Medium’s science publication, Future Human, has an article out this week investigating the new technologies being used to solve cold cases involving murdered or abandoned infant children.
The weird thing about the article is that it comes across as sympathetic toward the mothers who commit said crimes. In fact, it’s hard to read the article and not come away with the distinct impression that the author believes these unsolved crimes ought to remain unsolved for the sake of the mothers who perpetrate them.
“DNA Is Now Solving Decades-Old Newborn Killings,” reads the article’s headline. Its subhead adds, “Genealogy databases are leading police to mothers who killed their babies.”
“Genetic genealogy,” writes Future Human’s Emily Mullin, “has solved more than 200 U.S. homicides and sexual assault cases, many of which had long gone cold. Now, police are increasingly using the technique to identify the mothers of infants who were killed or abandoned years ago.”
She adds, “In 2020, police across the country announced that they solved several such ‘Baby Doe’ cases with genetic genealogy, including one this month in Michigan, where a 41-year-old woman was charged with murder in the deaths of her twin newborn sons in 2003.”
Then the article takes an extremely weird turn.
“But some feel that [genetic genealogy’s] use in identifying the mothers of these newborns takes the technique too far,” writes Mullin.
She adds [emphasis added], “Research suggests that most mothers who murder babies within the first day of birth — known as neonaticide — do not premeditate the crime and aren’t violent.”
Come again?
“Instead,” the author continues, “these girls and women, who are often unmarried, scared, and without the resources to care for a child, act out of impulsive panic after they deliver the baby. Experts estimate that a few hundred neonaticides occur in the United States each year, but the true incidence is unknown.”
Mullin adds, “On one hand, genetic genealogy is a way to bring justice to the babies who never got the chance to live out their lives. But the growing use of the technique could also mean imprisoning women who may pose no threat to society.”
Wait, what? Are we handing out mulligans for murder now? Is there a “first one’s free” policy for homicide?
The author genuinely seems to sympathize with mothers who murder or abandon their children, to the point of even suggesting that the mothers be allowed to get away with it. The article’s opening paragraphs alone set the tone for what seems to be the story’s clear subtext [emphasis added]:
Then, in 2019, Alameda County police uploaded the baby’s DNA profile to an online genealogy database, which allows people to find relatives based on matching DNA. This enabled the police to trace the baby’s relatives to the mother, Lesa Lopez, now a 52-year-old grandmother living in Salida, California, about an hour east of Castro Valley. … Few details about Lopez have been made public, but her Facebook photos belie the notion of a cold-blooded killer. Instead, Lopez’s profile reflects a love of animals, the band Kiss, and spending time with her family and friends.
Yes, and John Wayne Gacy also loved to perform for hospital and charitable events. So what?
The Future Human article is undeniably fascinating and deserves a read. It’s just a shame that one must sidestep what appears to be the author’s bizarre and, frankly, grotesque agenda just to get to the parts that are interesting.
