Tag Archives: DNA

WAS ALBERT DESALVO REALLY THE BOSTON STRANGLER?

The Boston Strangler was America’s first modern serial killer case. From June 1962 until January 1964, someone terrorized the Greater Boston area of Massachusetts with thirteen sexually-motivated murders. Single women of all ages were raped, sexually brutalized and killed inside their apartments. Apparently, they voluntarily let their killer in.

The slaying string suddenly stopped. No one was apprehended, charged or convicted. Today, the Boston Strangler serial murders remain officially unsolved. The files—whatever left of them—sat shelved with other cold cases. Day-by-day, the trail got icier. That’s until modern forensic science revisited the evidence.

Authorities long debated whether Albert DeSalvo was the Boston Strangler. He was a serial sexual predator and certainly capable of strangling women while raping them. In fact, Albert DeSalvo admitted being the Strangler and claimed responsibility for the thirteen cases, plus other homicides. But, DeSalvo also recanted his confession, blamed others and many pieces implicating him didn’t fit.

Boston area detectives didn’t have Albert DeSalvo on their radar during the early investigation. It wasn’t until late 1965 that DeSalvo surfaced after making a jail-house confession to a cellmate who happened to be represented by high-profile lawyer F. Lee Bailey. Bailey took on DeSalvo’s case and tried to broker a deal with Boston Police and the D.A. It was having Albert DeSalvo ruled criminally insane so he could move from the harsh penitentiary to a comfortable hospital.

The police were very cautious about credibility in DeSalvo’s confession. There was absolutely no physical evidence—at the time—to connect Albert DeSalvo to any of the Strangler scenes. DeSalvo was well known for exaggerating and fabricating stories. Further, DeSalvo seemed wrong about some Strangler scene key facts such as times, mechanisms of death and various evidence points. It seemed to investigators that DeSalvo could have got his information from the news, made some up, or possibly heard it in jail from the real killer.

Albert DeSalvo was written off as a braggart and a pathological attention seeker. He was never charged for the Boston Strangler murders and died in prison in 1973 after being shanked by fellow inmates. The Strangler case sat dormant until 2013 when the Boston PD got special cold case funding from the National Justice Institute. With it, they assembled a team and applied DNA analysis from questioned male biological evidence retrieved at one Strangler death scene and compared it with known DNA extracted from DeSalvo’s exhumed body. The results finally settled the question, “Was Albert DeSalvo really the Boston Strangler?

Boston Strangler Case History

The killings associated with the Boston Strangler serial murder case happened over a 19 month period from the summer of 1962 until the winter of 1964. All victims were females alone in apartments who were killed by manual or ligature strangulation. Some were also stabbed. All were sexually violated in some manner, and most had their nylon stockings cinched around their necks. However, there were marked differences in modus operandi (MO) between the killings. There was also a huge age range. The youngest Strangler-attributed victim was 19. The oldest was 85.

Initially, the Strangler case was called the “Silk Stocking Murders”. This label changed when the Boston Sunday Herald ran the July 8, 1962 headline “Mad Strangler Kills Four Women in Boston” after the fourth victim was found. Then, a panic surge swept Boston causing women to arm themselves, buy guard dogs and rig alarms in their homes.

The print, radio and TV media industry didn’t help calm peoples’ fears. They sensationalized the Boston Strangler case as Boston’s crime of the century. Interest intensified as the Strangler’s body count grew. Through good investigative journalism and helpful leaks from police officers, much of the Strangler key-fact evidence got published.

Normally, this critical information—only known to the true killer and the principal investigators—would be held back in strictest confidence. Not so with many of the individual Strangler murders. Descriptions of exact ligatures, body posings in lurid sexual positions and notes allegedly left by the killer appeared in newspapers and on the air.

Another challenge was the multi-jurisdictional overlap in the Greater Boston police departments. Strangler victims surfaced in Cambridge, Salem, Lynn and Lawrence as well as central Boston. This was the sixties and way before modern communication links in law enforcement. The media had better information channels than the cops and were making case links that seasoned detectives doubted.

The sixties weren’t sophisticated times as forensics and informatics go. But, the Boston detectives were no strangers to murders and were well-equipped with gut sense. The wide gap in victim ages, race, social class, crime scene modus operandi and event spacing puzzled the initial investigators. There were so many different patterns that it was hard to believe that, behaviorally, the crimes were committed by one person.

Many officers still believe that today. They feel that more than one killer was at work in the Boston area during that period and to seasoned officers, that makes sense. However, there was one obvious common denominator in all thirteen murders. Not a single scene had any sign of forced entry. Somehow, the killer had to have been let in.

The Boston Strangler Victims

Initially, the Boston Strangler victim list held fifteen names. After a time, two cases were solved and found to be independent perpetrators. The police also proved these assailants were not connected to the unsolved cases they cautiously suspected were the Strangler’s work. Here is the list of victims historically associated with the Boston Strangler.

1. Anna Slesers – age 56. Found: June 14, 1962 at 77 Gainsborough St., Back Bay, Boston MA. MO: Sexually assaulted with unspecified foreign object. Non-fatally strangled with a belt then fatally strangled with bathrobe cord tied in a bow around neck.

2. Mary Mullen – age 85. Found: June 28, 1962 at 1435 Commonwealth Ave., Boston MA. MO: Sexual assault in progress but died of heart attack during strangulation attempt.

3. Nina Nichols – age 68. Found: June 30, 1962 at 1940 Commonwealth Ave., Boston MA. MO: Sexually assaulted with a wine bottle. Fatal ligature strangulation with one nylon stocking. Two more postmortem nylon stockings tied around neck in a bow.

4. Helen Blake – age 65. Found: June 30, 1962 at 73 Newhall St., Lynn MA. MO: Raped and fatally strangled with nylon stockings. Another nylon and bra tied around neck postmortem.

5. Ida Irga – age 75. Found: August 19, 1962 at 7 Grove St., Beacon Hill, Boston MA. MO: Raped and manually strangled. Pillowcase around neck postmortem.

6. Jane Sullivan – age 67. Found: August 21, 1962 at 435 Columbia Rd., Dorchester, South Boston, MA. MO: Raped and fatally strangled with nylon stockings.

7. Sophie Clark – age 20. Found: December 5, 1962 at 315 Huntington Ave., Back Bay, Boston MA. MO: Raped and fatally strangled with nylon stockings. Petticoat wrapped around neck postmortem.

8. Patricia Bissette – age 23. Found: December 31, 1962 at 515 Park Drive, Back Bay, Boston MA. MO: Raped and fatally strangled with interwoven nylon stockings. Blouse also tied around neck postmortem.

9. Mary Brown – age 69. Found: March 6, 1963 at 319 Park Ave., Lawrence MA. MO: Raped, bludgeoned with a pipe, stabbed in breasts with fork and manually strangled. No ligature involved.

10. Beverly Samans – age 23. Found: May 6, 1963 at 4 University Rd., Cambridge MA. MO: Raped, stabbed four times in neck, twenty-two times in torso. Two scarves and one nylon stocking tied around neck postmortem.

11. Evelyn Corben – age 58. Found: September 6, 1963 at 224 Lafayette St., Salem MA. MO: Raped, forced to perform oral sex and fatally strangled with two nylon stockings.

12. Joann Graff – age 23. Found: 23 November, 1963 at 54 Essex St., Lawrence MA. MO: Raped, beaten and fatally strangled with nylon stockings. Black leotard wrapped around neck postmortem.

13. Mary Sullivan – age 19. Found January 4, 1964 at 44-A Charles St., Boston MA. MO: Sexually assaulted with broom handle, forced to perform oral sex, fatally strangled with nylon stocking. Two scarves tied around neck postmortem. Posed on bed with back against wall, legs spread and hand-written sign placed at feet reading “Happy New Year”.

How Albert DeSalvo Surfaced

Hindsight is a marvelous thing. Many police and forensic investigators wish they were issued it when they started their careers. Hindsight may be 20/20, but that’s not the real world in active, fluid police and forensic worlds.

Analyzing modus operandi, or method of operation, is also a marvelous thing. In hindsight, the Boston Strangler’s MOs appear glaringly obvious. But, it’s just not that clear for field investigators on the ground. These professionals had to do the best with what they had at the time. Usually that’s a name and they didn’t have Albert DeSalvo’s as a murder suspect.

Looking back, Albert DeSalvo was proficiently active across the crime spectrum. DeSalvo was a con-man duping people on scams. He boosted cars and broke into businesses. DeSalvo dealt drugs and fenced goods. But what Albert DeSalvo was really good at was scamming innocent people into letting him enter their homes.

Before the Boston Strangler case started, Boston police were baffled by sexual predators called the “Measuring Man” and the “Green Man”. They appeared to be two different entities because of two different MOs. Both behaviors were far from how the Boston Strangler operated.

The Measuring Man started his Boston business in 1960. He was a clean, well-dressed and cheery man who randomly appeared at single ladies apartment doors, confidently portraying himself as a modeling agency rep. The ruse was the lady had been recommended by her anonymous friend to be a model. The Measuring Man was asked in, took critical bust, waist and hip sizes and was never seen again.

The Green Man was more aggressive. He appeared at single women’s apartments dressed in green work clothes. His ruse was repairs, and he was let in to do his job. That turned out to be raping women, but leaving them alive. Most gave a very good description and one victim later led the police to Albert DeSalvo.

Boston police arrested Albert DeSalvo for the Green Man rapes on October 27, 1964. This was eight months after the last Boston Strangler murder. Based on DeSalvos description and distinct Green Man MO, they charged him with multiple counts of rape and related sexual assaults. DeSalvo was held in custody and remanded for a psychiatric assessment. It was the same place and time holding George Nassar.

Albert DeSalvo Meets George Nassar

George Nassar was a violent Boston area criminal. Nassar was also in psychiatric remand for cold-bloodedly killing a gas station attendant during a robbery. He was already convicted of a previous murder. They wrote the penal code for guys like George Nassar, and he’d already checked off most of the boxes.

Somehow, Albert DeSalvo and George Nassar were cell mates. No one except Nassar knows how the conversation started. He’s still alive, but not talking. However, back then, the increasingly high-profile American defense attorney F. Lee Bailey represented George Nassar. Though Nassar and Bailey—Albert DeSalvo confessed to being the Boston Strangler.

This toxic mix of masterful manipulators gave Boston police investigators the willies. Nassar was known as a cruel murderer with sexual deviancy. Bailey was an up-and-coming publicity hound. And Albert DeSalvo had absolutely no priors for anything indicating murder.

F. Lee Bailey (later famous for clients like Sam Sheppard, Patty Hearst and OJ Simpson) recorded 50 hours of interviews with DeSalvo producing 20,000 transcript pages. Bailey remained the middle man and the police never talked to DeSalvo directly.

Boston and other PD detectives carefully analyzed Albert DeSalvo’s statements. They concluded that DeSalvo got may details wrong about the crime scenes, particularly times of death that contradicted autopsy evidence. They also concluded details DeSalvo got right—certain key fact information—could well have come from another capable criminal like George Nassar.

DeSalvo suddenly recanted his confession. Police suspected a ruse between Nassar and DeSalvo to split a reward and prefer facilities. DeSalvo was already facing life imprisonment and Nassar had an appeal shot. Police also mistrusted F. Lee Baily and for a good reason, given Bailey’s track record. Eventually, Bailey goes home. DeSalvo dies. Nassar does life. And the Boston Strangler serial killings go unsolved.

Mary Sullivan and Albert DeSalvo’s Families Join Forces

This might sound like an unlikely joint venture, but the families of Mary Sullivan—13th on the Strangler list—and Albert DeSalvo joined forces to exonerate him. Both families had agendas. DeSalvo’s family wanted his name cleared as the Boston Strangler and Sullivan’s family long suspected a copycat—an associate of Mary Sullivan’s roommate.

The Sullivans and DeSalvos did a private investigation in 2000. The Boston police and other law enforcement agencies weren’t involved. Because both families had next-of-kin and executor powers, they convinced the medical examiner to exhume Mary Sullivan and Albert DeSalvo’s bodies for DNA examination.

Their goal was to isolate the killer’s DNA profile on Mary Sullivan’s remains and a known DNA profile from DeSalvo’s remains. Theoretically, this would link or exonerate the two. This was despite Mary Sullivan decomposing for 36 years and Albert DeSalvo rotting for 27.

They exhumed Mary Sullivan on October 13/14, 2000 from her grave in Hyannis MA. The forensic report of her disinterment and forensic examination is fascinating for the forensically inclined. Foreign DNA signatures developed on what was left of Sullivan’s underwear, pubic hair and head hair. They produced two separate donor profiles through degraded mitochondrial DNA profiling. The question was, “Were they contributed by Albert DeSalvo?

The DeSalvo family authorized the Medical Examiner to exhume Albert’s body. The private team isolated suitable material and developed a unique DNA profile for Albert DeSalvo. When compared, the foreign DNA on Mary Sullivan clearly wasn’t contributed by Albert DeSalvo. Albert DeSalvo seemed innocent.

For the next 13 years, both families and many others were convinced Albert DeSalvo didn’t murder Mary Sullivan. That wasn’t so with the Boston police who still held the original semen swabs and slides from Mary Sullivan’s autopsy. They were waiting for forensic science to catch up so degraded DNA could be positively processed.

Boston Police Examine Strangler DNA in 2013

Boston and other police departments had no involvement in the 2000 private exhumations and DNA analysis. Neither did the Medical Examiner’s office or District Attorney. They let a privately-funded—and expensive—venture play out and let the private conclusions stand for what they were worth.

The authorities are no fools. They analyzed the private process flaws and waited till technology advanced. By 2013, forensic DNA analysis had three decades under its belt and was far more precise on old, degraded serology swabs and slides like those still retained from Mary Sullivan’s autopsy in 1964.

Two forensic labs worked tandemly to profile mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from the foreign, or questioned, semen samples taken at Sullivan’s postmortem. They produced a clear biolgical picture of her killer. Now, the forensic team needed a known sample from suspects.

For years, Albert DeSalvo was the leading Boston Strangler suspect. Certainly, individual investigators had their personal opinions. But, the preponderance of evidence pointed to DeSalvo and the overall modus operandi pointed to all thirteen murders being related.

Now the Boston police and the forensic team needed a known sample from their prime suspect—Albert DeSalvo. The problem was, DeSalvo was dead. Unlike the NOK/family loop that allowed exhumation, the cops had to convince a judge to issue a search warrant.

Again, the authorities are no fools. They needed a live link to the dead for an indicative DNA donor. That lay in a living male relative of Albert DeSalvo and, by now, the cooperative ones had dropped off. The closest living DeSalvo was a nephew. He wasn’t cooperating.

So, the Boston PD did a sting where they surveilled the nephew till he discarded a plastic water bottle. From that, the forensics team developed a Y-Chromosome DNA profile that showed that someone from the DeSalvo male lineage was 99.9% likely to be Sullivan’s foreign sperm donor. This powerful biological indicator provided grounds for a second Albert DeSalvo exhumation, authorized by a court warrant. Direct nuclear DNA from Albert DeSalvo was crucial to precisely proving or disproving the connection.

On July 10, 2013 Boston police and their forensic team once again dug up Albert DeSalvo and extracted DNA from his femur and three teeth. Nine days later, the Boston PD chief, the local DA and the Massachusetts Attorney General jointly announced that Albert DeSalvo’s DNA matched Mary Sullivan’s sperm donor with odds of one in 220 billion.

It follows that if Albert DeSalvo’s semen DNA match conclusively links him as Sulivan’s killer, then the intricate MO—the nylon stocking nexus—connects DeSalvo to all thirteen killings. That evidence combination is the holy grail in a serial killer investigation and there is no doubt—no reasonable doubt—that Albert DeSalvo really was the Boston Strangler.

THE NGI — REALITY IN CRIMINAL IDENTIFICATION’S NEXT GENERATION SYSTEM

A3Imagine information straight from crime scenes biometrically feeding a super-computing, multimodal system of collaborating human identification techniques. A futuristic system beyond IAFIS, the longstanding Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System. A new system with hyper-integrated, next generation, biometric database identifiers of laser-scanned tenprints, palmprints, iris and retina recordings, facial recognition, voice printing, tattoo banking, and instantaneous DNA profile matching. An amazing algorithmic system of centralized surveillance. A fantastic system favoring the police.

A4Imagine the cop on the street with a handheld device imaging your eye, searching your face, or scanning your index finger, then uploading via iPhone to the next generation system that searches, identifies, and reports within seconds. Imagine a system with a repository on persons of special concerns—murderers, rapists, and terrorists—that tracks their chip and their criminal life-cycle from the commission of crime to the correctional center.

Think it’s imaginary? Well, it’s not. It’s here. It’s active. And it’s expanding. It belongs to the FBI and it’s called the Next Generation Identification system. NGI for short.

On its website, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who administers the program, states:

F22“The NGI is the cornerstone that enables our Criminal Justice Information System, CJIS, to meet our growing an evolving mission and continue to build our reputation as a global biometrics leader. The NGI Program Office mission is to reduce terrorist and criminal activities by improving and expanding biometric identification and criminal history information services through research, evaluation, and implementation of advanced technology beyond the AIFIS environment.”

Wow! An ambitious goal Let’s look at how this 1.2 billion dollar baby works.

The NGI is already fully operational in its fingerprinting capacity and is incrementally phasing in other parts of the program in with these biological, biographical, and contextual categories:

Tenprints

220px-Fingerprints_of_Anna_Timiriova_3 (1)Conventional fingerprinting of arrested individuals involves rolling each of the ten digits from nail edge to nail edge as well as impressing ten flats. The “tenprints” were inked onto paper then scanned into AIFIS. The NGI allows real-time scanning and digital direct uploading. The NGI’s use of matching algorithms in its Advanced Fingerprint Identification Technology, AFIT, increased accuracy to 99.6% and its speed to under two minutes.

A9

Palmprints

Previous systems did not include palmar impressions yet statistics show that partial palm prints account for over 30% of latents lifted at crime scenes. The NGI’s digital scanning, recording, and identifying palm prints are already having a huge impact in criminal identifications.

Latents

F3Latent” prints are technically those impressions that can’t be seen with the naked eye and are discovered by the use of amplifying powders, chemicals, and alternate light sources. The NGI lumps these in with “plastic” impressions—those impressed into a mold like wax or grease—and “patents” which are those visible on glass, for instance, and conventionally lifted with adhesive and fixed on slides. All questioned prints are now termed “latent”.

F1The NGI’s advanced matching algorithm technology has three times AIFIS’s capacity in identifying minute details and making identifications. Further, it has ten times the capacity to store unsolved latent prints and randomly searching newly inputted prints to clear cold cases.

Currently, the NGI’s Latent Branch is subdivided into the Criminal Master File, the Unsolved Latent File, and the Civil Repository.

Facial Recognition

A2The NGI system incorporates the Interstate Photo System (IPS) which catalogs millions of criminal mugshots as well as other identification photos like driver licenses and passports. The NGI is accessible through Universal Face Workstations where criminal photos are entered through desktop software and the results are immediately scanned and returned as “ranked candidate leads as investigational tools”. The system is expanding its capability to search facial recognition from public videos like cell phone and surveillance camera material.

Iris and Retina Identification

A5This technology was developed by the military and is incorporated in the NGI system as part of its integrated approach to criminal identification. Current prisoner processing will include iris/retina images recorded and entered into the NGI database. Additionally, patrolling police officers will be equipped with portable scanners to assist in identifying persons in public who cannot produce conventional identification. This mobile technology already exists as MORIS, the Mobile Offender Recognition and Information System, and is a mainstay with the NYPD.

Scars, Marks & Tattoos

A8The SMT Branch is another evolving arm of the NGI where criminal processing allows for images of tattoos, scars, and other markings on suspects to be collected and entered into the overall criminal profile. Technology allows for a search capacity in querying descriptive data in order to find stored images of potential matches.

DNA Database

Currently, all convicted felons of serious persons crimes are court ordered to provide their DNA profiles to authorities. The NGI will be the central repository of criminal DNA profiling with a tremendous search and match capability. This increment of the NGI is being phased-in.

A7

Voice Printing

Recording and  recognizing human voice patterns is an emerging technology and a future project for the NGI program as it rolls out its ambitious program. This will be especially useful in identifying unknown speakers caught in electronic surveillance through bugs and wiretaps in terrorist and criminal investigations.

RISC

A10The Repository for Individuals of Special Concern area of the NGI allows a total packaged profile to be constructed for high-risk offenders, suspected terrorists, and other individuals of special concern. The RISC system is available 24/7/365 and has a response time of less than five seconds. Currently, the NGI’s RISC branch has over 5,000 requests per day from everywhere like street checks to airport security. Its average hit rate is 4.6%.

Think about this.

30 seconds. Tie a shoe. Wave hello. Send a text. Fasten your seatbelt. Kiss your child goodnight.

Now it only takes 30 seconds to identify a wanted fugitive through the Repository of Individuals of Special Concern.

Rap Back

A11The National Rap Back Service is the screening program for monitoring non-criminal issues like job applications for jobs of critical trust such as daycare workers, scout leaders, bank tellers, children’s sports coaches, teachers, and possibly even gynecologists. It also includes people who are under criminal justice supervision like parolees and probationers. Turnaround time for Rap Back reports are typically fifteen minutes and it processes thousands per day.

Tech Refresh

Upgrading and replacing existing software and hardware will be never ending in the struggle to implement the NGI at Federal, State, and Local investigation and enforcement agencies. It’s vital to the system’s success that end users are up to date and avoid quick obsolescence.

A12Beyond being a multimodal biometric identification database program, the NGI will also align with the Personal Identity Verification (PIV) cards that are being developed by NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology. These are credit-card sized pieces designed to be carried on your person and contain a chip encoded with your entire biometric profile—tenprints, palm prints, iris/retina image, SMTs, DNA profile, and your voice pattern. While elective for everyday citizens to apply to the program, soon PIV’s will be mandatory equipment for mobile felons.

A13So, the imaginary, fantastic world of biometric identification and super-computed, centralized civilian surveillance is here. In 2016.

Makes me wonder what’s coming in the future. I suspect a biometric chip surgically implanted into high-risk offenders that permanently identifies and GPS tracks their existence. We’ll know where they are. Who they’re with. And what they’ve done.

And, hopefully, stop what they’re about to do.

GENOMICS — THE FUTURE OF FORENSIC DNA PROFILING

A3Genomics is the scientific study of the molecular instructions encoded in your cells.  It maps your entire genetic structure. Till now, forensic science has focused on only identifying your cell’s nuclei signature — your inner DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) and, to a degree, your outer miDNA (mitochondrial DNA) — not your genes. The old method of forensically profiling your biological fingerprint by DNA analysis is being replaced by a computerized 3D genome recreation of your entire being.

A17Genomics is a concept first developed in the 1970’s. It led to the Human Genome Project (HGP) being completed in 2003. The HGP was a massive international research venture that sequenced and mapped all of the human cell genes — together known as the genome. The HGP gave us the ability to read nature’s complete genetic blueprint for building a human being. Like you.

So what’s a genome?

A14A genome is the whole ensemble of your genetic material. It’s the molecular guide of your DNA, your chromosomes, and your genes that tells how to make your cells. It’s the instruction manual for your body. That book is your genome and the study of that book is termed genomics. It’s pretty much a math exercise. And it’s deadly stuff for identifying criminals with.

Let’s take a quick look at your biology.

A35Deoxyribonucleic acid is the chemical compound that contains the instructions to develop and direct your life as an organism. DNA molecules are made of two twisting, paired strands, often referred to as a double helix.

Each DNA strand is made of four chemical units, called nucleotide bases, which comprise the genetic “alphabet.” The bases are adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G), and cytosine (C). Bases on opposite strands pair specifically — an A always pairs with a T — a C always pairs with a G. The order of the As, Ts, Cs, and Gs determines the meaning of the information encoded in that part of a DNA molecule. It’s just like the order of letters determine the meaning of a word, only DNA is written out in a barcode locus.

Every single cell in your body contains a complete copy of the 3.2 billion DNA base pairs, or letters, that code your human genome.

DNA’s four-letter language contains information needed to build your physical body. A gene refers to the unit of DNA that carries the instructions for making a specific protein, or set of proteins, and there’s 23,000 genes in your genome code. Each gene directs an average of three proteins.

A11

If you could peer inside your cells, you’d see your genome contained in 46 tightly packed bundles of DNA — 23 came from your mother and 23 from your father. These DNA bundles, called chromosomes, provide instructions that enable a one-cell embryo to develop into a 100 trillion-cell adult. So, every time the human body produces a sperm or an egg, 3 billion DNA letters must be copied and packaged so they can be passed along to future offspring.

A31Humans come in many shapes and sizes, but we’re all very similar at the DNA level. In fact, the genomes of any two people are more than 99% the same. Still, the tiny fraction of the genome that varies among humans is critical when it comes to forensically identifying a particular individual. DNA variations are part of what makes each of us unique, but it’s in the genes that the real difference lies. They direct what you look like.

Okay. Enough of the biology lecture. How is genomics gonna catch some crooks?

It’s not just genomics. Science now has a great handle on how your DNA is formed and how your genes fine-tune your uniqueness. The problem has been in how to process a staggering forensic workload that has bottlenecked the crime labs and the courts — and how to put a face and a name to an unidentified DNA profile..

A26The answer lies in genomic computerization. The good news is that technological progress is being made faster than anyone ever dreamed possible. Now the labs are looking at your entire genome package for identification, not just at that little bit of nucleic or mitochondrial DNA which is dirty, volatile, and time-consuming stuff to process.

Advancements in computerized processing are allowing crime labs to build an entire picture of you as a suspect — not just an impersonal, academic graph of the matching points in either your biological evidence sample that you left behind at the scene, or your known reference sample that investigators obtained from you.

A2Think about how many cold cases there are where the investigators have a clear DNA profile of you as the perpetrator, but they have absolutely no clue what you look like. They have no idea whether you’re young or old, black or white, have green eyes or brown. They don’t know your hair color or texture. They don’t know if you’re tall or short. And, in some cases, they don’t know if you’re male or female.

Genomic profiling is going to change the game. Computers will speed it up. 

A25Illumina Corporation of San Diego is a world leader in Forensic Genomic technology. They’ve developed a process called Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) that can simultaneously analyze every locus-point in a traditional DNA barcode using less than 1 nanogram of a sample in a fraction of traditional turn-around time that it’s currently taking.

Illumina is also at the forefront of developing the new cornerstone of contemporary forensic science — being able to generate a physical description of the DNA’s donor based on their genome profile.

A22Think about the ramifications. It’s not only going to assist in solving current cases. It’s going to give a physical look at the perpetrators of cold cases. Identify found remains with no names. Help in sorting disaster victims. And make accurate aging estimations for missing children.

The speed and accuracy of forensic genomic profiling will have far reaching effect on the costs in the criminal justice system. Faster and higher rates of identification will remove more dangerous offenders from society and the reliability of their forensic identifications will result in less trial time. It will reduce investigator workload in chasing blind leads. And it will, undoubtedly, save lives.

A29I think we’re in a fascinating time, watching technological advancements in forensic sciences. Genomic profiling is a fantastic breakthrough. We’re close to the day when your tiny biological dropping at the scene of your crime will go into a machine, the button pressed, and not just will your virtual mugshot come out — it’ll build a full-color, 3D image of your entire person right from your molecules to your moles.

Yes, science has come a long, long way in understanding how your human genome instruction book is written.

God knows who wrote it.