0:00

Boost Mobile is giving families the holiday gift they

0:02

really want. When you switch to Boost, you

0:04

get an iPhone 11 for only $49.99 or a free Samsung

0:06

Galaxy A23. You'll

0:09

get amazing service, too, because only Boost switches

0:11

between the top networks to give you the best

0:13

service. So stop by a Boost Mobile store and

0:15

give the gift of Boost. That's an iPhone

0:17

11 for $49.99 or a free

0:19

Samsung Galaxy A23. Get yours at a

0:21

Boost Mobile store today. Visit boostmobile.com for

0:23

details. New customers and in-store only. Requires

0:26

auto pay and ID verification. Other restrictions

0:28

apply. See participating dealers for details. This

0:38

is the Fall Line. All

0:41

season long, we've talked about one of

0:43

the most important tools in cold case

0:45

resolution. Forensic investigative genetic genealogy. If you've

0:47

listened to the show for a while,

0:50

you've heard us cover that topic on

0:52

a number of occasions. Like having guests

0:54

on to explain the difference between more

0:57

classic DNA testing and the newer profiles

0:59

that are used in genealogical work. We've

1:02

also featured a number of genealogists who've

1:04

spoken about the roadblocks in cold cases

1:06

and how they can be overcome. And

1:09

even to discuss their own work on some of

1:11

the John and Jane Doe cases featured on our

1:13

show. The organizations you're

1:15

probably most familiar with, the ones we

1:17

talk about the most, are the DNA

1:19

Doe Project, the Trans Doe

1:21

Task Force, and Redgrave Research. Lee

1:24

Bingham Redgrave and Dr. Anthony Redgrave

1:26

began their professional careers as volunteers

1:29

with DDP. Then went on to

1:31

develop the grassroots organization, Trans Doe

1:33

Task Force, which eventually became a

1:36

non-profit. It also has a

1:38

missing persons arm, LAMP, which we featured on

1:40

the show in its own standalone episode. Redgrave

1:43

Research is the professional arm of their

1:45

work. Where they

1:48

take on forensic and non-forensic cases, which

1:50

might include adoption, or, as in

1:52

the case of my own family, locating

1:54

an unknown parent. Redgrave Research

1:56

were featured in my book, Lay Them to

1:58

Rest. did the F.I.G.G.

2:01

work that successfully identified Aina Jane

2:03

Doe, a homicide victim. Her case

2:05

had been cold since 1993.

2:08

Though the team's work identified Aina Jane

2:11

Doe as Susan Minard Lund, a young

2:13

mother from Tennessee, there are still many

2:15

questions in her case and

2:17

mysteries concerning her disappearance. You

2:20

can read more about that in my book. After

2:22

working with the Red Graves on that

2:25

case and watching their work on another

2:27

well-known case, the Canadian Babes in the

2:29

Woods John Does, we decided to ask

2:31

the Red Graves to join us for

2:34

the final episode of this season to

2:36

tell you more about forensic investigative genetic

2:38

genealogy and also more about their own

2:40

work. Like many of the

2:43

scientists we feature here, it's a

2:45

human-first approach to unidentified persons' identification

2:47

with both victims and families in

2:49

mind. The Red Graves

2:52

are a little unusual as they're

2:54

one of the few married couples

2:56

working in F.I.G.G. They also focus

2:58

on a collaborative, team-based approach to

3:00

case solving and they have preferred

3:02

that method since they began. They

3:04

got involved very early on in

3:06

the forensic side of genetic genealogy

3:08

before many of us were even

3:10

aware that it was a possibility.

3:12

We sat down to discuss many

3:15

things. Their work, their law enforcement

3:17

training program, when they first

3:19

became concerned about the cases of

3:21

trans and gender expansive individuals, and

3:23

their interest in education and victim

3:25

advocacy. We also discussed some of

3:27

the case work that we did together. We

3:30

began the interview with Anthony explaining

3:32

how they first became involved in

3:34

genealogical work. So

3:37

most forensic investigative genetic genealogists, I

3:39

know, started out as genealogists, but

3:42

you too are younger than a

3:44

lot of the earliest pioneers in

3:46

this field. Were you

3:49

also involved in more classic genealogy when

3:51

the first test came on the market

3:53

that would allow for genetic genealogy? How

3:55

did you get interested in genealogy in

3:58

the first place? of

4:00

us have our own genealogical

4:03

mysteries that we've been trying to solve for a

4:05

long time. I didn't know my father when I

4:07

was when I was growing up, I had like,

4:10

a couple of clues to

4:12

go off of and I basically like, spent

4:15

every couple of years googling to try to

4:17

find him. And

4:19

we was adopted. So we got our

4:21

start with traditional genealogy to solve our

4:23

own problems. But neither

4:25

of us really took DNA test

4:28

until significantly later. For a

4:31

number of reasons, you know, some of it was it was

4:33

cost prohibitive, some of it was that we were, you know,

4:36

worried because we were uneducated on the topic at

4:38

the time. And a

4:40

big one for me was just that I I

4:42

didn't know what the test was going to turn

4:45

out like, because I'm not only transgender, but I

4:47

was born intersex, so I didn't know what was

4:49

going to come back. And

4:51

you know, what actually put me over

4:53

the edge into wanting to do that

4:55

was twofold, well, threefold,

4:58

really, one was that

5:00

my doctor wanted to have me

5:02

do DNA karyotyping that wasn't going

5:04

to be covered by health insurance.

5:06

So I tried to DIY it myself. This

5:08

is your first one was in conclusion. Yeah, the first

5:10

one was inconclusive. Second

5:13

was that after

5:15

I'd figured out who my father was

5:18

and found my father's side of the family, there

5:20

was the hanging mystery of who my great grandfather

5:22

was on my mother's side that no one been

5:24

able to figure out. And it

5:26

became a parent that was only going to be solved

5:28

with DNA. And then the other

5:31

thing that put me over the edge

5:33

was finding out about the Melungeon DNA

5:35

project. If you're unfamiliar,

5:37

Melungeon's are a small distinct

5:39

population in Appalachia with multiracial

5:41

roots. There are several

5:43

family surnames generally tied into Melungeon

5:46

history, and there's ongoing research

5:48

into the history of Melungeon in

5:50

Appalachia. Thus, the DNA project as

5:53

an adoptee. Lee was also drawn

5:56

to genealogy, but was at

5:58

least at first a little hesitant about

6:00

making the jump to the use of DNA as

6:03

a tool? So I

6:05

was adopted as an infant and

6:07

was able

6:09

to solve my own

6:12

mysteries using traditional

6:14

search methods and traditional

6:16

genealogy. And then

6:19

I started helping other adoptees as

6:21

well. And it was very apparent

6:25

as soon as DNA testing became

6:29

commercially available that in order to

6:32

stay current in my skill set

6:34

that I would have to learn

6:36

about DNA. But I was actually

6:38

very nervous about that. It

6:41

really freaked me out. And

6:44

it was Anthony who taught

6:46

me about it after he learned about

6:48

it for the reasons he just described.

6:51

And then we learned

6:54

how to apply it to cases

6:56

together. We

6:59

learned how to apply it to adopt e-cases

7:01

first. And we learned

7:03

how to decode our

7:05

own DNA and

7:07

read it in different ways and

7:10

pull different information out of it.

7:12

And it just

7:15

led us in this direction

7:17

that we didn't expect at

7:20

all when we began. I'd

7:22

love to talk about that part because the

7:26

sort of transition to forensic genetic genealogy

7:28

for you too. When you became interested

7:30

in that aspect of the field, how

7:32

you heard about it, I know for

7:35

a lot of lay people, myself included,

7:37

it was the identification of Joseph DeAngelo,

7:40

the Golden State Killer, where really

7:42

that hit the scene. But

7:45

I know that you were clued in a

7:47

lot earlier than that. Yes.

7:50

This is Lee talking. Yes, we

7:52

already had had at least two

7:54

case falls at the DNA Doe

7:57

Project before the Joseph DeAngelo case.

10:00

neglected and we can help you with. They'll

10:02

say yes to that, but then the next problem is

10:04

money. So we wanted to eliminate another hurdle

10:08

for these very important, very special cases.

10:11

So you've talked to me

10:13

and many other media outlets about

10:16

your growing concern regarding the cases

10:18

of trans and gender expansive unidentified

10:20

decedents and how that led to

10:22

the establishment of the Transitor Task Force. But

10:25

I'd love for you to tell me more about

10:27

that in detail here. What were you seeing? What

10:29

were you concerned about and how did you want

10:32

to address that need? This

10:34

is Anthony again. So

10:37

what we saw initially was that there

10:40

were a lot more cases than we

10:42

expected to find. So when we asked

10:44

the question of what

10:47

would it look like if there was a trans

10:49

person who was unidentified, how would that get handled?

10:51

How would it be different? When we

10:53

started looking into that, we found so many

10:55

more cases than we could have possibly imagined

10:58

of unidentified deceased people who may have

11:01

been a trans or gender variant

11:03

in some way. We thought we'd

11:05

find just a couple or a few. We

11:07

figured most of them would be resolved because

11:09

we see so many stories already about trans

11:11

people becoming victims. So we

11:13

were absolutely astonished when we kept

11:16

finding more and more unidentified victims both

11:18

in the US and around the world. This

11:21

continued to happen once we set up

11:23

a submission form for the

11:25

public to alert us of cases. At

11:28

that point, it became abundantly clear that

11:30

this was going to be a lot

11:32

of work and we needed to assemble

11:34

a team and officialize it. We've

11:37

done an entire episode on the Transo

11:39

Task Force LAMP database and LAMP, of

11:42

course, is LGBTQ plus accountability for missing

11:44

and murdered persons. And we'll link that

11:46

in the show notes too. But that's

11:48

not the only work that you're focused

11:50

on. I briefly mentioned Red Grave Research,

11:52

where you do have a law enforcement

11:54

training program that you have recently revamped.

11:56

Do you want to talk a little

11:58

bit more about that? very

14:00

difficult cases. So

14:02

one of the cases we worked on

14:05

for quite a long time was a

14:07

very difficult perpetrator case that

14:09

some of our former students were working

14:12

on very diligently. Two

14:16

young women, Lisa Gondak and Rachel

14:18

Zendejas were assaulted and murdered by

14:20

the same perpetrator a few

14:22

months apart from each other in California in

14:24

1981. And these detectives worked without giving

14:28

up for a couple of years on this case. It

14:31

was absolutely one of

14:33

the most difficult cases we've worked and

14:35

we've assisted on. And

14:38

we're so proud of them for their hard

14:40

work and we're really honored to have assisted

14:43

in that. We are especially

14:45

grateful to have helped with resolving the

14:47

case of Bill Lewis, formerly known as

14:49

Jasper County John Doe, who was a

14:52

victim of serial killer Larry Eiler in

14:54

1982. Bill's case

14:56

was particularly touching and his family

14:58

is the sweetest family and we

15:01

thank them so

15:03

much and we think of them often. Also

15:07

similar with Harry, who was another

15:09

case that we worked, whose family

15:11

requested that his last name be

15:13

withheld but they graciously shared his

15:15

first name and photo with the

15:17

public. And their situation was so

15:19

difficult that they were so grateful

15:22

to everyone who helped to be them

15:24

to be able to finally lay him

15:26

to rest and you

15:29

know send thank you to the team and

15:31

everything. And these cases really stay with us

15:33

and mean a lot to us and the

15:35

family stay with us too and

15:37

they mean a lot to us as well.

15:40

As I mentioned at the top of

15:42

the show, the most high-profile case Redgrave

15:44

Research has been involved with is the

15:46

Babes in the Woods. It

15:48

was one of the most emotionally affecting

15:50

cases too because it involved the

15:52

deaths of two young children. Elise

15:55

summarized their involvement for us. This

15:58

is a historic case from Vancouver. from

16:00

the 1950s, approximately. We

16:02

didn't really know at the time when we

16:04

took the case what exactly we were going

16:07

to find in DNA. The

16:09

number of people whose hands touched this case

16:11

over the years, the number of different

16:13

methods used to try to crack it

16:15

were astounding. It was one of the

16:17

biggest mysteries in Canadian history, and

16:20

it's totally wild to know that we were

16:22

able to help identify these little boys. And

16:25

we have copies of the only known

16:27

pictures of David and Derek up in

16:30

our office. And with the TransDiver

16:32

Task Force, we have several cases

16:34

that are in various stages of

16:36

lab process, and we hope to

16:38

have another out to work genetic

16:42

genealogy on very soon. However,

16:44

thanks to our collaboration with Victor and

16:47

the few folks who help

16:49

us with the LAMP database, we've been

16:51

able to help resolve many cases that

16:53

we don't usually publicize. But

16:55

we do usually list them in our year interview

16:57

posts to the best of our ability. For

17:16

listeners who haven't read my book,

17:18

there's something I should mention that

17:20

readers tell me, something that really

17:22

amazes them. After the long journey

17:24

of identifying Aina Jane Doe, her

17:26

DNA profile was successfully developed

17:29

by Estrella Labs and

17:31

then uploaded to GEDmatch Pro. Once

17:33

her profile batched, which means that

17:35

it processed so it could be

17:38

compared to other DNA profiles voluntarily

17:40

uploaded for comparison, the team at

17:42

Redgrave Research was able to identify

17:44

Aina Jane Doe as Susan Minard-Lunn

17:46

in six hours. It's

17:49

amazing for me to think about that even today.

17:51

The story is in my book, but when

17:54

you hear that figure six hours,

17:56

it probably seems like a piece of cake. As

17:59

we discuss, we'll be back in a few minutes. discussed in this interview,

18:01

things are a little more complicated than

18:03

that. Lee and I talked about the

18:05

process during our interview. One

18:08

thing Lee and I have talked

18:10

about is that the six hours,

18:12

while being incredibly impressive to me

18:14

and anyone I've told to this

18:16

point, is a little deceiving because

18:19

even though that's a short period of

18:21

time, the work that goes into

18:23

that is pretty massive. But

18:25

we'll go through some questions

18:27

so that listeners can better

18:29

understand why this identification was

18:32

so impressive and why identifications

18:34

can be more or less

18:36

difficult and what factors can

18:38

affect that. So first, when you're

18:40

working on an identification, I know you really

18:42

hope to see as a match something that's

18:45

at least in the triple digits, symptom organ

18:47

wise. How common is that to see when

18:49

you open GED match and what do you

18:51

do if there are only really low matches?

18:55

This is Lee again. So we really

18:58

celebrate, and

19:00

I mean celebrate when we see anything in the

19:02

triple digits at all on GED match. With

19:05

a white case, we expect it a little bit

19:08

more frequently. But in

19:10

general, if we get more than, if

19:13

we get over triple digits, we are

19:15

very excited. That's quite

19:17

different from many genetic genealogists who

19:19

are perhaps used to numbers they

19:21

get from ancestry results. So

19:23

as you said, we are only allowed

19:25

to use GED match and sometimes family

19:28

tree DNA. And we're only

19:30

allowed to see matches who have specifically opted

19:32

into law enforcement matching. So

19:34

this means that usually our data pool is

19:36

significantly smaller than people who are using ancestry

19:40

or something similar to solve an adoptee

19:42

case or to just look at their own

19:44

DNA and their cousin matches. It's

19:46

pretty unusual for us to see such a

19:49

high match as we saw in Sue's case,

19:51

even though she is white and of

19:53

European descent. If there are only low

19:56

matches though, we'll keep trying.

19:58

We'll never stop trying. We will

20:02

do things like sleep though, because

20:04

when we see such a high match,

20:07

we're like, we're not sleeping. We're

20:09

staying up and solving this right now. And

20:12

sometimes that happens and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes

20:16

we think we're going to solve it that night

20:18

and then it takes, you know, three or four

20:20

days or a week. But

20:23

when we have a team, that's

20:25

a really good team and is

20:27

really communicative, it makes

20:29

it go faster. So

20:32

if there are only low matches, we keep

20:34

trying, but we focus more on where the

20:36

matches match each other in addition

20:39

to how much they match each other. It's

20:41

a process called segmentology or segment

20:44

triangulation. We have

20:46

several methods of data visualization

20:48

that help us to see

20:50

the places that people match

20:52

in their DNA. And

20:54

studying those DNA segments is just

20:56

called segmentology. So it's the study

20:59

of the segments. And

21:01

triangulation is when you

21:03

have more than two

21:07

segments that match each other in the same

21:09

place across matches. So

21:12

if you have a theory, you have

21:14

to have triangulation to hold that theory

21:16

up. It's that whole three-legged stool thing.

21:20

So we focus more on that. If

21:22

there are very low matches, it's a

21:24

lot more grindy work. And

21:28

if there's a high match,

21:30

that can sometimes be

21:33

deceiving. So we have

21:35

to take every case as an

21:37

unknown. We

21:40

can't expect that any case is going

21:43

to go a certain way at all

21:45

just based on its profile.

21:48

What are some other really common

21:50

difficulties that investigative genetic genealogists run

21:52

into? This is

21:54

Anthony. So if

21:57

you have that one really high match but they

21:59

don't train. with another match at

22:01

a significant amount, that high

22:04

match is only going to help you

22:06

so much because you can't reliably narrow

22:08

down that branch of the DNA matches

22:10

family to focus on. So

22:13

also if a DNA match and an

22:15

unidentified person have more than one set

22:17

of ancestors in common, it can cause

22:19

them to share more DNA with each

22:22

other than average. Having

22:24

more than one common ancestor couple

22:26

is the result of endogamy, which

22:29

is the process of intermarriage within

22:31

a small geographic ethnic or religious community.

22:33

It's not an unusual or bad thing.

22:36

I've got a bunch of it in

22:38

my own tree and I turned out

22:40

all right. But

22:42

if it happens repeatedly over

22:45

several generations, it can make

22:47

the relationships estimates unreliable. In

22:50

short, high matches may

22:52

appear closer than they really are. And

22:54

additionally, if an unknown DNA profile comes

22:57

from an underrepresented

22:59

population, which in terms of

23:01

genealogy databases, pretty much anybody who

23:03

isn't white enough European descent, there

23:05

will be gaps that we won't

23:07

have information to fill. If

23:09

you're talking about a forensic case too, then

23:12

you're going to be dealing with things

23:15

like degraded DNA. A direct-to-consumer

23:18

DNA test kit will have a stabilizer

23:20

that will keep the DNA sample fresh

23:22

until it gets to the lab. With

23:25

forensic cases, especially cold and old

23:27

cases, you're usually working

23:30

with genetic material that has

23:32

been recovered anywhere from days

23:34

to years post-mortem and

23:36

stored in any number of ways which you

23:39

may or may not be made aware of.

23:41

Things like deflashing skeletal remains by

23:44

boiling or the decedent being discovered

23:46

to be involved after exhumation

23:48

will damage the available genetic

23:50

information in the sample. So

23:54

in Sue's case, there was

23:57

actually a very high since Morgan matched right

23:59

off the bat. 432 roughly

24:01

if I remember. So

24:03

I'd love to ask you a few questions about

24:05

that. First I'd love

24:07

for you to describe, and I know there

24:09

are a couple options here, the kind of

24:11

relationship that could be generally speaking and what

24:13

that signals to you in terms of how

24:16

quickly a solve might come and

24:18

if there are still possible issues that can come

24:20

up even if you do have that high

24:22

of a match. So

24:25

a 432 centimorgan match has a

24:27

82% chance

24:30

of being a great-great-aunt or

24:33

uncle, a half-great-aunt

24:35

or uncle, a

24:38

half-first-cousin, a first-cousin-once-removed,

24:41

a half-great-niece, a

24:44

half-great-nephew, great-great-niece or

24:46

nephew, according to

24:48

the shared centimorgan tool at

24:50

dnapainter.com. Now that leaves

24:52

a lot of options when you're

24:54

talking about a completely unknown person.

24:57

If we have an age estimate and post-mortem

25:00

interval and we can determine how

25:02

close in age the unidentified might

25:04

be to the DNA match, we

25:07

can narrow that down a bit, but

25:09

with cold cases, a lot of these

25:12

estimations were done with now outdated standards

25:14

or with insufficient data to give anything

25:16

more than a very broad window. A

25:20

432 centimorgan match is

25:22

fantastic in an adoptee search, but

25:25

sometimes not as informative in a

25:27

forensic case. We

25:29

had matches this high and higher

25:31

when we were working on the Joseph

25:33

Henry Loveless case with the DNA Dope

25:35

Project, and we had an

25:37

incredibly broad estimate of when he may

25:40

have been born when we started. In

25:43

fact, the actual relationships between him and

25:45

his DNA matches were at the

25:48

very least three times

25:50

removed, which doesn't even show up on

25:52

DNA Painter. That meaning if

25:54

you have a first cousin three times removed,

25:56

that means that one of you, your first

25:58

cousin, is a DNA match. common ancestor is

26:00

going to be your grandparents, but the other one

26:03

it's going to be your great, great

26:06

grandparents. So

26:08

that's the removal of the generation difference

26:11

between you and your cousin. And since

26:13

he was born like so

26:15

much earlier than anybody who was even

26:17

capable of taking a DNA test, it

26:21

made things look real funny and definitely

26:24

plays into the caveat of just because

26:26

you have a high match doesn't necessarily

26:28

mean this is going to be easy.

26:31

So a couple of times now,

26:33

as we've been talking, you've mentioned

26:35

having a really great team to work

26:38

on a case. And so I think

26:40

this is a really great time to talk

26:42

about how you do work on cases. It's

26:44

a process that I actually described kind of

26:46

in detail in my book, but I think

26:48

listeners will find it really interesting to hear

26:50

about because it's collaborative. So

26:53

Lee has told me before that a

26:55

lot of genealogists tend to work alone

26:57

or maybe in pairs. But tell me

26:59

more about how you work and how

27:01

does that shape the process of how

27:03

a case gets solved? So

27:06

Anthony and I started out working

27:08

together as a team unofficially

27:11

before we were ever on a

27:13

team together, and we really couldn't

27:15

imagine it any other way. No

27:17

one person is ever going to

27:19

have every skill and every specialty

27:21

and know how to access every

27:23

resource and absolutely no one person

27:25

is ever going to catch every

27:27

single detail unless they are

27:29

working painfully slowly.

27:32

So if

27:34

we want to

27:36

work through these cases at a good pace

27:38

and be able to give

27:41

good reports back to the departments, having

27:44

a team is ideal. Even

27:46

when working on a team, if one of

27:48

us locks in on a match or on

27:51

a branch of a tree and gets tunnel

27:53

vision about it, someone else

27:55

will be able to say, hey, you need

27:57

to back up and look at the big

27:59

picture. Let's go back to

28:01

the team leader and figure

28:03

out what we should really be focusing on.

28:06

Having a small, well-oiled,

28:09

well-managed team is,

28:12

in our opinion, the best way to

28:14

solve any problem and especially a forensic

28:16

case. Did anything surprise

28:18

you about the process of

28:20

suicide identification? And this could be

28:22

in terms of your own genealogical

28:25

process, the DNA work you

28:27

did, or even anything we did when

28:29

we were working on the final steps of working

28:32

towards trying to confirm. I

28:36

think that what we were the most

28:38

surprised by were the things that the

28:40

team and also you continued to uncover

28:42

related to her missing persons case. This

28:46

was not a particularly unusual

28:51

genealogy case, but

28:54

it is certainly a very unusual case.

28:57

And the genealogy was, of course, the

29:00

doorway to opening that flood

29:03

of information that started happening.

29:06

And that was what was more surprising.

29:08

Because sometimes you'll just identify someone and

29:10

that's it. In the book,

29:13

readers get to see what actually

29:15

happens when genealogists have a tentative

29:17

identification. But I asked Anthony to

29:19

explain that for our listeners, too.

29:22

So the very next thing we do

29:24

once we have a candidate for identification,

29:26

which is what we call

29:29

it standardly because it's not an official identification,

29:31

so police are done with it, we

29:34

toss it to the team and we say, disprove

29:36

this. This is one

29:38

of the very best reasons to have a team,

29:40

in our opinion. So

29:42

if in the team's attempts to

29:45

disprove the theory, they end up

29:47

proving it further, then we would

29:49

begin preparing a report for

29:51

the agency about those findings. And

29:55

then that would get passed on to the agency

29:57

in a secure manner for them to take it

29:59

across. the finish line and confirm

30:02

that potential identification through conventional

30:05

means such as SDR testing,

30:08

interviews with the family, and other evidence

30:11

that they can turn up. I

30:14

know there are some extra steps that

30:16

you take, specifically as a

30:18

company or as the transfer task force,

30:20

that have to do with the family

30:22

side of things versus the law enforcement

30:25

side of things, which really has a

30:28

set of steps. So can you talk about those?

30:31

Yeah, this is Anthony. So

30:34

after we have confirmation

30:37

of an identification, we

30:39

will offer to the family

30:41

via law enforcement contact a

30:44

printable pedigree family tree, something

30:46

looks nice and artistic that

30:49

can be printed and or framed

30:51

as they wish. We'll

30:53

also provide a genealogical report that's

30:56

more standard and less forensic sounding

30:59

photos if we have them. And we

31:01

can also be on hand to

31:03

assist the notifying officers in explaining

31:06

to the family how we arrived at

31:08

this conclusion and how the

31:10

process works and everything. One

31:12

thing I appreciated about the press

31:14

conference I attended for Sue's identification

31:16

was that Anthony, who did a

31:18

video presentation, went through

31:21

and explained how Sue was identified

31:23

and really broke down the process

31:25

of how identification is achieved in

31:28

really simple and clear terms that was

31:30

really easy for me to understand. And

31:33

I was able to quote and discuss

31:35

that directly in the book. But

31:37

more importantly to me, it was also

31:40

available for anyone who was watching at

31:42

home and for Sue's family

31:44

who attended. Can you

31:46

talk to me a little about why

31:48

that education aspect is important to you?

31:52

Yeah, the educational aspect

31:54

of this work was actually the

31:56

subject matter for my doctoral dissertation. So

31:58

I can conducted a

32:00

study on the needs, fears,

32:02

and misconceptions of different stakeholders

32:05

in the forensic genetic

32:07

genealogy process, including law enforcement,

32:09

forensic genetic genealogists, and families

32:11

of missing and murdered and

32:14

formerly unidentified people, and

32:16

DNA test consumers. And what I

32:18

discovered, long story short, is

32:20

that people are more scared when

32:22

they don't have accurate or complete

32:24

information. Big surprise. People

32:27

don't even know that

32:30

HIPAA protects all of your genetic

32:32

information, and it's been that way since 2015.

32:36

It's an uphill battle to

32:38

educate specifically the public on

32:40

how this works and

32:42

how it's not actually causing any

32:44

harm to them whatsoever. There

32:48

are plenty of people in marginalized communities

32:50

that have very valid and real fears

32:52

about what might be done with

32:54

their genetic information. And

32:58

those fears should absolutely be

33:01

acknowledged, but

33:03

it should also be made very clear

33:06

the benefit to

33:08

all of society, especially those

33:10

who, for whatever reason,

33:12

their cases have been deprioritized, what

33:15

can be gained from forensic

33:17

genetic genealogy. And

33:20

education is absolutely

33:22

the frontline of this

33:26

battle to get this giant backlog

33:28

of unidentified cases solved. Scientists

33:39

don't often connect with victims' families and

33:42

survivors as part of their jobs, but

33:44

there are some unique aspects to Transdo

33:46

task force work. So I asked Lee

33:48

to discuss some of those initiatives, including

33:51

work with an outside consulting firm. I

33:54

know you both know that I've continued

33:56

to work with Su-Lan's family for the

33:58

past year and a half. half now, I

34:00

think, primarily on her homicide case. And

34:03

that's an aspect of my work that I

34:06

really love and really value. I

34:08

know with all of my friends

34:10

who are forensic experts, generally at

34:12

least, you don't work directly with

34:14

families afterward because there are necessary

34:16

professional or legal distances there. But

34:18

I know that in your case,

34:20

you've recently found some avenues to

34:22

do some additional victim focused work that might

34:25

not be in the same way that I

34:27

do it. So I would love for you

34:29

to talk a little bit about that. We

34:32

do not involve ourselves with the

34:34

family unless the family wants us

34:37

to become involved and

34:39

indicates that to law

34:41

enforcement. And we do not

34:43

involve ourselves in contacting the family

34:46

unless law enforcement indicates to us

34:48

that they would like our assistance

34:50

in that. So in

34:52

those couple of instances, we have

34:56

had experiences where we have been

34:58

directly involved with families, but only

35:00

under those circumstances. But

35:03

we also have the Transdo

35:05

Task Force, which operates very

35:07

differently, especially with working with

35:10

missing persons cases. And

35:13

doing that, you end up interacting

35:16

with families and friends and chosen

35:18

families a lot more often. And

35:22

that has really thrown into relief

35:24

for me, especially that we need to

35:30

be very careful about the way

35:33

that we're packaging and presenting these

35:35

case solves and this information. And

35:38

that if people are going to be consuming it

35:40

as entertainment, that we

35:42

not exploit the victim's families

35:44

or the victim's, obviously. That's

35:46

especially important with already marginalized

35:49

people who are victims and

35:51

are already marginalized people who

35:54

are family members and

35:57

might not trust law enforcement and

36:00

probably don't for good reason. So

36:02

a couple of

36:04

different things have come

36:06

about. I've joined a board

36:11

of consultants under the direction

36:14

of Lenora Claire, who is

36:18

someone who is an expert on stalking.

36:20

And she also works with the Los

36:22

Angeles DA's office, working

36:26

with direct Lua victims. And

36:28

she has started

36:31

a consultancy firm for

36:33

media and for

36:35

events. So if you are

36:37

a, you know,

36:39

true crime vendor of some kind,

36:42

you can hire Lenora's company to

36:44

advise you on how to do

36:46

so respectfully, on how to present

36:49

the information you'd like to present

36:51

respectfully, and not

36:54

cause damage in the process. Finally,

36:57

we discussed our shared focus,

36:59

DO cases, and what we

37:01

most want the public to understand

37:03

about the unidentified. As

37:06

our listeners know, we have spent

37:08

the last five weeks covering the

37:10

cases of unidentified decedents in Tennessee,

37:13

and really stressing to our listeners

37:15

that these are the cases of

37:17

missing people, whether they

37:19

have official reports or not. And

37:21

they're not just bones, they're not

37:23

objects, they're subjects of their

37:25

own stories. What do you

37:28

want the public to understand about

37:30

DO cases that perhaps is not

37:32

discussed enough, whether it's in media,

37:35

or even when we talk about

37:37

case faults? So what

37:39

I would love for people to understand

37:41

about DO cases is exactly

37:44

what you just said. These are

37:46

real people. These are people who

37:48

live, who have families, and even

37:51

if their families of origin don't necessarily

37:53

want them back, there were still people

37:55

somewhere in life who loved them. From

37:58

the perspective of somebody working with their

38:00

DNA, it can get really,

38:03

it can get actually really intimate without

38:06

even knowing who these people are.

38:08

There are so many people whose

38:11

lives are touched and affected by

38:13

being involved in these cases, whether

38:15

as a family member of

38:18

an unidentified person or as an investigator.

38:20

There are

38:23

so many, there's

38:25

so many hands involved in solving these

38:27

cases. And we tend to be the

38:30

last in a long line of attempts,

38:32

but that doesn't mean necessarily that we're

38:34

the most important. It just means that

38:36

we got the job done by standing

38:39

on the shoulders of giants, so to

38:41

speak. And it is a

38:44

team effort, no matter if that

38:46

team is working asynchronously or

38:48

not. There's a

38:50

bunch of also unknown and unidentified people

38:52

behind the scenes who never

38:55

get credit. And so we'd like to

38:57

just make sure that others who have

38:59

worked in these cases who maybe don't

39:02

get a big shot at being in

39:04

the spotlight because they are not the fancy

39:06

forensic genetic genealogy team that got the press

39:08

for it. We all worked hard

39:11

and we acknowledge everybody who works hard on all of these

39:13

cases. You

39:16

can learn more about TDTF, LAMP,

39:18

and Redgrave Research at their website.

39:20

And much, much more about the

39:22

case we worked on together in

39:24

my book, Lay Them to Rest.

39:26

The identification of Susan Menard Lund,

39:28

formerly Ina Jane Doe, is just

39:30

one piece of that story. If

39:33

you're interested in learning more about

39:35

forensic investigative genetic genealogy and all

39:37

the other ways John and Jane

39:39

Does are identified, I do

39:41

break down that science for you, illustrated

39:43

through some of the most well-known cases

39:45

in the United States, along with many

39:47

other cases that you probably haven't heard

39:49

of. And Sue's case still

39:51

needs attention to. You'll be hearing more

39:54

about that very soon. The

39:56

fall line's next full season begins

39:58

in February. bringing you

40:01

the complex stories of two

40:03

missing mothers and two daughters

40:05

whose decade-long searches have brought

40:07

them to very unexpected places.

40:10

Homicide cases, unidentified persons investigations

40:12

and even solving the missing

40:14

persons cases of other families.

40:17

In the meantime, we'll have a

40:19

mid-season special for you in January,

40:21

so be sure to join us

40:23

then. Remember, our ad-free feed is

40:25

available through Patreon and Apple Premium.

40:27

It provides episodes a day early

40:29

and of course without ads. And

40:31

100% of that money pays for

40:33

therapies for families who've been on the

40:35

show. We've been able to provide that service

40:38

for almost two years and we hope

40:40

to continue it for as long as that

40:42

help is needed. The follow

40:44

line is written, hosted and researched

40:46

by Lauren Orton, the additional research

40:48

assistants from Brian Warder and Anna

40:50

Luria. Interviews by Rokar Grosz,

40:53

produced, engineered and scored by

40:55

Mora Curry. Content advisement by Brandy

40:57

C. Williams. And, as always,

40:59

our most special thanks to Liz Luftkopf.