DNA Camouflage

[Arkangel]

I was impressed and interested by Dunkelmann's post in the Fake ID's thread regarding genetic camouflage. People suggested a new thread on the topic, but I don't remember seeing one. If one exists and I've missed it, could a mod bin this one? Ta.

In essence, he talked about producing a mass of random genetic material to swamp a crime scene, making it harder to identify a single suspect - you.....

To illustrate it, I'll use a comment from NBK, and suggest that you go to a hairdresser's and collect hair from people for an entire week - hundreds of people's hair. Then, chuck it all in a ball mill or large blender, and make a fine powder. You could then get this genetic "soup" and dust the entire scene with it. Obviously this would not help if you were to bleed, spit, ejaculate, amputate a limb or otherwise leave a different sample, but I'd be very interested to know what people think, what they know about forensic science practices and techniques.

[Dunkelmann]

dropping some cigarette filters on the scene of the crime collected from a public astray will keep the investigators busy.

A public toilet might be a good source for pubic hair, investigators love to find them on certain scenes of crime.

Also collect textile fibres of all kinds and spread them.

creating thousands of traces will make it nearly impossible to find out the real evidence.

[spydamonkee]

this is a very good idea and would combined with many of the other well thort out ideas could build upto someone comitting the perfect crime... which we would never hear of as the only person who would know the perfect crime was committed would be the perpurtraitor. (sp?)

could see someone these ideas coming to use someday ... to someone...who is dreaming :D

[green beret]

This is really quite brilliant, the forensic team cant run DNA tests on every bit of hair......I wonder what they would do? Give up? Or just not use genetic evidence for that particular crime? I would most certainly save your skin. Or your hair... :p

[nbk2000]

They don't have to test every little snippet of hair. All they have to do is find the ONE hair that's different from the others.

For instance, when hairs are pulled out by force (like victim grabbing it), it usually comes out with the follicle still attached to the root of the hair.

Hair that's been collected from the barbershop isn't too likely to have that follicle since the hair is either already detached, or cut off.

This is the difference that could nail you.

Any hair that you collect from the barber would have to be sorted to extract out only those hairs that either have the follicle still attached, or are uncut.

THESE hairs would then be useful to clutter up a crime scene.

As for fibers, that's as near as the lint trap at an apartment complexes driers. You'd then have to seperate the lint matt to get seperated fibers to use. I'd think agitation in detergent water would loosen it up enough so it could be dried out into a fluffy mass.

Where could you get large amounts of skin flakes though? I'm thinking a gym, tanning salon, massusse, or something has to have a large number of people getting nekk'd and shedding skin.

This would make a great product for Lockdown! DNA and Fiber "chaff" kits. Random hair, skin, blood, fiber, and "other" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> fluids would be available to confuse a CSI and make their lives harder.

Think they could prosecute that? No laws against sales of "forensic test samples" that I'm aware of. :D

It's not MY fault if some scumbag criminal <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> used my scientific samples to escape conviction for his dastardly crime! :p

Now, the chaff idea might work to prevent DNA testing from being performed simply because of the cost of testing dozens, or hundreds, of samples could be prohibitive for a small community.

However, I believe the FBI has offered to do it for free for any county that can't afford to do it themselves.

So, you could very likely still get nailed on DNA, but then they'd have to have spent many times more than they otherwise would have, thus decreasing the number of test they can do later on.

If every crim did this, then it'd simply overwhelm the DNA labs, making it almost useless to bother with it. Unfortunately, not too many crims have brains. :(

Then again, if you had a broad enoguh sample range, there'd likely be at least one other person who's DNA profile is on record somewhere. This throws up the element of doubt.

If there was a particular person you were after, you may wish to target their family, friends, and co-workers for samples.

The vast majority of homicides are committed by someone the victim knew. What better way to throw the pigs off your scent than to play up to their expectations (RTPB Patterns).

Give them plenty of the spouses DNA in the form of a "pulled" hair clutched in the corpses hand, saliva on the eyelids, or some other "Only the Killer could have left that there" evidence. :)

<small>[ December 25, 2002, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[megalomania]

One could certainly make the case, at least to a jury, that the presence of hundreds or thousands of hair samples is just too much to possibly draw a definite conclusion from even though the only one with epithelials was yours. Making a blended powder wouldn’t work in this case if yours is the only actual “hair” at the scene. A salon need not include just cut hair, they also do a bit of combing and are not very gentle at some places, plenty of good DNA stock should also be in with the cut hair. It’s at least a good defense in court.
Another good court trick is to demand a speedy trial, Americans have that right. If the crime scene guys have to comb through hundreds of hairs (a bad pun I know) to get to yours, your trial can be well over with. This would work if the cops quickly grab you on some fishing expedition with circumstantial evidence. They know the good forensic evidence is on its way and all they have to do is hold you. Most people want to delay a trial as long as possible, but if you force them into a trial they are not prepared for that is your right.

One could stake out snatch waxers for good samples of pubes, I don’t know whether to be disgusted or aroused by that. Lint traps are also good sources of hair, a two for one DNA and random fiber deal. A place for skin samples might be the thrown away paper towels in a rest room. Saliva samples should be on every straw in every fast food resturant in the world, check their garbage.

Does anyone think hospitals may be a good way to get blood samples? I don’t know if they leave their trash unguarded or not, but one of those “sharps” containers should have plenty of blood. Just dissolve it, water perhaps, and spray all over the scene. I am sure a tenacious person could abscond with plenty of hospital garbage, it can’t be that secure.

Anyone care to hazard sources for sperm samples?

<small>[ December 26, 2002, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: megalomania ]</small>

[Mr Cool]

Rob a sperm bank?

I wonder, if you had just one type of foreign DNA, but lots of it, if you totally soaked the entire scene in it would the forensics people still be able to detect your DNA?

[nbk2000]

I read that scientists are interested in splicing in segments of human DNA into mice to conduct studies with them.

Naturally the fearful peasents...I mean sheeple...uh, I mean public <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> raised a stink about "Frankenstein" mice. They actually came up with the absurd scenario of a mouse the produces human sperm mating with a mouse that produces human eggs :rolleyes: as a reason why we shouldn't do so.

However, human/animal chimeras are going to happen eventually. I could envision a cow that produces human saliva by the bucketful. Or, perhaps horses/bulls that produce human sperm by the bucketful. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

This is all rather fanciful at the moment, but technology marches on.

When nanotech is advanced enough, you could even change your DNA, becoming, literally, a new person.

Labs don't examine the entire DNA chain. Rather, they look for specific segments, the pattern of these segments being unique to evey human. If you knew what parts of the DNA that the labs look for, you could purchase those components commercially, and use these to create a DNA smoke screen.

Then, even if they do all the tests, and do find your DNA pattern, you could always argue that the results are invalid since the needed parts to make up ANY pattern where present at the scene.

[xoo1246]

Remove

<small>[ December 28, 2002, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]</small>

[russian_chemist]

i think that the animal/human thing is good, like if you can get human blood from a pig for donor reasons and things like that.

The only thing wrong with what is being said here is that you have to assume you have enough time after such a crime has been committed to carefully place all that of what you wish to place.

Whilst remembering that you can in no way contaminate the stuff that you are putting down in the scene of the crime is in no way contaminated with your dna, sweat etc etc.

[nbk2000]

I find the idea of using gummy fingerprints with photoshop created prints interesting. Use the gummy to leave the "suspects" bloody "finger" prints on everything you can find (door knobs, light switches, windows, etc) so the piggies will be looking to match these prints to a person who doesn't exist.

Then, if any of your DNA is found, you can always argue reasonable doubt since none of your fingerprints where found on the scene in the victims blood. :)

Of course you wouldn't want to completely saturate the scene in an unnatural manner. You'd want to carefully place the DNA chaff in such a manner as to be as realistic as possible.

Though I woulud certainly like to see the development of something you could spray or dust over a scene that would render DNA testing pointless or hopelessly expensive.

[russian_chemist]

thats a good point, but then think that it may be impractical to use something that costs as much as you are going to steal

[BrAiNFeVeR]

Who are you to put a price on a human life ???

Anyway, DNA is an acid, so couldn't you just use a strong NaOH solution and soak it all ?

[xoo1246]

Remove

<small>[ December 28, 2002, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: xoo1246 ]</small>

[nbk2000]

The can do a profile with one picoliter of blood. Think a dot so small you can barely see it with the naked eye. 'Course, their problem would be to find such a tiny speck amoungst pools of other blood. :)

As to where to get lots of human blood, that's simple. Go to the same place the plasma centers got to...skid row. Plenty of bums will sell you a liter for $40. You could probably get it for less at night when the legit places are closed and the dregs of society are hurting for a fix of whatever they're hooked on. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Same for "other" fluids, if you have the stomach to ask them for it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

I used the term "gummy" as a generic description of ALL fake fingerprints, whether gelatin or silicone.

Russkie & Brain, what are you two going on about? Hair and fibers are free for the taking, and nothing says the chaff is going to be used solely at a murder scene.

If you first chaffed the scene, then used your destruction spray, then that'd open up even more paths of reasonable doubt since you could argue that the REAL perpetrator destroyed his own DNA, while leaving others (yours included) at the scene to throw the pigs off his scent. :D

Naturally, time is your enemy. If you don't have time to carefully arrange the scene with your fake DNA, then I'd have to go with destruction of the scene. Flood or fire are the only sure ways to destroy it.

I'm sure most people here are familar enough with the mechanics of fire to do a proper arson job to reduce the scene to ash.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">And maybe they can do some profiling on you(NBK?).</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">What the hell does that mean? :confused:

And I already do subscribe to quite a number of police/criminalistics/forensics/etc bulletins and news lists. It's a major drag going through these things everyday, but I do it because it's RTPB (subscribe...info) to do so.

<small>[ December 27, 2002, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]</small>

[russian_chemist]

There are so many ways that they can get your deoxy-rybo-nuclaic Acid (sp?) that i dont think there is a possible way to irradicate it all is there?

Like i say earlier on, its the fact that you have to spend all that time doing it after the crime that will get you caught, and then they will interrogate you for twelve hours, appeal for the 24 and then go for the chief Superintendant for the full 48 (i think thats the hierachy)

By that time with little sleep and mind tactics, you would have confessed

<small>[ December 27, 2002, 09:50 AM: Message edited by: russian_chemist ]</small>

[Anthony]

Who can't go without sleep for 48hrs? Call human rights on them if you've been awake that long and can't stand it.

They can't break you with sleep deprevation, mind games or anything else if you do the wise thing and say absolutely FA until your laywer arrives. Then only speak through them.

If you know the object of your crime, then you could plant a lot of chaff beforehand. Bloody fingerprints, and fluids on the body would obviously need to be done afterwards. I don't see why you couldn't deposit hair and skin samples on visits for several weeks before.

The problem of using collected sperm might be that it's noticebly "old". If the sample was collected a few days after the crime then I'd expect the little critters to still be swimming. The same would be true with blood.

Hair might be an exception, but I'd expect the folicle to gradually deteriorate if it was live when pulled.

[nbk2000]

That brings to mind the OJ Simpson trial where the defense experts said that traces of a preservative was found in the blood stains on the glove.

If you sprayed the crime scene with a preservative like EDTA, would it not be possible to bring up an OJ defense?

[russian_chemist]

i think sperm can live for 2 hours (at most) outside the body...

[Arkangel]

I hate to be the one to pick you up on this, but someone's going to anyway........

What has the survivability of sperm got to do with DNA?

Personally, I'm of the view that anyone involved in sex crime should have their genitals and hands cut off, but just because you shot your load across the floor more than 2 hours ago doesn't mean that you're going to get away with it.............. :rolleyes:

[Anthony]

It's significant because any semen found at the scene (outside of a nice warm, wet body) should be dead if russian_chemist is correct. It'd be dead regardless of whether it was legit, or collected previously and planted.

If it could survive for five days like it does inside a body, then any collected at the scene a day or two after the crime took place *should* be live. If it had been collected and planted then it would likely be old and dead, thus a giveaway. It's only a small technicality, but murders can walk on technicalities...

[russian_chemist]

sperm needs the septum, the moisture and the warmth of 37.5 degrees to live for a lengthy 5 days...

i think it is under 2 hours it can live, i really dont think it is long at all.

[nbk2000]

Simple organisms like sperm can be frozen, and remain that way for years, before being thawed and used to get some woman preggers. I'd think dry ice temps would be sufficient for a while, maybe even just a regular deep freeze would work.

[Boob Raider]

I think using a condom instead of collecting semen samples, freezing them and dispersing them would be much more convinient for rapists. Vaccume cleaner bags should make excellent sources for shed hair and skin. If one can get a bag from a high school or similar place, that should be more that enough skin and hair evidence. Stuffing the victum's nails with a mix of blood and skin shedings would be like a highway with a dead end to the piggys. In most cases using stereotypical evidence would be very effective.
But what if the crime is "spur of the moment" ?? How to render existing DNA useless without a fire (It is detected easily as visibility is high)

[Ezekiel Kane]

I heard of a really good idea to confuse the pigs, if it actually works - go to a shooting range, pick up spent shells off the ground (obviously not your own) and scatter them around the crime scene. That'll confuse them long enough to get the hell out of town.

[static_firefly]

Yes you could raid the bin behind a waxing salon and collect them hairs.

There was a murder in central Australia, many of you may remember. Where the British backpacker was attacked and her boy friend killed. There was a big up roar when the police used the florecent paint stuff to search for blood. They found hand prints on the door that were most likely the killers, however this paint stuff also destoryed the DNA so they couldnt use it in court (dont think they found him anyway).
However wouldnt it be the easyest way of destorying your DNA to just burn everything?

[Kid Orgo]

To quote boondock saints, one of my favorite movies of all time (being a guinea/mick helps)
"They used ammonia! None of this is any good! FUCK!"

Will ammonia actually work to destroy DNA? NaOH has been suggested.

If they can still do blood type analysis on what remains, you could probably spray it down with phenol to trash proteins, too.



On a side note, I've got strep right now. It's amusing to the chemist in me that i'm spraying a very mild solution of phenol down my throat in the form of Chloroseptic.

[Mr-Eckted]

Who was it that wanted to ball mill hair?
If you ball milled the hair you collected, all the piggies would have to do would be to look for the only foreign hair that wasn't ground up into tiny bits, and run that.
And NBK: wouldn't it be smarter to simply take, say, a garbage bag full of hair and the like and dump it all over the scene? Police can sometimes tell if evidence is planted, and they would look for any other hairs at the scene once they realized that it was planted, and you would be caught.
If you dumped a massive amount of hair all over the scene, and were unlucky enough to be tested, just claim you're one of the many who had their hair planted.
Also, the person who's DNA you plant might have a bullet proof allibie (sp?). Suppose they were on live T.V at the time of the murder?I would think evidence flooding would be the best way to go.

[john_smith]

Sorry for bringing up an old thread, but there's something I'd really like to know...would this have a chance of working:
1) take a moist hanky or something and scrub down a few door handles in public buildings, buses, subways etc.
2) wash and wring it out in minimal amount of water
3) let most of the water evaporate
4) put the leftover in an Ajax bottle, shake, and spray all over the crime scene
What do you think?