GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-02 > 1202161298


From: John Rhodes <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Subpoena of DNA sample or results (was: Recruitingrecalcitrant relatives)
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:41:38 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <C3CCEF3D.1F06B%hbwhitmore@yahoo.com>


Well, folks, I don't know which message hijacked my question regarding recruiting recalcitrant relatives but I can surely say that the last twenty responses to that topic have been about Alabama sheriffs and SMGF and all sorts of other topics. I appreciate the first two or three responses to my question but the rest have been a terrible waste of time for me.

"H. B. Whitmore" <> wrote: I share Rebekah's concerns about this. I can easily understand a subpoena
being issued for a DNA sample if there was some reason to require a DNA
test. The courts do this frequently these days.

I find it very hard to understand a subpoena being issued for either a
sample or the results directly from a testing company. There would be no
"chain of custody" for the sample and it would, I believe, be useless for
the purposes of any legal action. In fact, if the court did get these
results they would have to get another sample for which chain of custody
could be proved from the person who had supposedly furnished the sample in
order to "prove" that the sample was from the person who was claimed to
have supplied it.

If there were legal grounds for a subpoena it would certainly be much
simpler just to subpoena a fresh sample from the person of concern and send
it to a lab which would test in such a way as to prove something useful. Y
DNA testing does not prove identity. I doubt that even a fgs mtDNA test
would suffice for proof of identity.

Hal


Hal Whitmore
Administrator Whitmore DNA Project
http://whitmore.dnafamilies.com




> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rebekah Canada"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 11:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Recruiting recalcitrant relatives
>
>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Could you please post a link to the relevant news story? I do not
>> think that this is the sort of thing any of us want circulated
>> unverified. I truly am not sure what you meant to accomplish when you
>> wrote it.
>>
>> On 2/4/08, Robert Stafford wrote:
>> ...
>>>
>>> As I noted, I have no reason to worry about the confidentiality of
>>> commercial firms. However, there are some people who do. I was told that
>>> a sheriff in Alabama subpoenaed DNA results and/or a sample (not clear
>>> which) from a commercial testing firm, raising fears among some about
>>> testing.
>>>
>>> Bob Stafford
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Rebekah
>> ISOGG Resource Coordinator
>> Volunteer Administrator: H mtDNA Project; Q yDNA Project; Scandinavian
>> yDNA Project
>> Co-Administrator: I1a yDNA Project
>> "dedique cor meum ut scirem prudentiam atque doctrinam erroresque et
>> stultitiam et agnovi quod in his quoque esset labor et adflictio
>> spiritus"
>> Ecc 1:17
>>



-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: