Sure, but how could it possibly be linked to you?
Sure, but how could it possibly be linked to you?
You already exist in a criminal database, comes up as a hit, police create a narrative to fit it, even though it is a false narrative.
You argue that a judge could issue a warrant on an innocent person. However, warrants are only issued if there is enough plausibility that a person could be guilty of a crime. At the point the warrant is issued, the government can now force you to give your DNA. But that could happen right now.
Ultimately, in this case, the FBI barely exercised any of their authority. They didn't do any backroom dealings or use 'secret' laws. They just signed up to a genealogy website where people freely share their DNA information with the DNA sample voluntarily given to them by a rapist and murderer. The rapist has no right to any kind of privacy after giving his DNA away. Moreover, no one has any right to prevent a person who shares their genetic information from not disclosing it.
Because your cousin was arrested in 1999 for burglary and held for 30 hours until they realized they had the wrong guy.
That is exactly what the article is about: using large genetic databases to find DNA they have never collected in connection to an investigation.
What this means is that getting just a small fraction of the population into this database will enable it to provide leads for any DNA sample.
Umm...
The person who shared their DNA was neither a rapist or murderer but was simply related to one.