An international consideration of a standards-based approach to forensic genetic genealogy

Law enforcement use of genetic genealogy databases in criminal investigations: Nomenclature, definition and scope

Although law enforcement use of commercial genetic genealogy databases has gained prominence since the arrest of the Golden State Killer in 2018, and it has been used in hundreds of cases in the United States and more recently in Europe and Australia, it does not have a standard nomenclature and scope. We analyzed the more common terms currently being used and propose a common nomenclature: investigative forensic genetic genealogy (iFGG). We define iFGG as the use by law enforcement of genetic genealogy combined with traditional genealogy to generate suspect investigational leads from forensic samples in criminal investigations. We describe iFGG as a proper subset of forensic genetic genealogy, that is, FGG as applied by law enforcement to criminal investigations; hence, investigative FGG or iFGG. We delineate its steps, compare and contrast it with other investigative techniques involving genetic evidence, and contextualize its use within criminal investigations. This characterization is a critical input to future studies regarding the legal status of iFGG and its implications on the right to genetic privacy.

Operationalisation of the ForenSeq® Kintelligence Kit for Australian unidentified and missing persons casework

Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping technologies can generate investigative leads for human remains identification, including estimation of biological sex, biogeographical ancestry (BGA), externally visible characteristics (EVCs), identity, uniparental lineage and extended kinship. The ForenSeq® Kintelligence Kit provides forensic laboratories with the ability to apply this suite of genetic tools to forensic samples using one panel targeting 10,230 SNPs (including 56 ancestry-informative, 24 phenotype-informative, 94 identity-informative, 106 X chromosome, 85 Y chromosome and 9867 kinship-informative SNPs) sequenced on the MiSeq FGx® Sequencing System. The ForenSeq® Kintelligence Kit has been internally validated, optimised and operationalised by the Australian Federal Police National DNA Program for Unidentified and Missing Persons (AFP Program) for coronial casework. The internal validation was conducted according to the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods guidelines (excluding mixture analysis), focussing on sample types typically encountered in human remains identification casework, such as bones, teeth, nail, blood and hair. The workflow was optimised for a high throughput library preparation and sequencing workflow, and additional analytical thresholds were developed to improve genotyping accuracy for low DNA input samples. Additionally, the genetic intelligence generated from the kit was compared to the self-declared biological sex, EVCs and BGA of the DNA donors to assess concordance. The kit was able to produce high quality SNP profiles from 1.0 ng down to 0.1 ng of DNA, with high repeatability and reproducibility, and minimal background noise. The prediction accuracy for biological sex (95%), hair colour (58%), eye colour (74%) and BGA inferences (consistent: 74%; partially consistent: 10%; inconclusive: 16%) was determined based on self-declared data. Additionally, SNP profiles from a volunteer family group of ten related individuals were uploaded to GEDmatch PRO™ to assess kinship accuracy. The kit was capable of detecting (97%) and accurately classifying (90%) genetic relationships spanning from first to fifth degree. The Kintelligence Kit provides the AFP Program with a robust and reliable genetic intelligence tool for unidentified and missing persons investigations, which has been designed to sequence multiple challenging samples in a single multiplexed assay using existing laboratory instrumentation.

Recent advances in forensic biology and forensic DNA typing: INTERPOL review 2019-2022

This review paper covers the forensic-relevant literature in biological sciences from 2019 to 2022 as a part of the 20th INTERPOL International Forensic Science Managers Symposium. Topics reviewed include rapid DNA testing, using law enforcement DNA databases plus investigative genetic genealogy DNA databases along with privacy/ethical issues, forensic biology and body fluid identification, DNA extraction and typing methods, mixture interpretation involving probabilistic genotyping software (PGS), DNA transfer and activity-level evaluations, next-generation sequencing (NGS), DNA phenotyping, lineage markers (Y-chromosome, mitochondrial DNA, X-chromosome), new markers and approaches (microhaplotypes, proteomics, and microbial DNA), kinship analysis and human identification with disaster victim identification (DVI), and non-human DNA testing including wildlife forensics. Available books and review articles are summarized as well as 70 guidance documents to assist in quality control that were published in the past three years by various groups within the United States and around the world.

Attitudes towards police use of consumer/private DNA databases in investigations

Consumer DNA products, such as databases that allow the public to explore familial relationships, have recently been used by police to assist in investigations. This has moved the collection of DNA used in criminal investigations away from the limitations of criminal databases and has opened up ethical concerns regarding privacy and consent. This study explored public attitudes and support towards police use of consumer DNA databases in investigations to assess whether different crime types or moral and attitude alignments influenced the level of public support of police using these consumer products. An international survey of 438 adults, using theory and scales pertaining specifically to retributive punishment and attitudes towards law, courts and police, found that moral alignment and attitudes did influence the level of public acceptability towards police usage of these techniques and that support did vary based on crime type. This research found that higher levels of public support was given for the most serious case types explored (sexual assault and homicide). Participant support for police access to private DNA databases by case type was as follows; 83.5% for sexual assault, 83.2% for homicide, 85.2% for identifying unidentified human remains, 62.8% for robbery and 58.9% for illicit drug related cases. Small to medium effects sizes were observed for these results. Although these findings provided context towards public attitudes, further research specific to international attitude differences and variance between serious crime types and public acceptability could further develop these findings.