TrueAllele automated DNA forensic analysis
Report incident ๐ฅ | Improve page ๐ | Access database ๐ข
TrueAllele is a widely used DNA analysis system developed by Pittburgh-based Cybergenetics that has been used in over a thousand criminal justice cases in the US and internationally.
Released in 2009, TrueAllele uses probabilistic genotyping to help link a genetic sample โ such as a sample from crime-scene evidence โ to a person of interest (POI) in a criminal investigation.
System info ๐ข
Operator: Virginia Department of Forensic Science (DFS)
Developer: Cybergenetics
Country: USA
Sector: Govt - justice
Purpose: Analyse DNA
Technology: Probabilistic genotyping
Issue: Accuracy/reliability
Transparency: Governance; Black box; Legal
Risks and harms ๐
Concerns have been raised about TrueAllele's lack of transparency and its accuracy and reliability, thereby compromising legal due process.
Transparency and accountability ๐
TrueAllele is not open source and whilst its algorithm has been published in peer-reviewed literature, TrueAllele has repeatedly refused to release its source code to prosecutors, government crime laboratories, researchers, civil rights and privacy organisations and others on the basis that it is a trade secret, despite the high risk of wrongful convictions.
In July 2021, the Washington Post reported on a court case in Fairfax County, Virginia, that saw public defender Bryan Kennedy informed by Cybergenetics that the algorithm could only be reviewed by a defence expert under an the terms of a non-disclosure agreement the terms of which included a USD 15,000 fee and permission only to take handwritten notes.
In 2017 the results of a TrueAllele DNA assessment were used to sentence Billy Ray Johnson to life in prison without parole. But the court denied the defense team access to TrueAlleleโs source code, leading the ACLU to call the use of TrueAllele 'unconstitutional'.
Incidents and issues ๐ฅ
In one legal case, TrueAllele's results differed from the results of probabilistic genotyping programme STRmix, persuading the judge to reject the DNA evidence.