3 ms·
What got me was, if it's not 100% accurate, how do you explain their ability to hunt down the golden state killer using his family tree? They narrowed the possi
by sillysaurusx 6y ago
What got me was, if it's not 100% accurate, how do you explain their ability to hunt down the golden state killer using his family tree? They narrowed the possibilities to 1,000 or so, then checked all 1,000. Straightforward police work. Then a final DNA match confirmed their hypothesis that they'd found him, which turned out to be true.
I don't know. I'm vividly aware that if the matching isn't accurate, innocents will go to prison. But the truth seems less simple than that.
- dxdm 6y agoI'm assuming the "police work" you mention would yield more material to prosecute on, so they won't gi by "DNA alone", which GP was concerned about.
- Spivak 6y agoIt's the same thing with IAFIS. If you think you're going to trial and winning with just a fingerprint match in the database you're gonna be sorely disappointed. These tools are better understood as "lead generation" than any kind of proof.