Cece Moore

And so the whole...

method of crime solving, of investigation, has advanced to such a degree that it's already extremely difficult to get away with a crime like this, even without the addition of investigative genetic genealogy.

Remember Night Stalker, Richard Ramirez?

He was in my area.

Well, first of all, what we just talked about, the technological evidence.

But if even that fails, we always will have investigative genetic genealogy going forward now.

And so unless someone is killing people from a distance with a gun, and even then,

We might be able to- DC snipers.

Well, then they better wear gloves when they handle the bullets because you can pull DNA from bullet casing as well.

And so it's just going to be virtually impossible to be the type of serial killer and certainly a serial rapist that is-

perpetrating these very intimate, up-close, and personal crimes, because you will leave your DNA behind.

And if you do, we will identify you, even if it takes months or years.

I recently worked the Faith Hedgepeth case out of Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

It took us three years to identify the DNA contributor, her killer, her alleged killer, because he was born in Guatemala.

And so, you know, even those cases, we will get there.

It just takes additional time.

And as the databases grow, it's going to get more efficient and quicker and quicker as time goes on.

And we're getting better at what we're doing every day as well.

And so, you know, that's why I don't think that we will have serial killers.

There won't be Ted Bundy's or Golden State killers or Zodiac, who's still unidentified 50 years later, because of investigative genetic genealogy.