New York's Commission on Forensic Science is weighing whether to let state police use a powerful new form of DNA testing that can pull usable genetic profiles from degraded crime-scene evidence, the same technology credited with cracking open the Gilgo Beach serial killings. The state police application, which seeks approval to perform Single Nucleotide Polymorphism, or SNP, testing in-house for investigative genealogy, drew sharply divided testimony at a public hearing in Albany Friday, October 9.
According to amNewYork, the hearing pitted forensic scientists and prosecutors who want the technology expanded against a coalition of public defender groups warning that New York lacks the legal guardrails to use it responsibly. The state police laboratory submitted its application for approval to perform SNP-based investigative genealogy, and the commission is now considering whether to sign off on that request. As Newsday reports, a formal vote or other action could come as early as December.
Why State Police Want the Upgrade
Unlike traditional Short Tandem Repeat testing, which checks 24 to 27 specific genomic locations and generally requires intact DNA, SNP testing examines hundreds of thousands of genetic variations and can extract usable profiles from badly degraded samples, per Newsday's reporting on the underlying science. That distinction matters because New York's 25 public forensic laboratories are currently restricted to the older method, which frequently yields inconclusive results on aged cold-case evidence, Newsday notes. The state police lab is so far the only one of those 25 facilities to formally apply for state authorization to run SNP testing in-house.
In comments reported by the Queens Daily Eagle, state police said in-house SNP testing could lead to breakthroughs, particularly in cold cases. amNewYork reports that forensic scientists at the hearing echoed that argument, highlighting the technology's ability to produce investigative leads otherwise unavailable, and that forensic laboratory leaders representing Suffolk County, Nassau County, Onondaga County, and the NYC Office of Chief Medical Examiner backed expanding its use statewide.
A Gilgo Beach Sister's Testimony
Supporters pointed directly to the Gilgo Beach serial killings as proof of the technology's value, per amNewYork. Melissa Cann, sister of Gilgo Beach victim Maureen Brainard-Barnes, testified that her family finally attained long-sought justice through the technology's use in that case. In September 2025, a Suffolk County Supreme Court judge ruled that prosecutors could use whole-genome sequencing and SNP DNA evidence in Rex Heuermann's upcoming murder trial, marking the first time such evidence could be admitted in a New York court, as reported by CBS News.
CBS News reported that a California lab, Astrea Forensics, performed testing on nine hair samples from the Gilgo Beach case. Suffolk County had spent $130,000 on the Gilgo cases, the outlet reported. State officials argue that building internal capacity would help future cold cases.
Defenders Say the Rules Aren't Written Yet
Not everyone at the hearing was convinced the state is ready. A coalition including the Legal Aid Society, Bronx Defenders, and Brooklyn Defender Services wrote that SNP testing can initiate a far wider investigative process, one that draws innocent families into criminal investigations and raises privacy, due-process, and constitutional concerns, according to amNewYork's account of the hearing. The group also warned that SNP testing captures non-forensic personal data, including physical traits, geographic ancestry, and health risk factors, without statutory Fourth Amendment protections, the Legal Aid Society said in its joint statement.
Because large SNP databases can reveal genetic connections between people, investigators can combine those relationships with genealogy records to narrow in on an unknown person's identity, even when that person never submitted their own DNA for testing. The defender coalition argues that dynamic can implicate relatives of people whose DNA is tested, pulling them into law-enforcement scrutiny with no explicit statutory rules in place to limit it, per amNewYork. The coalition urged the commission to block the state police request until more regulations are established, and said state police had not provided key written policies on their intended use of the technology for review before the hearing.
New York Lacks the Statute Other States Have Passed
Central to the defenders' objection is a gap amNewYork and the research record both point to: New York currently regulates genetic genealogy searches through commission approval rather than through a statute passed by the state legislature. Maryland's 2021 law provides for judicial oversight, limits the crimes for which searches may be used, and includes destruction requirements, according to the American Bar Association. Montana law includes warrant requirements for database searches, while Utah law sets legal-process requirements for disclosures.
At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Justice's 2019 interim policy on forensic genetic genealogy addresses law enforcement's use of CODIS. New York has no equivalent statute of its own. The defender coalition argues that absence is likely to raise exactly the concerns Maryland, Montana, and Utah moved to address through legislation rather than leaving the question to a commission vote.
Not every forensic voice at the hearing opposed moving forward. A coalition of forensic scientists said it supported expanding the technology provided safeguards addressing privacy concerns are put in place, and notably stopped short of calling for a pause in implementation until policies are fully developed, amNewYork reported. State police did not respond to a request for comment on the opposition to its proposal, according to the same report. The commission's decision, expected as soon as December, will determine whether New York State Police can run SNP testing internally or remain dependent on private, out-of-state labs for the cold cases still waiting on a lead.
