Police are now able to build up a detailed picture of a suspect from the smallest speck of blood left at a crime scene thanks to an extraordinary DNA breakthrough.

New advances in the technology mean detectives will know if an offender is black or white, the colour of their hair and eyes, their height and age–even if there are no witnesses to the crime.

Until now, investigators have only been able to match genetic material to records of criminals already in the national database, but the innovation will produce a ‘DNA photofit’ describing the offender.

Dr Denise Syndercombe-Court, a forensic genetics expert at King’s College London, said: ‘The new technologies raise the possibility that we won’t need an actual eyewitness to a crime in order to produce a picture of how the suspect looks.

‘Instead, investigators will be able to generate a DNA photo detailing a suspect’s characteristics, biological age and geographical ancestry.’

She said the value to police is ‘enormous’ in narrowing down the pool of suspects and eliminating the innocent. ‘We are now in the moment of glimpsing a brilliant new future of DNA analysis,’ she added.

Each test costs about £700 to carry out and can take up to ten days for the analysis to be done.

The breakthrough comes thanks to the Human Genome Project, which identified all the genes in human DNA, meaning scientists can single out the sequences that determine individual characteristics.

Academics and private companies are now developing tests that focus on individual areas such as eye colour. In the past year, King’s College London, working with the Metropolitan Police, has helped on a ‘handful’ of criminal cases to identify the geographical background of suspects based on DNA samples. They are currently achieving success rates of more than 85 per cent.

King’s can also work out a suspect’s eye colour but has not yet used this in a forensic case. The university is working on identifying other ‘externally visible characteristics’ with colleagues across Europe.

Within two years, academics hope to have perfected the ‘next generation’ of sequencing, which should speed up analysis, increase accuracy and bring down the cost.

Gary Pugh, director of forensic services at Scotland Yard, said: ‘By a combination of looking at different parts of the DNA molecules, you could get things like face shape, physical characteristics and baldness as well, because it’s genetic. You can even distinguish between identical twins because there will be mutations and very slight differences.’

However, the implications of the ‘extraordinary’ amount of information provided by the new tests could prove controversial.

A quango called the National DNA Database Ethics Group will study the issue. It said an ‘ethical framework’ will be developed to consider the use of data and ‘how might the right of individuals be balanced against the rights of the state’.

Researchers say they will only study visible physical characteristics and not look into sensitive, private data such as if a person has a particular disease or a high likelihood of developing conditions such as dementia in later life.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Some researchers may be more ethical than others.

  • That sound you hear is the favorite bromide of the “it’s just a social construct” crowd being torn asunder.

    • Sick of it

      It’s just a social construct…that shows up in a quick DNA test upon a single drop of blood. Perhaps they will add the last part in extremely small print?

    • TruthBeTold

      They’ll never let go of the ‘social construct’ argument.

      Race is a genetic reality but they’ll insist that how we perceive these differences is constructed by our biased perceptions.

      It’s always been twisted logic but they’ll never give it up.

    • Harry Largo

      It’s odd how the left insists on viewing race as a social construct, considering how much they “f’king love science”.

      • Fall and Decline of Man

        that facebook page also loves tranny and homosexual propaganda

      • Aussie_Thinker

        Actually, race being a social construct has been ‘proved’ through genetic testing, according to the more intelligent Leftists I’ve spoken to. But it all comes down to what you define race as, which in and of itself could technically be called a social construct.

        Is IQ a social construct? Its a natural ability we measure, so in that sense no. But we also define it, set the scale, etc… Does that then make it a social construct?

        • Jesse_from_Sweden

          “If all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.”
          As the saying goes.

          And the leftists sees social structures in everything, so everything is a social construct. Relativism is a part of it as well, because everything depends upon how we as indivial perceive things, making even the most object matters into subjective ones.

          Race has been disproved as a scientific fact, according to leftists.
          In actuality, it was “disproved” by a political decision in UN, without any scientific basis.

  • LHathaway

    Detailed description of subject physical appearance from DNA? Sounds like a tool (with careful application) that may be used decrease racial injustice – ignoring the fact that whites who commit crimes are already more likely to be caught and apprehended as it is.

    • Cid Campeador

      Am I missing something? How many ” suspects” leave drops of blood behind? That’s usually left by the unfortunate victim.

      • Germanic Depressive

        A fair number do, if the victim is able to fight back or the attacker’s hand slips on a knife blade.

      • Bossman

        They could leave their saliva behind which could be used to determine their race, age, and facial appearance. You can now mail your saliva to some businesses that specialize in that kind of stuff and they’ll give you a detail analysis of your racial makeup.

        • Cid Campeador

          OH Ok. As Roseanne Rosanna Dana would have said, “NEVER MIND!” RIP Gilda.
          The article didn’t mention any other “Precious Bodily Fluids”
          RIP Gen. Jack D. Ripper

          • Bossman

            With a response like that, it is obvious that you know nothing about this subject.

          • Ellis Kurtz

            Probably he doesn’t know that the entire genome is found in most cells of the body (skin, nerve, blood (except red cells), semen, hair roots, etc.) The article mentioned “the smallest speck of blood” just as an example.

        • Ha! I tried that and they told me I was a Jew.

          • Bossman

            What is wrong with that?

          • I was just being facetious.

      • meanqueen

        Semen, saliva, hair, skin cells under the fingernails of the victim, etc. Criminals leave a lot of DNA behind. Thanks to CSI, now black perps have gotten the idea to pour bleach down their victim’s throat, or burn them alive.

  • MekongDelta69

    Not to worry – the radical left media will still suppress all mention of race – unless the perp is White – in which case, they will mention it 10 million times per article.

    • Mary

      If a suspect is black, that is merely incidental to the crime. If White, that is the only salient point.

    • Ron Cheaters

      Most blacks look alike, have brown eyes, same hair type, facial features and so-on. So it’s really only useful in eliminating, or pointing the finger at whites.

    • Anna Tree

      How many criminals have blue eyes? I would say a smaller percentage, the bigger percentage have brown eyes.
      If the diversity crowd wins, to spend money on finding the test for the eye color is a waste of tax payer money: a couple of decades and most people will have brown eyes, and I don’t think that the few remaining blue eyes will be anything else than victims of crimes.

  • Luca

    Clearly forensic genetics is a pseudo-science. It is simply racism dressed up in an ivy-league lab coat. More of the White man’s mumbo-jumbo designed to disproportionately incarcerate the poor oppressed blacks.

  • Whitetrashgang

    White people and science, have to love it.

  • Truthseeker

    I love it. Another weapon in our arsenal against race-deniers.

  • Easyrhino

    Let me guess, due to “Disparate Impact” Holder will ban the use of biometric markers as evidence if the perpetrator is black.

    • Ron Cheaters

      Unless of course, they’re white.

  • Ernest

    “”New advances in the technology mean detectives will know if an offender is black or white””

    I’m sorry that just can’t be true. Everyone knows that race is just a skin color!

  • TruthBeTold

    More info:

    www foxnews com/us/2015/01/19/new-dna-technique-could-put-face-on-unsolved-double-murder/

  • dd121

    I have long suspected that DNA researchers have long had capabilities that were never made public because of their PC implications.

    I suspect the day will come when a good picture of a person can be reconstructed from DNA evidence.

    • IstvanIN

      I bet some of their capabilities would be quite scary in the wrong hands.

  • Simonetta

    This might be useful were it not for that fact that criminals tend to leave more blood of their victims at crime scenes than of their own.

  • ZB01

    I am sure the day will come when DNA will be able to accurately determine the likelihood of criminal activity by someone who has yet to engage in a crime….And I am just as sure that the science will be suppressed because of the racial differences it will expose.

    • Spikeygrrl

      Both Minority Report and Gattica may prove to have been prescient.

  • BloodofAlbion75

    “Dr Denise Syndercombe-Court,a forensic genetics expert at King’s College London,said: ‘The new technologies raise the possibility that we won’t need an actual eyewitness to a crime in order to produce a picture of how a suspect looks.’ ”

    Knowing how eyewitness testimony can sometimes be unreliable in identifying potential suspects,this development will be an undeniable boon to the criminal justice system as it will inevitably lead to a more precise and efficient form of law enforcement as it will save precious resources that would have otherwise been wasted chasing down false leads.

  • WR_the_realist

    Science is amazing. We can now detect a social construct in a drop of blood.

    • MBlanc46

      I knew I wasn’t going to be the first to make a remark about a “social construct”.

  • Augustus3709

    B-But…We all bleed red.

  • JohnEngelman

    As time goes on it will become increasingly difficult to deny what Charles Murray has been saying for several decades.

    • David Ashton

      As time goes on, who will know or care what someone called Charles Murray might once have said? Into the memory-hole along with Gobineau, Stoddard, Eysenck, Rushton…&c &c?

      • JohnEngelman

        I am optimistic enough to believe that in the end truth will out.

        The Second World War against Nazism made the United States susceptible to denying what had previously been common knowledge. After the extent of the Holocaust became known fewer people in the United States wanted to believe that racial differences mattered, or even that they existed. In addition, in the U.S. blacks contributed loyally to the War effort.

        The Holocaust is fading as a living memory. As time goes on blacks will continue to perform and behave less well on the average than whites. Efforts like No Child Left Behind will continue to fail. More will be learned about genetics.

        • David Ashton

          I don’t wish to harp on this, but although “the Holocaust is fading as a living memory”, Never Again has become Never Forget. Hence the museums, commemoration days and seeks, compulsory lessons, Spielberg’s “testimonies” and films, and certainly in Britain a government commission set up specifically to remember and to oppose “racism”, “prejudice”, “discrimination”, etc. A new theme or angle every week, at present at least one program each day on the main 5 UK TV channels, new books including the “recent revelation” that the Auschwitz “gas-chambers were dismantled so that parts could be transferred, across 1945 Germany with their operatives” to exterminate thousands of women in Ravesbrueck, &c. The Holocaust and Israel look like replacing Good Friday and Easter, respectively, as the Pole Events of a new post-Christian western secular “religion”.

          • JohnEngelman

            I want there to be enough of an awareness of the Holocaust that the vast majority of people realize that it did happen. I do not want that awareness to interfere with an awareness that racial differences are significant, and of genetic origins.

          • David Ashton

            People will ask why.

            What you want is not what you will get.

  • Tim_in_Indiana

    Researchers say they will only study visible physical characteristics and not look into sensitive, private data such as if a person has a particular disease or a high likelihood of developing conditions such as dementia in later life.

    I’ll bet very soon they will be able to give a pretty accurate estimate from the blood as to a person’s expected score on a standardized IQ test (if not already). Needless to say, the leftists will not like to hear this.

  • Luca

    I can hear it now, when presented with the evidence that his DNA was found on the victim and at the crime scene, the usual suspect will retort: “Dats not my DNA, dat my cuzin’s DNA!”

  • Ashlar

    This is fascinating, too bad the offender has to be cut or shot for the technology to have practical value.

  • It will be condemned as “racist” and outlawed. Just wait.

  • evilsandmich

    Phh, who cares? 90% of the time I can do that with just a two sentence description of the crime.

  • Daniel McGrath

    Oh my. This is going to be embarrassing for the Equalitarians.

  • AmericanCitizen

    So the mainstream concept of “Race” is that it is only words and thoughts with no scientific credence. However, a person’s DNA can reveal a person’s race and appearance because of the differences between the races.

    Which is it? Is Race is just a term with no scientific support, or is it something that can be easily spotted by noting genetic differences? I can’t answer that definitively but I can tell you that it certainly cannot be both options.

    Political correctness will be the death of us. When scientific evidence is suppressed because it doesn’t fit a political ideology that highlights a very serious problem. Our society and leaders have ceased to be rational and open minded.

  • ElComadreja

    But…but…..but… I thought we were “all alike”.

  • Earl P. Holt III

    The NAACP won’t like it…

    • BloodofAlbion75

      Who cares what they think? I don’t, and neither should anyone else.

      • Earl P. Holt III

        I was being facetious…

  • No dna needed… Criminal = black

    • Cid Campeador

      Isn’t that what the demon Pazuzu speaking through the possessed girl in the Exorcist said except in English?