Charlotte Dotson

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 17

3/2/20

Sandoval, Edgar. “N.Y.P.D. to Remove DNA Profiles of Non-Criminals From Database.” The 

New York Times, The New York Times, 21 Feb. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/nyregion/dna-nypd-database.html.

In this article, “N.Y.P.D. to Remove DNA Profiles of Non-Criminals From Database '', the NY Times reports that the New York Police Department will start removing 82,000 DNA profiles of people who have never been convicted of a crime. For years, the NYPD has been collecting DNA from people who have never been convicted of a crime. They do this by collecting DNA from people who are brought in for questioning, including minors. For about as long as this practice has taken place, it has been controversial. Advocates for civil liberties argue that the collection of DNA from innocent people is a violation of privacy rights. In an effort to lessen the criticism and controversy surrounding the NYPD, they will begin removing DNA profiles of those who have never been convicted. The process will begin with the removal of files that contain DNA belonging to those who were initially considered suspects in investigations, but later ruled out. 

Despite this announcement, many are wary of trusting the NYPD to follow through. Terri Rosenblatt, the Supervising Attorney of the DNA Unit at The Legal Aid Society, believes, “Our lawmakers should step in with real control and oversight of the N.Y.P.D. and act to ban unlawful and unregulated DNA collection...All New Yorkers should reject anything less”. The rules regarding the collection of DNA evidence are becoming stricter. For example, a new rule prohibits the collection of DNA from a minor for a misdemeanor. In the event that a minors DNA could lawfully be taken (connection to a sex crime, firearm crime etc.) the ocnsent of both the individual and their parents is required. 

The criticism facing the NYPD as well as the rules that have been enacted in response represent a growing challenge in the world of DNA technology. The collection of DNA by law enforcement, genetic companies, etc. has grown more and more controversial. Regardless of the practices the NYPD and other agencies follow, it is essential that they are 100% transparent. The NYPD should not be keeping the DNA of innocent individuals, specifically minors. As the article mentioned, once DNA is in the system it is extremely difficult to remove. It is unjust that a minor guilty of a petty crime or simply brought in for questioning should have his/her DNA stored for the rest of their life. 

This article was written in an engaging and informative manner. I think the author did a great job of representing the perspective of civil liberties advocates and those opposed to the collection of DNA in unnecessary cases. Though I personally share this persepctive, I would have liked to have heard about why individuals in the NYPD (or individuals in similar positions) support the past practices of DNA collection. This opposing persepctive would have presented the reader with all the facts, allowing them to make their own opinion. Overall, this article was engaging and very interesting. 

Thirty Years of DNA Forensics: How DNA Has Revolutionized Criminal Investigations

Lorelei Heath

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 16

February 25, 2020

Arnaud, Celia Henry. “Thirty Years of DNA Forensics: How DNA Has Revolutionized Criminal Investigations.” CEN RSS, 18 Sept. 2018, https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i37/Thirty-years-DNA-forensics-DNA.html

In 1986, a 15-year-old girl, Dawn Ashworth walked home, she was 

found raped and murdered later that day.  Richard Buckland was the lead 

suspect for the young girl’s case, for he confessed. Alec Jefferys, a genetics 

professor, from the University of Leicester had previously discovered the 

power of DNA identification. Jefferys worked in the field of paternity and

 immigration cases. But the authorities insisted that he get himself involved 

with Dawn’s case. Jefferys began sampling DNA from Dawn’s scene and a 

similar one from 1983 to Buckland’s. The results came back stating Buckland 

was not present at the scene. After discovering Buckland was not the 

murderer, Jefferys still had work to do. He began collecting DNA from more 

than 4,000 men in Leicestershire with ages between 17 and 34. There were 

no matches found within the 4,000. However, a man was overheard saying he 

was paid off to confess to the crime against Dawn. The name of the real 

murderer was Colin Pitchfork. After analyzing Pitchfork’s DNA and comparing 

it to the scene, Jefferys found a match. Colin Pitchfork was arrested on 

September 19, 1987. He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. 

DNA sampling has become one of the world’s most highly valued 

discovery, for its ability to catch criminals. It is enough to send an offender off 

to prison and is used as evidence for most cases. “ Today, investigators can 

retrieve DNA profiles from skin cells left behind when a criminal merely 

touches a surface. This improved sensitivity combined with new data 

analysis approaches has made it possible for investigators to identify and 

distinguish multiple individuals from the DNA in a mixed sample. And 

it’s made possible efforts that are underway to develop user-friendly instruments 

that can run and analyze samples in less than two hours.” This scientific 

discovery has made lives and saved lives every day.

The article I wrote about was very interesting, as it was about 

the first crime solved with DNA sampling. This discovery saves the 

world and puts away one more bad influence almost every day. Although 

it has it faults, it ultimately saves the world.

Randy Ayala Valdez

Mr. Ippolito

Forensic Science

February 2020

Current Events 16

Randle, Aaron. “Why the N.Y.P.D.'s DNA Database Has Some People Worried.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 16 Aug. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/08/16/nyregion/newyorktoday/nypd-dna-database.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FForensic%2BScience&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection.

There has been controversy over the accumulation of DNA without the approval or knowledge of the person. “Why the N.Y.P.D’s DNA Database Has Some People Worried” addresses the issue relating to the violation of privacy and DNA profiling. The New York Police Department has been storing people’s DNA without their consent. Correspondingly, there has been a 29% increase in the genetic profiles in the city’s database, Local DNA Index System, according to the Legal Aid Society. The police claim that assembling this sort of information from the general public has been efficient in identifying criminals and solving crimes.

According to the Legal Aid Society, over 31,000 of the profiles were of children and adults who were suspected, but not convicted, of crimes. Thus the police department is gathering data on your DNA without any reason to believe you committed a crime. On the contrary, police are arguing that they are not indiscriminately obtaining this content; they chose to highlight how the DNA has helped solve 270 cases, some related to sexual assaults and homicides. 

This article ultimately deals with the unlawful intrusion of private information and how it is disclosed to the police department. Public disclosure of private facts and infringing on the content of someone’s genetic information is very unsettling. This raises the question of whether or not it is morally right to accept these actions since they are benefiting our society? Should institutions like the police department have access to our entire genome? Has DNA profiling proved to be a violation or a security force?

In short, the article addressed two sides of this dilemma, giving the reader a clear understanding of the underlying effects of this modification. As well as insight into the many things that are overlooked in society. The genetic database is just one of the various things that function with little to no overlooking. 

Experimental fingerprint test can distinguish between those who have taken or handled cocaine

University of Surrey. "Experimental fingerprint test can distinguish between those who have taken or handled cocaine." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 6 February 2020. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200206080453.htm>. 

This article titled, “Experimental fingerprint test can distinguish between those who have taken or handled cocaine” published by the University of Surrey discusses a series of experimental tests carried out by the University in their initiative to make fingerprints indicative of possession or consumption of the class A drug, cocaine. Obviously, it is crucial to be able to distinguish whether someone consumed the drug or was just handling it as they have different implications in the eyes of the law but previously the only way to really be sure if the drug was present in someone’s system would be to run tests. This new concept can tell investigators if it was handled or consumed using a single fingerprint. The researchers conducted these tests at a drug rehabilitation clinic and asked all patients whether or not they had consumed or come into contact with cocaine. Participants then washed their hands thoroughly before giving a second set of prints. These types of tests have been in use since 2017 using experimental high-resolution mass spectrometry techniques for fingerprint-based drug screening. 

This article is important to the study of forensic science because it can be very difficult to detect certain drugs when first encountering a suspicious individual without running more in-depth tests but this new and improved fingerprinting method could be extremely influential in stopping drug users. Dr. Min Jang, one of the experts quoted in the article stated regarding the new innovation, “A fingerprint is a great way to test for drugs as it is so quick and efficient to collect. Using our methodology, it is possible to analyze a fingerprint sample for drugs in less than 2 minutes.” Furthermore, it has become more apparent that drugs are getting easier to disguise in our system making it appear as if individuals test negative so hopefully these fingerprint-based tests can help catch people using this illicit substance and others in the future. 

Overall, I thought this was a very informative article that outlined the way these new fingerprint-based tests work to detect individuals who have either handled or consumed cocaine. I also think the research made sure to test various situations including after individuals have washed their hands which allows the results to appear much more full-proof. While I understand this was a research-based article aimed at providing an overview of the new tests, I would have liked to read more about some of the areas the test may not work and plans for expanding the fingerprint method to work with other drugs in the future. 

How Jeff Bezos’ iPhone X Was Hacked

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/technology/jeff-bezos-hack-iphone.html

Frenkel, Sheera. “How Jeff Bezos' IPhone X Was Hacked.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Jan. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/technology/jeff-bezos-hack-iphone.html.

On the afternoon of May 1, 2018, Jeff Bezos received a message on WhatsApp from an account belonging to Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.Mr. Bezos has been on a singular quest to find out who penetrated the device since early 2019, when he said The National Enquirer’s parent company had threatened to release private photographs and texts, and the forensic study was part of that effort. Those pictures and messages showed Mr. Bezos, who was married at the time, with another woman, Lauren Sanchez. The analysis did not connect the hack to The Enquirer. The hack also exposed how popular messaging platforms like WhatsApp have vulnerabilities that attackers can exploit. In October, WhatsApp sued the NSO Group in federal court, claiming that NSA's spy technology was used on its service to target journalists and human rights activists. WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook, has patched the flaw that the malware used.

This instance is pretty impactful because it emphasises the negatives of technology and how easy it is for humans to interfere with others via tech.  In addition, it gives insight to how forensic science is very involved in technology. Often times people are now using their faces and or their fingerprints to enter their devices.  Meaning every time they enter the print is sent to a certain place. Fingerprint scanning and face scanning match dna from your face and finger. It is very important that you are careful with this information. 

This article's strengths are the clear connections to our very developing society.  However, I would have been more interested in the actual science of how his face was intercepted.  That was the main weakness. To improve I would just amplify the technical aspect of the case. Overall it was a great read!