Investigative genetic genealogy lives at an unusual intersection: science, history, law, and human consequence. When it’s done well, it’s rigorous and transparent. When it’s done poorly, it’s guesswork dressed up as certainty.
At Shot in the Dark Forensics, structure isn’t an afterthought—it’s the foundation.
Our work is conducted in alignment with recognized professional and ethical frameworks governing forensic genealogy and investigative practice, including guidance from NTVIC and the Investigative Genetic Genealogy Accreditation Board (IGGAB), the Genealogical Proof Standard as articulated by the Board for Certification of Genealogists, and inspection-style principles derived from ISO/IEC 17020.
In addition, the handling, storage, and disclosure of genetic and personal data within our workflows reflect HIPAA-aligned privacy and confidentiality practices, informed by my background as a board-licensed naturopathic physician with professional experience managing protected health and identity information under regulated clinical standards.
These frameworks collectively inform case intake, scope definition, documentation, data handling, analytical decision-making, and reporting. They do not predetermine outcomes; rather, they ensure that methods are transparent, reproducible, and ethically constrained, and that conclusions are proportional to the strength and limits of the available evidence.
What does that actually mean in practice?
It means every case begins with defined scope and suitability—before DNA is uploaded, before trees are built, before conclusions are even hypothesized. It means documentation isn’t optional. Methods are recorded. Assumptions are challenged. Decisions are traceable. Data access is limited, purposeful, and handled with the same care expected in clinical and forensic environments.
It also means understanding where the boundaries are.
Not every DNA profile can support a definitive answer. Not every historical case should be pushed past what the data can honestly support. Following professional standards means knowing when to proceed—and when to stop.
In a field that’s still rapidly evolving, it can be tempting to prioritize speed, novelty, or compelling narratives. We prioritize defensibility instead. Our conclusions must make sense not just today, but years from now—when someone else reviews the work, reanalyzes the data, or asks hard questions.
That’s why our internal workflows mirror inspection-style standards:
clear roles, documented processes, quality controls, privacy safeguards, and separation between data interpretation and final conclusions.
The goal isn’t bureaucracy.
The goal is trust.
When a case touches real families, unresolved histories, or public narratives, the work deserves more than intuition. It deserves structure that holds up under pressure.
Shot in the Dark exists for clients who value careful reconstruction over quick answers—and who understand that in forensic genealogy, how you reach a conclusion matters just as much as the conclusion itself.
That’s not just best practice.
That’s responsible work.
