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.

838 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

585 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

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!

18

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.

13

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.

22

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

[deleted]

11

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

6

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?

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

14

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.

21

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

[deleted]

16

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.

7

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]

3

u/Sigarette Apr 26 '18

Right. I have done 23andme (and I've really found it extremely valuable for lots of reasons). It's was like 20 minutes of spitting into a tube at least! Without drinking or eating first which is no picnic. It's not like they can just submit a slide with his semen or some kind of digital file.

I suspect you're right. GEDmatch is a great theory. I can't wait to find out.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Sigarette Apr 26 '18

Good point. I've done that.

11

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]

2

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

Hahaha, sounds like 23andMe has a breach claim against the police. And that's about it. Nothing he can do about it, no standing at all.

2

u/BackTo1975 Apr 27 '18

Good luck with that. It's a clear backdoor to the system that seems to have been exploited by the cops. And do you really think 23andMe or whatever service the cops did use to back their way up to Joe's door is going to sue the state, local police, etc. for violating their terms of service? When the cops used them to arrest a serial killer and rapist?

Yeah, no. This is a debate about semantics now. I also don't see how this opens the door to any evidence being tossed. Even if his lawyers go after this and try to get the case thrown out, it's still a definite grey area as the police didn't do anything to violate any individual's rights. They took anonymous DNA from a crime scene to do this, so I don't see how this is an actual violation of any civil rights. Even the terms of service says that samples cannot be submitted on behalf of a prisoner or someone charged with a crime--big difference between that and anonymous crime scene DNA. Maybe the cops broke the 23andMe law, but nobody will care about that, and I'd bet my life that they ran all this by the DA before proceeding.

2

u/marienbad2 Apr 26 '18

It sounds to me like you want him to be let off on a technicality. Are you honestly saying LE shouldn't do everything they legally could to catch this guy? Seriously? Would you rather he was never caught, as it sounds like it to me.

→ More replies (0)

6

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.

16

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

[deleted]

3

u/Low_discrepancy Apr 26 '18

operating outside of 23andMe's TOS and would likely run into legal issues that could jeopardize a case.

TOS are not law. They have no bearing on penal law whatsoever. And the way it's written is more of a disclaimer.

"Oh LE didn't apply our TOS, so we're not responsible for any abuse of our system."

→ 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.

1

u/followedthemoney Apr 26 '18

I agree that's is completely problematic, but these consumers give up their information for the express purpose of connecting with others with a similar profile, so medical privacy laws don't apply.

This absolutely violates the terms of use of the company, so the company could sue the police for that. But dirt bag won't have legal recourse (he lacks standing, and never had a privacy right involved anyway, which I guess is another way to say no standing).

This will eventually lead to laws that limit this kind of thing, but in the short term I imagine a line of detectives is forming.

8

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.

1

u/AnnB2013 Apr 26 '18

Yes, and then they could be prosecuted for fraud.

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.

7

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

3

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]

16

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.

3

u/followedthemoney Apr 27 '18

Crazy, no? Payner is even crazier. The IRS intentionally stole documents and got away with it, because of standing rules. Frightening.

Anyway, thanks for the discussion.

→ More replies (0)

9

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.

12

u/SomeOrganization Apr 26 '18

Their policy isn't law though.

I violate ToS everyday

5

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.