CSI-type information...

[seawasp]

As anyone who's watched any of the CSI shows knows, they try to show investigations of various crimes being solved by the application of various forensic techniques. In some cases these are done reasonably accurately except (often) for speed of processing. In others, they're screamingly funny in their wrongness (most obvious is the common "let's enhance this video to see what's in this tiny little part of the background" resulting in this amazingly clear video of someone stabbing someone in the back).

One of the most common plot threads is trying to identify or obtain for identification some DNA for comparison. I know they do this stuff at lightspeed compared to real life, but one thing I *have* wondered about is this: generally they show that they have a "database" of DNA samples to search, and I'm wondering:

1) Are there actually decent-sized databases of people's DNA already on file that could be searched that way?

2) If so, who's IN these databases, who can access them, and when/how do people get put into them in the first place?

3) Does this vary across the country? I.e., if I'm in, say, Los Angeles do I have access to databases X and Y, but not A and B, but in New York I have A, B, and X but not Y?

Comments

[shana.livejournal.com]

This looked like it might be relevant.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/case/revolution/databases.html

[eacole72.livejournal.com]

I know that many states require that anyone convicted of a sex crime be "DNA printed". Plus, each state and/or lab would have its database of DNA from perpetrators of sex crimes, whether or not the perps had been identified. I heard at one point that the National Crime Information Center was working to link all of those state databases, so that someone in Virginia who had an unknown sample could run it against the databases for California & Texas to see if either had matches. Being able to link a serial offender across state lines can bring resources to bear on a string of cases that would otherwise be unavailable (the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit, for example).

I haven't heard if they actually managed to make the linkup happen.

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

There is a military DNA database. I don't know how far back it goes. I also don't know if it includes federal service agencies such as the Border Patrol, law enforcement officers, Customs agents, Secret Service, or others of that type.

[nordhus.livejournal.com]

The National DNA Index System (http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/codis/program.htm) claims to have 3,528,903 convicts on file. That should give them a 1% chance to identify a random DNA sample.

In most cases their chances would be somewhat better because:

a. Criminals are somewhat more likely to be in the database than the average person.

b. Even if the criminal is not in the database maybe his no-good cousin Joe is. Knowing they are searching for a relative of Joe should be at least some help for the investigators.


I'm not really sure who gets registered in the database but looking around the above site I found this phrase:

The tiered approach allows state and local agencies to operate their databases according to their specific legislative or legal requirements.

which would indicate that standards vary.

[murstein.livejournal.com]

When I left the Army in 1994, they were beginning to build that database. One of the ways they were building it was to take samples from everyone coming in; by now, all but the old fogeys gave samples as part of their Basic Training Experience.

They probably got all the fogeys before 2000, too. But that's speculation, based mostly on being in Personnel when mandatory AIDS testing was phased in.

[iiradned.livejournal.com]

The military DNA database is used primarily for identification of remains. And if the TV show NCIS is accurate, it can be used only for that purpose.

[autopope.livejournal.com]

As usual, we natives of Airstrip One are ahead of you on the slippery slope towards an Orwellian surveillance state; the UK National DNA Database currently holds about 3.4 million records, and while that's not much larger than the FBI database, it's a five-times higher proportion of the population, and is routinely used in cold-case reviews (e.g.: earlier this week a man was jailed for life for a murder committed in 1982 on the basis of a cold-case review and DNA matching on preserved evidence).

It's already available to police everywhere in the UK; after all, criminals move around, right? So you can expect any Federal criminal DNA database to follow the same logic.

You get on the database by being arrested. You do not get off the database if charges are dropped or if you're found to be not guilty.

Oh, and Big Brother Blair wants to extend it to cover everyone.
In general, mass surveillance techniques pioneered over here end up being deployed in the US about 3-5 years later. Sleep tight!

[kengr]

Hmm. Wonder what werewolf DNA looks like?

And Verne's DNA would give anybody who took a close look *fits*. Because while human, it'll show a divergence point with the rest of humanity due to his being so much *older*.

Though that sort of "divergence" scan is not a normal test. It's usually used to figure out when Species branched from each other and may in anthropolgy work to try to track migrations and stuff.