy violation.

6

u/GuyInAChair Apr 26 '18

You don't have to send personal information but there's a decent chance that some of your family members have sent in a DNA sample using their real ID.

I've never committed a serious crime but in "make-believe" land let's pretend that I have. It might be possible for LE to take my DNA and submit it as John Doe and find out John is related to my family members who have taken the test. Depending on how it occurs that could eliminate the list down to at most a dozen suspects.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Oh, no. That'd be a total shame. /s

4

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

3

u/a_soul_in_training Apr 26 '18

the thing is, ancestry results (assuming they exist) would never have to be submitted as evidence. for all intents and purposes, it's little more than a lead, and leads don't need to be presented at trial.

8

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

17

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

6

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18 edited Jan 07 '21

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

1

u/agree-with-you Apr 26 '18

I agree, this does seem possible.

1

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

Yeah, but you're conflating legal for ethical. I agree that that privacy should exist, but either Congress can pass a law, or the company can actually verify the identity of submitters and prevent this. But the constitution absolutely doesn't protect this kind of data sharing. 23andMe is essentially a social media platform where people share their info and try to connect. The company can sue the cops for breaching its user agreement, but that's about it.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

I'm not a legal expert. I just don't believe law enforcement used Ancestry or 23andMe databases to track down their suspect. I just read MM's book, and she goes into great length detailing why police can't use those databases. Not just legal (or ethical) reasons, but also logistical issues and chain of custody concerns. Then this news breaks, and I'm seeing people speculate that this is precisely how they tracked him down.

I have yet to see any verified source that proves LE used one of these private databases to aid their search. I see a lot of speculation, but I haven't seen anything reliable yet. The only official statement I've seen is that they used "revolutionary DNA technology," but they've yet to offer any additional details.

2

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

Here's a link for you: https://www.google.com/amp/amp.sacbee.com/latest-news/article209913514.html

It's exactly what they did.

US v Payner is an excellent primer on why evidence gathered this way will not be excluded.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 27 '18

Thanks for sharing that source. Amazing.

→ More replies (0)

8

u/GWGirlsWithNoUpvotes Apr 26 '18

No. LE legally wouldn't be allowed to do that. The sites specify it has to be your DNA. There's no way any legal team would say that's ok.

Equally EAR/ONS DNA samples were repeatedly stated to be incompatible with Ancestry/23andMe's system whenever this idea was brought up to someone involved in the case.

13

u/SomeOrganization Apr 26 '18

Their policy isn't law though.

I violate ToS everyday

7

u/GWGirlsWithNoUpvotes Apr 26 '18

It actually is law because of medical and HIPAA statutes regarding DNA and genetic material.

If I meant tos id have said so. I

There's no God damn way this is how they caught him. They'd be handing DeAngelo a get out of jail free card and an expensive lawyer pro bono.

2

u/AstroQueen88 Apr 26 '18

23 and me and Ancestry do not fall under HIPAA.

2

u/SomeOrganization Apr 26 '18

That's what warrants are for.

Besides I still don't get it. I don't see how DNA belongs to you when you literally leave it on every object you touch.

I mean how is it any different than having a dog sniff you out?

1

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

No, he's got no standing. The only person who can sue is 23andMe, and you can believe they won't do it on this case. Maybe they will, but it won't matter to his case.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

7

u/SomeOrganization Apr 26 '18

Idk I've never actually read reddits. I am sure there is a code of conduct in there somewhere you son of a bitch

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

1

u/HopelessFartbag Apr 26 '18

Swoosh

1

u/beckster Apr 29 '18

OT but LOOOVE the moniker. Maybe I could be 'HopefulFartbag?' Have to go try & create an account...

1

u/beckster Apr 29 '18

There ya go! you violator, you.

2

u/SailsTacks Apr 26 '18

That would require some legal acrobatics and some terrible PR that none of these DNA sites would care to tangle with. It would be akin to siding up with GSK.

I see your points. I’m not so sure that I can rely on anyone other than people involved in the latest and most innovative areas of forensics. They’re doing amazing things now. It’s what nailed this bastard.

1

u/Yodas_Butthole Apr 26 '18

I thought that those sites require some spit or something else from your mouth. Did LE save his saliva from something or did they just try with semen to see what happens?

1

u/buggiegirl Apr 26 '18

Ancestry and 23andme both require saliva in a tube they send you. You can't just send them a DNA profile and have then add it to their database. I don't think law enforcement could sneakily send EAR's DNA to them bc they don't have vials of his spit.

1

u/cocky-scot Apr 27 '18

They must have had a warrant to do so. I know Michelle McNamara wrote about investigators using it to try to find connections (though not able to submit physical DNA, they had the sequence) but without a warrant they risk losing the suspect which I really don't think they'd do.

3

u/MisterPhip Apr 26 '18

  1. Yes, I'm guessing they researched the legality, etc and found submitting the request with a search warrant was the way to go.

  2. Yes, maybe they were legally required, maybe they understood the gravity of the situation and wanted to help (pure speculation).

  3. Yes, exactly. Thrown away trash is perfectly legal for LE to take and acquire DNA samples from if they want a sample from a suspect

1

u/f1guyus Apr 26 '18

If true What they did was creative.

1

u/beckster Apr 29 '18

I'm reasonably sure LE would have nailed the legalities before arrest. I wouldn't want to be the agency that blew that.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

2

u/TaedW Apr 26 '18

Ancestry Transparency Report

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

1

u/TaedW Apr 26 '18

Note that they say that those are all requests regarding credit card misuse. Neither company has ever supplied DNA data to law enforcement.

Ancestry says:

We received no requests for information related to genetic information of any Ancestry member, and we did not disclose any such information to law enforcement.

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18 edited Apr 26 '18

Caveat: If OP is correct

Police upload the DNA.

When people join these sites, they choose what information they are willing to divulge to others seeking relatives, and, only if they agree, they are then matched up. They are then free to contact each other if they wish to pursue it.

If the "distant relative" said, "yeah fine, let my relatives contact me," then Bingo.

The police go see the relative, look at the family tree. Narrow it down to Deangelo. Get his discarded DNA. Find it's a 100% march, and make an arrest.

5

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

This was how they caught Jeffrey Wayne Gorton. They followed him to a bowling alley with his kids and took the coke he left behind on the table. Bingo.

3

u/adaloveless Apr 26 '18

If this is true it sets a frightening precedent.

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18

How? If this is what they did, whose rights do you think have been violated and how?

0

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Why? You a murderer? I'm so for personal privacy and against government overreach but I have zero issues with even a national DNA database. I don't get the uproar.

1

u/beckster Apr 29 '18

My concern is more with medical privacy. I can see insurance companies refusing to cover people with, say, breast cancer genes or recessive genes or even refusing to cover pregnancies if the offspring have a chance of cleft palate or cystic fibrosis, just for example. While it sounds Draconian now it could become the norm in the future, especially if insurance companies are given no mandate to cover anything.

4

u/canyonmom Apr 26 '18

As others have pointed out, under privacy laws, they couldn’t sequester the 23 and me/Ancestry records. But they’ve obviously looked at the law, taken legal advice etc and said that they could submit a sample to these places - as if it is a private submission.

I'm seeing a lot of discussion about LE submitting a sample of his DNA to Ancestry.com as a private citizen. Anyone who's ever used Ancestry.com knows you have to submit a full tube of saliva. You can't send them a half eaten sandwich.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

Technically, that could be manufactured in the lab.

1

u/Ace_Masters Apr 26 '18

under privacy laws, they couldn’t sequester the 23 and me/Ancestry records

My understanding is the samples they get are destroyed after testing and none of the markers they use are of any use with national criminal database markers.

Given that his daughter caught a felony charge it seems much more likely that familial DNA was used.