 Rwy'n gwybod, mae gennym yn ymddi'r busnes. Yn ymdyn nhw'n gwybod yw'r cyffredinol ac wedi gweld i'r ddechrau'r ddweud o'r ddweud, o'r genedig genialog ymddi, rydyn ni'n gweithio i'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud, felly mae'n gweithio'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud i'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud. Ond would like to start look at.. First of all, this a historical perspective of identifying missing persons and then identifying missing people through the international DNA databases Then same up genetic genealogy to identify missing persons. All this is raising some very interesting questions, all this is doing this process of doing this drawing together all the information, y cwestiynau gallai uchaf. Felly byddwn ni'n gallu gydag i'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd o'r ffordd, a roedd ni'n cael ei ddweud o'r gwylfaenau. Rwy'n gwneud bod rhywbeth sydd eu ddweud yn ffordd i'r ffordd o'r rhondd. Felly, ymlaenwch ar y cyfanyddol yma yn ystod o'r cyfanydd yma yn myfynion. Mae'n gwerthwyr i'r gwrs, Gerald, yr olydd, yn 1921 i'r Cork. Diolch yn ysgolwyd am Llywodraethol, yw Llywodraeth Rfyrdd, ond roedd rôl eich cymaint yn Gwladysgol yng Nghymru, ac roedd yr oedd yma i'r gweithio amser i'r rhan o ffryd yn Ffryds. Dyna, mae'n gweithio i'r cymaint ac mae'n gweithio i'r rhan o'i rhan o'r cymaint o Belynyn. Dyna, mae'n gweithio i'r gweithio i'r 5, 6, 5, ac mae'n gweithio i'r gwybod llwy yma i'r gweithio. These were the planes that went out at the front of the, you had a sort of bombing version of them. They were the ones who were at the front laying away for all the planes coming behind so that they had the targets where they knew where to shoot. He went missing on the night of the 20th, 21st of April. The story was covered in the local paper that was at that time in Chelten where the family was then living Mae'n meddwl yn ei ddweud. Mae'r gwrthod yn yma'r ddweud a'r sefydlu'r ysgodran, ac rwy'n ddweud hynny'n iawn i'n rhaid, mae'n hynny'n telegram ar y sefydlu. A yna'r tex ar y telegram. Felly dyna'n cael ei wneud, mae'r aelod yng Ngheirwch yn ymgyrch i'r mwyaf o'u ddechrau. Mae'n cael ei ddweud o'i ddweud, a'n cael ei ddweud o'i ddweud o'r ddweud. . Rwy'n rydyn ni'n mynd i ddweud yr ysgol yw'r cyffredin yr bwyr yn chi'n hefyd. Cynny'n ydych chi'n rhoi'r symud o'r cyfrannu yn ysgol dras rhywun i'r bobl wedi gwelio'r cyffredin yn ysgol yma yn oes fwrdd eff 125 o gynllun cymrodd, hayrwydd cael bod yn y gweithredu yma chi'n tr�io cymrydd i'r cyfrannu i'r tyff. Ond ar hyn yn drafod, mae y dyfodol yn Hyllwy Brannu yn y cwrin yn y cyfrannu. Rwy'n meddwl gynon i'n gondol gwaith, maen nhw'n meddylu'n mynd i gael y gwiriau hynny. Rwy'n meddwl gynnwys, oeddau gwneud hynny ddim yn y fwyaf, rydyn ni wedi bod ni yn gallu gweithio. Rwy'n meddwl i'r gweithio a chyfodol, mae gennym ei bod yn ei ddim yn y blygu i mewn, ac mae'r bodys wedi'n gwybod yn ei ddim i'w gyfath gyrdd. Mae'r gweithio wedi'n meddwl, rydyn ni'n meddwl yw'r cyfath yw, ar y cwm y tŵig yw'r rhan o'r amser. Rwy'n wedi bod ni'n clywethaf yn ymddi â'r ysgrifennu, ond y dydw i'r gwahau sydd wedi'u cwm. Dyma yma rwy'n cael ei bod yn ymweld i'r amser i ddweud y cerddio'r cerddio sy'n cael ei'r brosodr ac mae'n cael ei ei ddweud ymlaen, yr Ymddiwr Cymru Cerddio Cerddio'r Cerddio, yn ei ddweud un o'r cerddio sy'n cael ei'r cerddio, a yn y rhaid i'r cerdio, But the one thing that struck me this was actually the first time I visited one of these war graves was just walking around the cemetery the sheer number of gravestones for soldiers who are unidentified. And it's just that the sheer numbers of people involved, it's difficult to bring home that message. But I don't—did any of you go to see the display, the poppies at the Tower of London? That was just the world, the soldiers who died in World War One. Every single puppy, there were ceramic puppies, they were planting them throughout the course of the exhibition. It's just seeing the sheer numbers and knowing they every puppy represented one person, really brought home to me the scale of the horrors of the world war. Mae'n gwybodaeth i ddweud i gyfrydu mewn tynno. Rhywodraeth efo i ddim yn cael byb yn eich rhan. Rhaid i fiment sy'n bwysig ac maen nhw wedi'i ddisadagol, rhorwad, ysgolôl, arddwg ac y cyflwyno. Roedd yr yddech excru gwrs yn y rhan. Mae'n nesaf yng nghydfyrdd ym 911, a'r ² yn sicr o'r 3,000 rhai Laura Llywodraeth Llywodraeth yn yr ystafell. Mae'r diwrnod ym Mwysil yn Ynwy, yn ddeallu ffotosio gweld yw'n deallu mwy o weld o'r d eich bod eu bod yn ddysgu'n cyvenoedd. Os i ddweud o'r drwrs ac i ddiweddol, yw'n ddweudio'n ddweudio'r ddim, yn dweud o'r ddych chi'n meddwl Meksycho, y gallw'n ddweudio'r ddweudio, morgylchion, dduwg, thwyd, oedd myrwyr oed, norwg yn ddweudiaid, a ddref sy'n ddefnyddio cydydd yn y cynhyrch sydd wedi myfiant gweithio. Mae'r ffordd y cwrs iawn i chi'w gwybod yw'r cyngor yn y teimlo. Er oedwch chi'n dweud o erbydd o gweithio o'r localigodd ymlaen i'w defnyddio'r cyhoedd o gweithio o'u gweithio a chael i gweithio i gweithio, A y dynion i ddweud, mae Gyllid Freunig Gweithio yn hynny i gweithio'r hwn 7 miliwch ond o'r fwyllt gyda'i gyda'i oed yn y ffyrst yng Nghymru. Rwy'r rôl o'r 1 miliwch yw oed yn ysgrifennu ar y cyhoedd yw 150 o bobl, ond mae'r rôl yn ysgrifennu a'r ysgrifennu o'r fwyllt o'r rôl o'r rôl o'r ffyrdd yn ddiddordeb gwaith. Rwf yn ysgrifennu i ddiffyn i ni'n ddiddordeb gwaith ar y cyhoedd. ac yn ystod y bydd y bydd yn ymweld, a dyma'n rhaid i gael y gwahanol o'r ymddiannol yma, sy'n gweithio'r cyfrifol yma, ac mae'n gweithio'r cyfrifol yma 100 ym 100 o'ch cyfrifol. Ac mae'n gweithio'r cyfrifol yma, a'r 30 bodys cyfrifol ar y cyfrifol yma. Mae'r ymddiannol yn y rhan o'r cyfrifol yma yn y ddweud yn y ddweud yn y ddweud, mae'n rhan o'r cyfrifol yma yn y ddweud, hwnnw'n ymwneud ei wneud o'r projekty gyda'r Codd projekty, sydd yn rhan i'ch ffordd o'r cymwyllfa cymryd yng Nghymru gyda'r Cymysgol Llanfyddion Cymysgol. Rwy'n cael ei chyfrifio'r projekty sydd wedi y cysylltu'r cymryd yng nghymru i'r ffordd o'r cymryd yw'r neud. Rwy'n cais i'r Tom Rutherford Cresu, cysylltu'r cofnod ym Mhlairea, yn yw yng nghymru greu am Ysgrifordd Nesg, I Think it was in Russia, which is now part of Turkmenistan. I couldn't understand why I couldn't find his name on the CWGC website. So I came across this project and I wrote to them. The family actually had a number of letters surviving from that time. So we sent off an application. Then eventually, after it took nearly a year for the process to go through, they actually added Tom Rutherford Cruise's name to the register. Ac mae gennym yn fawr i gael cael 6,000 nesaf y CWGC website. Yn ymwneud yma'r ffordd yng Nghymru, mor ysbryd yn Ysbryd, a mae'n gweithio'r ffordd o'r Gwfryd, ac mae'n gweithio'r amhwynt yn Australia ac mae'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. ac mae'r archiologi o'r Unedig Gwasgwyd yw'r hyn yn cael ei ddweud o'r llyfr o'r ffordd, ac mae'r bwysig ddod 250 rhan o'i gwneud. Ac mae'r bwysig o'r bwysig o'r bwysig o'r bwysig o'r geniologicol, bo'r bwysig oherwydd yma 1,650 bwysig oed yn cyfnodd yn ymddiadau i'n gweithio ar y bwysig o'r dromel, ac mae'r bwysig o'r 250 bwysig oed yn y llyfr o'r bwysig oed yn cael ei ddod. Felly, mae'r projekty o'u gwahanol iawn yn Gymryd-dion wrth oedd a'r Gymru drionio o dyna'r dyna a'r gofio chyflentys ar gyfer 250 a wedi gael ddarnol y 250. Roedd eerylcheddol wrth gwrs yn ei wneud ar gyfer 250, ac armellio gynnig o'u gwahanol iawn ar gyfer 16,000—1,650 leisio. Felly, mae'n meddwl i'r ffamau, mae'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r ffamau o'r ffamau, ac mae'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r 6,600 ffamau i ddefnyddio'r 250 ffamau. Felly, mae'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r geniologicol ffamau sy'n meddwl i'r proses. A fyddai sydd naddu ar gyfer ei ddefnyddio'r ffamau...... ei mayan yn edud o'n meddl am y ddelfnyddio'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r ffamau sydd yn y Deyfyn. Yr ffamau ymwner oedd mae wedi ddefnyddio'r 250 ffamau i'r 159, oherwydd mae'n edrych i'n meddwl mwyaf dyma. Morys wedi eu ychydig yma ei ddefnyddio'r planau. … mae'r idea yw yw'r hyn mae'n gweithio'r llwun fffamil yw'r yn rhan o gylwgrthu. Felly, mae yn gallu y cyfnod y mynd i ysgrifennu sgol, mae'n gwirio'n gwirio mewn amddangol. Cymysg y dyfodol hanrhyng, ond hynny'n gwirio, donc mae'n hyn yn ffaf Liz Llywodraethau. Mae ydych chi'n mynd yn ffordd am hynny'n llig, and yn ffordd am lŵr i'n maen nhw fân i'w lllawn i'r drefyd o'r fledliadau yn ei ddych chi'n byw, dym ni'n dweud ei fodill i'n meddwl i'r drefydau. Mae'r bod ni'n ffordd yn y ddefnyddio'r bod yn 100 yrau a'r dynion yr hyn sy'n mynd yn ei ddeunydd, dynion ddeunydd, yn y ddeunydd yn y ddeunydd. Mae'r cymdeithas Cymru yw'r Red Cross ac yn edrych yn gwneud hynny i'r cyfnod i'r dynnu dynnu. Mae'r dynnu wedi'i gyd-1863. Mae'n rhoi ddim yn cyd-1863 ac mae'r cyfnod wedi gwneud oherwydd i ddysgu ddigon i'r ddysgu'r cyfnod wedi'u gwneud ac mae'n gweithio'r cwestiynau yn ysgolwyr yn ysgolwyr gyda'n gweithio'r prosiegiadau. Ieithio y byddai'r cwestiynau ymgau, ac mae'r cwestiynau yn 2009, sy'n gweithio'n cyfrifedd â'r cyfrifyddiad cyfaint, sy'n gweithio'r cwestiynau cyfrifyddiadau o'r cyfrifyddiadau. Rydyn ni'n gwneud unig yma yw'r cyfrifyddiadau cyfrifyddiadau, the missing persons which was founded in 1996 by President Bill Tintin and it came out of the G7 summit at the time, so it's actually his initiative to do this. And this was actually as a result of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia when they had the prospect of trying to identify all those bodies who were after the war had ended but they now work with governments and organisations from around the world ac eistedd ar gyffredinol yn digwydd yn y cyllid printed yn cyfrinod gyffredinol a slywfodol yn un Helio arffin. Rhyw gilydd yn ei wneud o'r ddysgu. Rhyw gilydd nadau o'r ddysgu ymddangos yw'n gwasanaeth sysymol a'r ddau yn gwybod mitarol o ddweud o fy môl o ni yn unrhyw un o mwythdiad mwrth ac mae'n gwybod eu mwythdiad i ddynnu i ddynnu i meddwl 180 ynghylch a ran pob villygau i'r ddynnu i'r ddynnu. roedd hyn yn ymwneud o'r ysgolol, a bod yna ddysgu a'r argylogio'r ffordd, ac yn ymddangos o'r dyna'r profi a'r dyna'r gyfer i'r datblygu. Yn ymgyrchau'n gitch yn yr hyn yn mynd i'r ac mae'n dweud o'r cyfaswyth i ddweud o ddweud o ddweud o ddweud cysylltu masgrais a ddweud o ddweud o ddweud o ddweud o ddweud. Ac mae'n meddwl y byddai'r llef, mae'n meddwl yng Nghymru, o'r ddweud o'r programme o'r cyffredinol. Mae'r cyffredinol o 50,000 bôn yn ysgrifennid ac mae'n cyffredinol o blyd o ddweud o ddweud o ddweud. Yn ddiddordeb yn ymgyrch, ynglynch, ynglynch, ynglynch, os ynglynch, ynglynch, a'r sétri gyrfa. Yn gyrch yn ymgyrch, ynglynchau neu yn yr hynny'n ddiddordeb, ac mae'r sétri gyrfa yn ymgyrch, ynglynch, ynglynch, ynglynch, ynglynch, ynglynch. A'r cyfaint cyngor gyda'r cyfaint cyngor gyda'r cyfaint cyfaint cyngor. Yn ddiddordeb, mae'n cael ei fod yn fwy gydig gwybod i'r pryd, sy'n gydig i'r ffóa ar y cwmhysg. A they are dealing with missing people from all over the world, so with the conflict in New Goslaw v.b, there were 40,000 persons reported missing and they were able to account for 27,000 of those, about 70 percent, but they've been working on programs around the world and even in countries like America, they were involved in the 9.11, the identification of victims there, Hurricane Katrina in 2005. mewn cael ei ffau'r rhaid i'r ffordd, a'r ffordd yn byw i'r rhaid i'r byw i'r gael. Mae'r ffordd yn byw o'r ffordd o'r gael, ac mae'r ffordd wedi'u gweld i'r cyfnodol, a'r ffordd yn bwrdd i'r cyfrifwyr mewn cwyrdd, ac mae'r rhaid i'r ffordd yn bwysig ychynig o'r cyfrifwyr yn ymgyrch. Mae'r ffordd yn bwysig mae'r cyfrifwyr yn bwysig ychydig, ac mae'r Bardiwn Cymru yn ffawr i'r gael. o'r own guidelines, ffocusing particular on issues of privacy and permission and making sure that any measures taken have to be proportionate and adequate and must not be excessive. And there are also a number of more local initiatives, so one, I won't go through all of these, there are far too many, but one in particular that I picked on is the Polish genetic database of victims of totalitarianisms, and there's a paper published about this Poland. There were six million people who died in World War II as a result of the, at the hands of the Nazis, and I was actually in Warsaw in September, and if you ever get the chance to go to Warsaw, there's the Museum of the Warsaw Uprising, and you can actually, they've got a reconstruction, and you can, it's sort of a film where they reconstructed what Warsaw would have looked like at the end of 1945, and the whole city was essentially completely flattened, and there was just a few hundred people left in the city, and they've now done a wonderful job rebuilding it, and they also reconstructed the old town, so it's a very interesting place to visit. But one thing that struck me on reading about this was the need for getting the reference samples while you still have the chance, because so many of the people, the last people in their generation with the YDNA or the mitochondria DNA, so it's just so important I think for all of us to make sure that we get those samples in the database while we have the chance. Now we move on to the criminal databases, which are also, are by extension also used for making, doing the official investigations of missing people. So the UK national DNA database was actually the first of its kind in the world, and DNA fingerprinting was invented in the UK in 1984, Sir Alec Jeffries, and the database was established in April 1995. So data is held from all four countries which make up the United Kingdom, but there are slightly different retention systems for Scotland and Northern Ireland, and there are now, as of the most recent date I could find, September 2018, five and a half million people in the database which represents about eight percent of the population. And it's the only national database of its kind where the number of people on the database is actually going down. The European Court of Human Rights a few years ago decided that it was a violation of human rights to keep samples on the database if someone was not convicted of a crime or if it was just a reference sample that was being provided. And the number for just England and Wales is nearly five million there. Eighty percent of the people on the database are male and nineteen percent female. And there's a separate database that if you happen to work in the police force or you're working in a laboratory or you have to provide a reference sample for any purpose you actually go in a separate elimination database. If there's a missing person in your family it's actually a different type of database altogether. So it's not part of the police database they keep this all completely separate. So they have a database of missing people, their close relatives, unidentified people and human remains all going in the same database. And there's something called the missing persons unit which was previously called the missing persons bureau and they manage all the records. And there were around about 1826 records on the database in 2017 at the most recent date there. And in the last year in which they reported that database produced seven matches. But in total the UK database has 778 unidentified cases and that includes not just bodies but rather grimly body parts and 50 alive individuals who do not know their own identity. And again it's 78% suspected to be male. In Northern Ireland there is a they normally investigate in the most recent year there is around about 12,000 reports of missing persons. Most missing people actually do get they get found. But in Northern Ireland there was a big scandal 53 police officers were disciplined after failing surrounding missing person investigations. And as a result of that the onwardsment recommended the establishment of a specialist central unit. And I haven't yet been able to find out if that unit has been developed. So I don't know if anyone else is any more information on that than I have. Scotland seems to be much more advanced. They have their own that they've recently done a big review of their missing person investigations. They've now and in 2016 they did 22,062% of them involving children. And 56% of the missing there were men, 44% were men and 99% of people were found safe and well. But sadly 91 adults were found dead and 16 are still missing. And their database goes all the way back to 1957. And they've identified 732 people on their long term missing list. And they now starting to try and collect reference samples from the family members of all those people on that list going right back to 1957. Ireland, the database, the police database in Ireland only launched on the 20th of November 2015. And it's administered by Forensic Science Ireland. And it's currently located at the Garda headquarters. But it's been desert, the current facilities have been designated as not fit for purpose. So the plan was to move everything to a new fit for purpose building over at Backwest and in County Kildare. But that project has been delayed indefinitely over lack of tenders. It seems to be a common feature with Forensic Science there are cut backs. Forensic Science in England, the body was all that was also cut completely. So it always seems to be a lack of funding for such important work. But in the Irish database they have 21,000 profiles in their database. But that represents just 0.5% of the population. So compare that with 8% in the UK DNA database. And as with the UK there is a separate missing persons index where they again hold samples from unidentified remains and they can get DNA from clothing, personal belongings and they also need to get the reference samples from the relatives. So the samples are submitted through the Garda and 48 samples were taken from relatives in 2017 and they had nine successful missing person identifications. And these are the statistics which I found for Ireland going right back to 2003 and you can see that the number of people reported each year but there's always every year a small number of people who are still outstanding. So there's still a large number of families still not having any closure about the whereabouts of their missing person. Ireland has the world's first national monument to missing people and this was set up by the Jo De Laard Memorial Trust and Jo was actually a relative of hers who set this up and she went missing about 20 years ago and I don't know if you can see the hands on the sculptures there but the hands are actually the hands modelled on the relatives of all the missing people and it's in the grounds of Kilkenny Castle and I think there's a really nice touching inscription on the sculpture garden there. In America they have something called CODIS which stands for Combined DNA Index System and that actually comprises three different databases so there's a national DNA database, there are local DNA databases and there are state DNA databases. They have more than 16 million DNA profiles about five percent of the population but unlike the UK they do not and in fact also the rest of Europe now as well they do not have they're not legally required to remove people from the database but if you ask they will remove your data from there and these are the sources of data that they can put on the database, convicted offenders, detainees, unidentified human remains, missing persons and relatives of missing persons so everyone seems to go on to the same database there, there's not a separate database for missing people and their database stores are to some more STR data, Y STRs and mitochondrial DNA but the Y DNA and mitochondrial DNA is only used in the missing person cases and America also has something called NAMUS, the National Missing and Unidentified Person System and this was established in 2007, the National Institute of Justice published a report on what they called the nation's silent mass disaster and it was revealed that there were more than 100,000 active missing persons cases and over 40,000 sets of unidentified human remains, the scale just seems unbelievable. So on this database they have what's called a decedence database that was a new word to me, I had to look it up in the dictionary but that seems to be illegal to them used in America for a deceased person and there's a missing persons database and an unclaimed persons database and an unclaimed person is someone who does not have any next of kin who has claimed them but interesting there is no requirement for the state to upload data to this missing person database and as in from as of February 2017 there were just 12,000 missing people on that database, 11,000 unidentified and 2,500 unidentified, unclaimed persons and it's estimated there are 600,000 people who go missing each year in the US and there are 4,400 unidentified human decedents and 1,000 of those to remain unidentified after one year so that's a huge proportion, almost a quarter. There is a very, this scientific working group on DNA analysis methods has set some protocols for the way that some of these investigations should be done but they haven't actually updated some of the recommendations for quite some time 2014 and 2013 which is a lifetime in the DNA world but they also have special guidelines for missing persons casework, they meet twice a year to come up with these guidelines. I just wanted to explain before I go on to talk about genetic genealogy about the different types of tests that are used, different types of markers so in forensic investigations they use markers which are called autosomal STRs, STR stands for short tandem repeats so a short tandem repeat is okay so you can see up here it's it's like a little motif that's repeated in the DNA sequence and if that's repeated 13 times then that the value for that marker is 13 and they can they do these things called electrophirograms and you can see that for each marker you get a peak like that but of course one of the difficulties is if you're dealing with DNA from say a crime scene or a missing person or a body that's been identified sometime after the person had died you may not necessarily get a complete profile so you may only get a partial profile like this which makes it much more difficult for doing the matching and the other thing that you can get is you get a mixed profile so that's especially the case on a crime scene where there may be DNA from two or more people there and if that was the case you what you would see is not just one peak there but you would see two peaks or three peaks depending on how many people were how many people's DNA was actually mixed up in in the sample there so in the in the UK and Ireland from 2014 it's now 17 markers that are used and 16 of those are short tandem repeats and then there's one sex marker so that gives us a total of 32 numbers because for each marker you get one from your mother one from your father and then also it reveals whether the person was male or female and in America they use 20 they now use 20 markers that's with effect from 1 January previously they used to use 13 we used to use 10 in Europe and the DNA 17 is the standard kit used now throughout Europe I believe so when they use these STR markers what they try and do is to work out a match probability so they will come up with a match probability of something like one in three million and that's based on the frequency estimate of how rare the profile is in the population but if you have a match probability of one in three million in a population like the UK that means that there are potentially still 20 people who could have that same signature but you then have to compare the data that you've got with all the other information so it's highly unlikely that the okay you've got a match probability of one in three million it's highly unlikely that any other person was would actually fulfill all the other criteria for the crime or for the missing person and if you have a perfect match between the STR profiles of two DNA samples and there are three possible explanations and I think this is something that people haven't really considered especially with some of the you know with the um the paraben and the golden state killer investigations just having the match on its own is not the only explanation so that is one reason why a person's DNA could match the person is the suspect or the missing person but another reason is that there may be a second person who has an identical DNA profile and that would happen if you had twins um and we can actually quantify this because we know that about one in one thousand births are where are actually identical twins if you don't know that a person was an identical twin then you'd have to take that possibility into account when doing the mathematical calculations and the other explanation is that that matches a false positive due to a sample switch or some other kind of error and there's a very useful little booklet if you want to understand more about forensic DNA the Royal Society published this booklet for for use by courts which goes into some of these issues in in great detail and they've also included in there a very interesting table about error rates so this is again something that could be factored into the mathematical analysis to produce the probabilities so the error rates are actually quite low for most things but you see at the bottom if you have a mixed sample where there's more DNA from more than one person there's an error rate of one in five hundred so if you if you're going through large numbers of DNA samples each year you are you would be expected to find a few errors this is based on data just from one year and of course it may be there are other errors in the data that haven't yet been detected now we always used to say that quite often people would ask us can the police access our genetic genealogy databases and the answer you always used to be well no that's not really possible because the police use these autosomal STRs and we use autosomal SNPs for our research I've tried to do a comparison here so the autosomal STRs they in the forensic databases it can be anything from 10 to 24 STRs and we don't really use STR autosomal STRs at all in our genealogy research although I think there is a possibility that that's something that could be developed in the future and we use autosomal SNPs in our databases and in forensics they do use autosomal SNPs but it's not they're not used for matching they do use them for doing things like predicting eye colour and skin colour and hair colour and that sort of thing and in the genealogy databases we we're now very much focused on using SNPs for defining branches on the family tree but they're again not really used for forensic purposes and might of contrary your DNA forensics do very occasionally do whole genome sequencing but it's very rare they just tend to do what's called the control region and in fact it's they split it up in a different way they split it up into three different regions whereas we're used to splitting it up into two regions whereas for genealogy we now mostly use the whole mitogenome and whole genome sequencing not generally use the forensic purposes although as you saw the ICMP is starting to look into that but we regularly use that now well certainly advanced researchers are starting to use whole genome sequencing in their research and if you do that you then get your whole genome sequence you get the full mitochondrial DNA sequence and you can also get lots of Y chromosome STRs as well but all that changed in April this year when the news broke about Buckskin Girl and this was a case in America and she was called Buckskin Girl because of the jacket she was wearing made out of skin and they thought originally thought she was perhaps Native American she was found in a roadside in a roadside ditch in Ohio they originally did autosomal DNA testing autosomal STR testing on her with no matches in the the codeys database they also submitted a mitochondrial DNA profile and then as we learned later an organisation called the DNA DO project were asked to help with this case and they um they had a new DNA sample some new DNA extracted from a damaged blood sample and what they were able to do was create a spoof kit for upload to JED match so that was created in march 2018 and they immediately had a match with a first cousin once removed in the database and then they started to research the family trees and as they searched the family trees and brought the trees down to the present what they found was this record here of a Marcia Lenore King missing dead so they had essentially found the answer within about four hours of searching and this is something this is a cold case that went back to 1981 so all those years where forensics was not able to provide the answer genetic genealogy comes along and suddenly you've got the answer in four hours there and so there was a press conference held on 11 April and the the family were informed and the mother um she had stayed in the same house and had not changed her telephone number in 37 years in the hope that she would see her daughter again but sadly the news was not the news that she was expecting or hoping for um does everyone know what JED matches yes hands up if you don't know what JED matches okay so there's a few at the back okay so JED matches a database where if you've taken a test with one of the commercial um genetic genealogy databases you can upload your data to JED match and then you can search for matches with other people in the database so if you've tested at Ancestry DNA and your cousin has tested at 23 in me you can both put your results in here and you can see whether or not you match as expected so this is the database that was used by the DNA DOE project for the Buckskin Girl case but after the news broke that JED matches had been used there were people who were expressing concerns about the use of what was essentially a genealogy database for but for law enforcement purposes and here's a tweet that I put out at the time um saying that it actually raised huge unaddressed ethical issues because the database was being used without the fully informed consent of its 900 000 users but I think at the time I was actually in a minority of people who was expressing concerns most people were actually quite happy that an unidentified person had been identified and the family had closure and they weren't thinking about other implications and then just two weeks later we had news that the golden state killer had been identified using the same process using the JED match database and um you probably heard Barbara brave enter talking here the other day about how she actually went about doing that so after that that was really when all the debates really began about all the privacy issues of using JED match for these forensic cases and JED match so some people argued that at the time the JED match website didn't specifically stop people from uploading DNA for law enforcement purposes so they did include this clause we are unable to guarantee that users will not find other uses whereas others and I was the monk's them who said that you know if it's going to be used by law enforcement then people in the database they should have the right to know what their data is being used for and they should have the opportunity to withdraw their data if they want to so Curtis Rogers and John Olson did actually respond very quickly they were a bit shell shocked at first that they're I mean it's just a tiny little volunteer hobby website that was set up to help adoptees find their families and they they had you know several weeks of you know trying to work out what to do for the best but they eventually decided that they published a notice on the website first of all to alert people that the database is being used for this purpose and then they eventually updated their terms and conditions and I think it was actually very bold of them and very brave of them to make this decision because they could just as easily have turned around and said well we don't want to do this we want we just want to keep it for genealogy so they have now explicitly authorised the use of GEDMATCH for the use of for solving by law enforcement but only in particular cases for violent crimes against another individual or to identify the remains of a deceased individual and they specifically defined a violent crime as as a homicide or asexual assault so the DNA DOE project that identified Buckskin Girl that is a not-for-profit organisation founded in 2017 by Margaret Press and Colleen Fitzpatrick they had a Facebook page that went live on the 1st of February 2018 but completely unnoticed by most people I think in the community until Buckskin Girl was identified and they have a team of around about 40 or more volunteer genetic genealogists who just seem to coordinate their work through a secret Facebook group as far as I can gather just work on the family trees and try and identify the the these DNA DOES it costs $1,700 per case and that's for the whole what they are doing is whole genome sequencing so next generation sequencing and then there's also the bioinformatics to try and work out to for the to actually create a kit and to make a spoof kit for upload to GEDMATCH because GEDMATCH you only want about up to a million snips to for comparison purposes on GEDMATCH so they're actually removing a lot of the data that you get from the whole genome sequence and they also charge an administrative fee of around about $1,000 sometimes they they waive that and it's a a team of three people three people who who are working on the biotech side so somebody called Vynang Tang from AMD Biotech just in Lowe who I'm sure is known to many of you who set up full genomes corporation and they they do Y chromosome sequencing and whole genome sequencing for the genealogy community and Greg McGoon is another one of our citizen scientists who does a lot of analysis work on an R1B and the U106 project so they've created their own methods for first of all characterising the level of degradation and assessing the the chances of success and also come up with algorithms one of the problems is that the the matching algorithms may not produce reliable matches if you don't have enough data there so they did some proof of concept studies and tried to work out ways of assessing the reliability of the output and ways of distinguishing between matches that are probably true and matches that are probably false and now one consideration of course is that the methodology has there's no transparency about the methodology and it has not been subjected to peer review at the moment and we know that you know we've had the press conferences but we've not none of us have been able to see any of the reports the police have had so at the moment we've got no way of verifying what has been done to say whether or not it is legitimate but though I have good faith in you know Greg McGoon and Justin Lowe that they and I'm sure they would be doing the right thing. The second case that was solved well solved by the DNA DO project is Lyle Stevik and that was actually an alias name and he was a man who eventually turned out to be 25 years old who was a he died of suicide in 2001 after checking into a motel in a place called Amanda Park in Washington. His DNA was put in CODIS but there were no matches and there was crowdsource funding through the DNA DO project to have his DNA sequenced and in this case they got a really good quality sequence from the sample with nearly 95% of the reads mapped to the human genome so that's about 95% of his sequence and with high quality coverage 38x so normally in sort of medical studies they're looking at a minimum of 30x so this is actually very very good quality and the band that they identified was a relative who lived in California they contacted the relatives and the positive they managed to get the positive ID by fingerprinting the family members but the family did not want his name to be revealed although they announced on the 8th of May that they've made the identification but the fact the name has actually been asked the family have asked for the name not to be revealed at all but that case was not solved within four hours that took hundreds of hours of work by a team at that time of 20 volunteers. The third case that the DNA DO project has worked on is um Joseph Newton Chandler III and he um was another suicide he died in 2001 and his his body was only discovered about a week later after he died and the body was so badly decomposed they couldn't get fingerprints at the time and they didn't get any DNA I don't know why I don't know if it again it was the state of the the body they weren't able to get DNA and his body was eventually cremated and it was very mysterious he left $82,000 in the bank and he had no named next of kin and when the they started to investigate it turned out that he'd stolen the identity of an eight-year-old boy who had died in a car accident with his parents way back in 1945 and he was apparently a loner no family no friends and very eccentric on one occasion he went off on a long drive for several hundred miles couldn't find a place in the car park of the place he wanted to visit turned round and came back again and there are some rather weird and strange stories about him on the internet as well and he was diagnosed with colon cancer a few months before his death and because he had the hospital treatment in 2014 it was the DNA it was possible to extract DNA from a tissue sample and that was uploaded to CODIS but at the time they did not get any hits so it was actually a company called Identifinders which is the commercial branch that Colleen Fitzpatrick runs in America and she's been the one who's been involved in YSTR testing and trying to use YSTR testing to find matches in genetic genealogy databases that I think is a lot more controversial than using autosomal STR testing because the success rate is not good and we've had two cases now of false identifications from YSTR matching but in this case when they did the YSTR it suggested surname was possibly Nicholas and then in 2017 the DNA DO project took on the case and they did the the whole genome sequencing so in the first round of sequencing they only managed to get 7% of the genome and they're actually entire chromosomes missing and the only matches that they had for Chandler were third and fourth cousins and they contacted some of the matches and the matches helped them to construct the family trees and then in December 2017 they sent the sample off for a second round of sequencing which produced a few more matches and then in March 2018 what they decided to do was rather than have two separate files they merged the two files together this was I believe that the first case that was taken on by the DNA DO project so it was still very much at the experimental stage in those days and then with this new converged file they had a new third cousin match appearing at GED match who hadn't been there before and when they looked at the tree they found that there was a Shriver who'd married eight Nichols and Nichols was very similar to Nicholas so they decided to have a look at this and then they came across a couple called Silas and Alpha Nichols who had four boys only one of those was still alive his name was Robert Ivan Nichols and they came when they looked at the address where his parents lived it was 1823 Centre Street and that was actually the same address that Chandler had provided in another document as an address for his sister which turned out to be a fictitious address so immediately when they found that you know that same address had been used it surely was not a coincidence and that was one of the key factors that led to the identification so they were able to trace the son of Philip Nichols and his DNA matched that of Chandler's so we then had the identification that Chandler was actually Robert Ivan Nichols and that identification was announced at a press conference in June this year and that particular case depending on which source you look at was anything from 1500 to 2500 hours of volunteer work most of the work is not it's all that it's the family tree reconstruction because you especially if you're working with third and fourth cousins you've got to follow all those lines down to the present day but the mystery still continues so Robert Ivan Nichols it turned out was a world war two navy veteran and his ship was bombed by the japanese and he was actually injured in the in the bobbing but he received a purple heart but having got home after the war he burned his uniforms in 1964 he left his wife and three children and he told his wife that she would know why he was leaving in due time in 1965 he wrote to his family saying he moved to California um but then that was the last they heard of him and then later on that year the family reported him missing but he he managed to carry on living under his um real name for quite for another decade or more and then in 1978 he assumed a new name and a new social security number which was the the Chandler surname so the theory is that he is was perhaps a fugitive on the run and apparently he'd been on a number of occasions he just disappeared and for days at a time and then came back again so it's one theory was that he was somebody called the zodiac killer who's another unsolved murder case in America so and it may be that you know one day we will get the answers to this but we still don't know if there is some sort of criminal history in his background so the dna dough project they have a facebook page which you can look at and the the current status is um the four cases that have been solved there is one case called the sheep flats dough case where they've solved the case but they've had to withhold the details because it's now part of an ongoing homicide investigation there are nine active cases eight pending at the moment where they're waiting to get funding or they need they're still waiting for the sequencing or the bioinformatics to be done and two cases that are stalled because there was insufficient or dna or the dna was just too contaminated to use and another thing that's come up is baby doughs so this particular case is in um I think it's mrs sip no no it's in florida a young baby who was only a few weeks old who was found dead in in a pond and this case has actually been taken on by identity finders um but then the question remains you know what's going to happen if you identify a baby to try and find another um and another case in georgia the us state of georgia where the police were considering using um dna from a fetus and this was a 20 week old fetus that was found in the sewage system and in georgia abortion is illegal after 20 weeks and this um fetus they couldn't work at the exact age but it was somewhere around that age so again there's all sorts of questions answered whether or not it's appropriate to do this sort of testing in these types of cases and there's been a very interesting case in ireland I don't know if many of you are aware of the kerry babies case I can see lots of heads nodding there um and this is a very very sad story of um a baby was found on white strand in county kerry I can't pronounce the place name so you have to forgive me for not saying that but he was then later known as baby jong which is much easier to pronounce for me um and they the police um went searching for people who may be like the parents of an abandoned baby and they they went to call on a lady called joanne haes and she told the police that she had just given birth to a baby boy on her farm and but she did actually buried the baby on the farm and the father the father was Jeremiah lock who was a a married man um and the baby either died during or after labour we don't really know so she eventually put the baby's remains in a in a pond she said but the police then suspected her of being the mother of the baby on the strand and joanne actually confessed to the killing of the of baby jong and she was charged with murder on the 1st of may 1984 and some of her family were also coerced into confessing as well but the the family then went to the police and then the next day they actually found the body of her baby that she that was buried on the farm exactly as she had said it it would be um so now they had two babies and one mother and they were able to there was no DNA at that time so what they did was they tested the blood groups and the joanne's baby was blood group o which was the same blood group as joanne and also of the the father um Jeremiah lock and the baby on the strand was blood group a so that ruled out um lock has been the father but it's still left a possibility that joanne haze could be the the mother and the police came up with this most extraordinary theory um of super fecundation and um the theory is that it's something that's very rare and it just merits a little footnote apparently in medical textbooks but the theory is that the woman has sex with two men around about the same time and two eggs are released she can have twins who are effectively half siblings um so um joanne haze was actually charged with murder on the basis of this theory but so they but the case was actually dropped by the director of public prosecutions and there was a whole massive debate in ireland about you know about this case and the treatment of unmarried mothers and and so on um she offered to have a DNA tested in 2004 so this is a case where DNA could have actually provided some answers and it was only this year that the DNA testing was done and the test confirmed that joanne haze was not the mother of baby john so now the police have launched a new investigation and trying to identify baby john and they've started taking DNA samples in the locality um from mothers in that area um but i think this whole area DNA testing babies raises all sorts of issues whether or not we should even be doing this type of testing in the first place and what is you know if if a mother has stabbed a child and killed a child she's been suffering from you know psychosis or depression and what good is it going to do dredging that up after all these years i so i think there needs to be a proper debate about cases like this and whether or not there should even be an intervention in the first place so all these um stories have raised a lot of um questions and there are no easy answers i don't know the answers at the moment so i'm just asking the questions for now um should jetmatch be used for these john and jane doe investigations at the moment most people seem to be in favour of using jetmatch um for this type of investigation but what is the long-term future of jetmatch it's run by two people that they're volunteers um Curtis Rogers is now 80 and he's been talking about going off on a long cruise and what happens if he wants to go on a cruise or he decides to retire or you know he just becomes ill and can't cope with it anymore um and should there be any law enforcement oversight in the use of jetmatch and in terms of you know which cases are submitted to jetmatch is it appropriate to spit babies are you know which law enforcement cases should be sent to jetmatch bearing in mind that a lot of these cases they end up turning into murder investigations and which genealogists should be doing this type of investigation especially when we start when we realise that a lot of the cases are effectively criminal investigations so there's a team of 40 volunteers working on these cases what sort of accountability is there for these volunteers what would happen if you know if they identified a victim of a crime and it was a close family member somebody that in that team knew that family and an information was leaked that could potentially compromise the investigation so what controls are in place to stop that sort of thing happening what happens if the wrong person is identified and it wouldn't be the first time i don't know if any of you were in Dublin in Belfast i did a talk on the titanic baby and the forensic anthropologist in that case originally identified the wrong baby as being the titanic baby that was with mitochondrial DNA but if you only have a very incomplete whole genome sequence it's i can imagine it might be possible to make a misidentification should the law enforcement databases be upgraded should they be using snips or whole genome sequencing rather than these very outdated autosomal strs but even then you've still got these legacy databases millions and millions of people in these databases where you need to do the matching and they would have to be at greatest that would be a huge cost to do that and should is there some way that we as genealogists or citizen scientists can get involved and help with these law enforcement investigations or should there be some sort of global missing persons database rather than having all these local initiatives should we perhaps have you know one big database where everyone can upload their their data that's perhaps controlled not by two genealogists doing it as a hobby but you know where you've got a proper setup and you know salaried people and you've got proper protocols in place and i just want to end by with this slide here a quote from 1765 with Sir William Blackstone it is better that 10 guilty persons escape from that one innocent suffer and it's always going to be a balancing act and i think it depends if you're the person whose child or whose relative is missing you are going to want the police to do everything in their power to find that person you don't mind what corners they cut to do it but if you're the person who has whose relative has been misidentified or whose relative has been charged with a crime they did not commit you are going to want to see more controls in place so i think this is a question for everyone to discuss and decide where we want that balance to lie okay and that's okay thank you thank you wow you've done a fantastic job interrogating the internet and getting all that information out there and putting it in one place and i think it's going to be a valuable video to look back on again and again and again and i hope you get this chance to give this presentation many other occasions because i think this is the exact kind of information that we the public need to know about i think you've raised very interesting questions do we have any interesting questions from the audience i'm sure there'll be there'll be one or two one over here from Patrick Kennedy i'll just get the scene as i said in recent times it has been brought to my notice that all the digital appliances contain a secret telephone and that raises the question in relation to the mcabe the sergeant mcabe case where um they were able to get the police were able to get certain information the manufacturers would say that they wouldn't do this kind of thing but i i think it's absolutely stupid to say that and i think that something should be done about this this um secret telephone that's in all our digital appliances all right i didn't know about that thank you thank you i didn't remember the name of the Greg McGoon and just a little side gap uh presumably that methodology as well it could be used not just for missing people but but but for you know tracing tracing our own uh like the the barries of very more place where you want to uh identify remains of ancestors yes well that methodology was in fact pioneered by genetic genealogists so i can't remember the person's name but there was somebody in the isle facebook group who was able to extract a whole genome sequence for his deceased father and upload it to so in fact that was the inspiration for the dna do project remember reading about that case i i did try and find the original post and the website sadly that he he uh he posted has now gone it's not even been preserved but there is certainly great scope for um as we move on to an era where we're getting dna from artifacts like you know um like stamps or we can get dna or to autosomal dna or even whole genome sequences from hair or from bones or teeth or something and i think we're going to see a lot of people um submitting dna from deceased relatives into genmatch or perhaps even other databases in the future first of all thank you very much for the the talk i was completely blown away thank you for the teaser you were right um so this discussion about get back get back is really interesting because maybe here we are using we are bending the database for another use case so maybe we should change the name it's not genealogy maybe we should have some kind of global dna database and people should know exactly how we can use these so it's just like it's a general comment about that because i think that some standards are missing some standard in the way we explain how we can use this data the different level of qualification of people maybe some genetician could be able to do these analysis but not this one because they are not accredited so i have really the impression that we have a huge opportunity here to move forward but at the same time it requires really rigorous standards so it's just a general thought here and just another comment um when we put our data i strongly agree i do think and i will put also my data part of them uh so it's a difficult balance between privacy and the right to the law investment to access this i do think that in case of violence you know i mean murder and so on they should have the right to access this just a comment what you think about this line and how it moves because as you populate the database or as a technology move forward maybe what we can do now is completely different from what we can do tomorrow so with the same data but better methods maybe tomorrow we will be able to identify people or to to move really uh really close to you and almost violate your privacy so in your opinion how can we make this evolve and make sure that the line the red line between your privacy and law enforcement can always be really adapted to each case i think it's an interesting question but i don't think there are any easy answers like one of the problems is the lack of funding for forensic science um and as long as we've got these databases we've got genetic genealogists like cc more barvarae vendor they're out there they're actually solving these crimes while everyone else is discussing what to do um but i mean i think there is like new technology like blockchain i think possibly could provide answers because we don't need to have access to someone's whole genome to do matching you could and you could privatise a lot of the data all you need to know is whether or not there's a match and how how much people match on um you don't need to know all the precise details about you know which chromosome it's on and everything else it's the same that ancestry dna do when they don't release the the segment data because you don't actually need that to confirm matches um so i think something like that possibly could be done but i think there there needs to be some sort of global collaboration and it needs to bring together the forensic community the genetic genealogy community governments bioethysys it needs to be everyone involved in this discussion and it's it's a global issue because anyone can put their data on data back on on genmatch and okay it's at the moment it's only american cases that are being sold because they they've tested in greater numbers than anyone else but potentially anyone could still be mixed up in any investigation so there was one recently the canadian authorities where they identified a relative in the uk from genmatch this is in use for immigration purposes so wherever you are in the world even if your dna is not on genmatch you can potentially be somehow involved in a missing persons investigation or in a criminal investigation simply because you're a relative of the of the person who's being investigated it's a really good example but bioethics recommendations are really different between canada and uk so at one point how do we deal with that i don't know and that's something we've noticed in these in a lot of these discussions in facebook groups where americans tend to have very very different attitudes to privacy than europeans um and so like gdpr has completely spooked them because they can't understand um they just see it as some sort of legal action that people are taking and that you're going to be sued by the gdpr which is not how it works at all so there are no no easy answers at all and i'm just hoping that this is going to you know start to spark a debate and interestingly morris and i had an email last night from somebody from europeans which is the big forensic company in in the uk and they're asking to have a meeting with us and that was after the barbra's talk and some of the other talks yesterday but to your to your question it's viv la différence but not too much so we have to leave now we're actually over time and they've been very very understanding allowing us to continue with this debate but um lots of wonderful questions lots of things to discuss in the future a big thank you to debbie kennett thanks very