Lawyers Portal

DNA FOR LAWYERS

This page is minded towards assisting lawyers with critical aspects of DNA evidence in the context of 2024 criminal proceedings . Content is frequently updated and expanded to follow the continual evolution of science, lab process and how DNA is evidenced before the courts.

Please use the page link to share  as this resource is updated almost daily.

NEW CONTENT - 2 Dec 2024

DNA NEWS

Dec 7 2024: In closing, Martin Hinton KC states that Steven Hainsworth’s DNA compared to DNA upon and around Mrs Harrisons body provides a match with “extremely strong support”.

Dec 6 2024: US county lab identifies plastic plates as the 7 year source of lab DNA contamination and lifts testing suspension.

Dec 2 2024: NSW Supreme Court will imminently consider the DNA relating to the  Janine Balding murder conviction in 1990.

Nov 29 2024: The chief justice of Tasmania’s Supreme Court cited “unacceptable delays” in police paperwork for contributing to a growing backlog of criminal cases.

Nov 26 2024: VIC major drugs squad detective guilty of fabricating DNA evidence and sentenced to 3 years custodial..

Nov 25 2024: NT silk John Lawrence calls for NAAJA board resignations. CLP “extra 1 mil ” for NT legal aid, drop in the bucket.

Nov 23 2024: NSW district court judge Peter McGrath references case delays and the “underfunding of courts, courthouses and magistrates and judges ” , as an “intolerable” situation.

Nov 22 2024: Royal Commission hears that SA regional services do not have sufficient resources to collect time critical evidence.

Nov 21 2024: QLD lab head hunts senior reporting scientists from VIC and NSW labs.

Nov 16 2024: QLD are reportedly reducing DNA sample intake numbers including sexual assault where consent is significant.

Nov 12 2024: Noticeable increase in NSW DNA Local Court matters that would commonly have moved up to District Court.

Nov 11 2024: QLD appoint Kirsty Wright to “undertake an extensive assessment of the progress of reforms and examine the progress of the testing of samples related to historic cases“.

Nov 8 2024: SA LSC funding reluctance deepens alongside efforts to evidence FSSA Activity Level Reports.

Oct 2024: NT funding crisis appears to have all but ceased defence DNA expert involvement.

Oct 2024: NSW FASS late service of reports continues. Prosecution seeks orders of lab in instances.

Sep 2024: Promega files patent for first-of-it’s kind enzyme that minimises stutter artifacts in STR analysis.

Sep 2024: QLD Supreme Court Practice Direction 14 appears to be causing more substantive lab expert reports.

Aug 2024: QLD lab continues outsourcing significant testing to ESR in New Zealand to ease substantial backlogs.

2 minute DNA

4 Videos
DNA FALLACY # 1

” Large quantity of DNA supports direct transfer”

a) The quantity of DNA cannot be used to evaluate the question of direct transfer.

b) Studies show that direct transfer more consistently results in greater amounts of DNA than does indirect deposit.

The relationship between a) and b) must be managed skilfully at hearing to avoid misleading the jury.

DNA FALLACY #2

” Every contact leaves a trace “

Locard’s principle is somewhat erroneously applied to the principles of DNA transfer. It is scientifically understood that detectible levels of DNA may not be left upon contact.

DNA FALLACY #3

” It is more likely “

“more likely” has misled the courts as to the strength of DNA results in countless trials over the last 20 years, and continues today. A scientist must only weight the results through a recognised evaluative process. A likelihood ratio is a valid evaluation, a mere “more likely” is nothing more than speculation.

DNA FALLACY #4

” the data supports this “

When referencing “data” at trial, an expert should have cited and evidenced that data. Such Ad-hoc references to data may mislead the listener towards a perception that an evaluation using the data has been conducted by the speaker.

DNA FALLACY #5

” must review the Raw Data “

 A pervasive thread in the Australian legal community espouses an insistence that thorough defence  process shall encompass a review of the Raw Data. This work is highly specialised, complex and extremely onerous.. Review of the DNA profiles will flag whether the Raw Data warrants review. The frequency to which I have even considered a Raw Data review  could be counted on one hand.

DNA FALLACY #6

” the BLOOD “

Jurors may be prejudiced when hearing suspected biological fluids spoken of factually. Participants should avoid referencing “blood” or “semen” for example, unless the presence  is confirmed scientifically. “reddish brown stain” may be suitable if the stain appears as such.

DNA - confirmatory testing for blood

PUBLISHED SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

TitleCategoriesLinkhf:doc_categories
NEW PAPERS - 8 Nov 2024

Scientific papers must be thoroughly evaluated in full context of the specific matter when relied upon in evidence

Questions raised at trial
effect of distance and time on DNA detection
chart
chart
effect of distance and time on DNA detection
Questions raised at trial

Scientific best practice may not be adopted within particular lab policy and procedure

ENFSI Logo

SCIENTIFIC BEST PRACTICE AND GUIDELINES

TitleCategoriesLinkhf:doc_categories

LAB REPORTS


Each Australian State and Territory lab apply differing methods of reporting DNA.

Further reporting is regularly conducted close to trial.

Lab expert opinion or weighting of the results is frequently presented orally at trial.

DNA INSIGHTS

87% of latex gloves contaminated

November 26, 2024

Investigator Mediated DNA Contamination can significantly complicate what can be understood regarding DNA deposition in the matter and frequently leads to exclusion of evidence.

Read More »

Lab contamination – 69% unknown contributors

October 19, 2024

It is commonly understood that DNA will be transferred onto the outside of sample packaging  during collection and with subsequent handling to varying degrees. This transferred DNA can and does make it’s way to other items.

Read More »

Indirect Semen Transfer

March 5, 2024

This recently published 2024 peer reviewed published scientific paper seeks to provide clarity as to the likelihood of indirect transfer of semen.

Read More »

November - 2024

High speed collision – trace DNA air bag – trace DNA steering wheel – Single source profile – collision reconstruction – organised crime

Two vehicles were travelling in the same direction within a 100km zone when they collided, causing extensive damage and coming to a stop. Witnesses state the drivers engaged in a confrontation and fled the scene on foot. The evidence appeared inconclusive as to vehicle ownership and criminal association was alleged between the drivers. The defendant’s wallet was recovered from the vehicle along with a single source DNA profile from the deployed airbag matching his profile, as did a profile from the steering wheel. Charges were discontinued by prosecution.

Generally, an airbag contained within its housing provides limited opportunity for the collection of background DNA, or the inadvertent transfer of DNA. In this matter, the centre of the deployed airbag was sampled to obtain a clear single source profile matching the defendant. This result was complicated by the handling of the vehicle post- crash, in which it was essentially treated as ‘non evidential’.

November - 2024

Sexual assault – digital penetration  – trace DNA – social interaction – garment damage

The parties were unknown to each other until the evening in question, with there being acknowledged social interaction including climbing fences. The complainant alleged sexual assault and that it culminated in her underwear tearing. The mater was complicated by the underwear not having been surrendered for 4 days and that various DNA sampling locations were combined into one sample.

Six areas both inside and outside the underwear were sampled into one, meaning it was unknown as to where the trace DNA was obtained. The retention of the underwear and the recovery of DNA attributable to the accused from her rings further complicated the consideration as to the propensity for the defendants DNA to have been inadvertently redistributed by the complainant upon the underwear, in the days following.

October - 2024

Sexual assault – digital penetration – oral vaginal penetration– absence of saliva testing – oral rinse – trace DNA – social interaction – showering – clothes washing

The parties were in social interaction at a work function and returned late in the evening to the defendant’s house. The allegedly intoxicated complainant awoke recalling admissions of oral/vaginal sex were made that are subsequently denied by the defendant. Failure to test for saliva and washing of the complainants’ clothes complicates the competing versions.

The low vaginal swabs produced a mixed DNA profile with the major contribution matching the accused, in conjunction with the complainant and her partner. Further complicating the matter was the complainant’s statement that sexual contact with her partner had not occurred in the preceding days.

September - 2024

Sexual assault – oral penile penetration – digital penetration – external mouth penile contact – absence of spermatozoa – oral rinse – trace DNA – social interaction

Alleged oral and vaginal penile penetration are denied whilst it is acknowledged that kissing and touching occurred. The parties were in uncontested social contact over the preceding period that evening. The allegation relies upon YSTR DNA obtained external to the mouth and DNA upon the body variously, whilst there is no DNA obtained internally or vaginally and positive saliva results exist.

The sperm fraction resultant from the differential extraction failed quantification, whilst the non-sperm fraction was subject to Y STR DNA analysis and produced an inclusionary result and likelihood ratio. Extensive testing of various samples ceased at quantification. Numerous samples were subjected to saliva testing, including the RSID test providing positive and negative results and saliva could not be reliably confirmed. Inclusionary DNA results could not be attributed to biological fluid.

August - 2024

Cold Case – Homicide – Stabbing – Crime scene officer contamination –  DNA transfer –– Complex mixed DNA profiles – Low level mixed DNA profiles –– Lab contamination – edged weapon blade geometry

A complex crime scene relying on trace DNA where officers DNA is obtained within crime scene profiles. Officers entered and exited the crime scene in proximity to the deceased before, during and after the taking of samples, when those officers duties place them in physical presence of the accused and the samples themselves.

This matter critically relies upon DNA samples which were extracted from hair and fibre samples collected in an era predating forensic DNA familiarity. An extensive crime scene records and contemporaneous notes review seeks to evaluate the possible and potential pathways for the defendant’s DNA present within the trace mixed DNA profiles taken from and adjacent to the deceased, which also bore contribution of the attending and non-attending crime scene officers and lab staff.

July - 2024

Violent group brawl – Homicide – Stabbing – Bloodstain pattern analysis – DNA transfer – edged weapon blade geometry – Complex mixed DNA profiles – Low level mixed profiles – Complex crime scene

A highly complex crime scene with multiple injured persons leading to various potential or possible blood contributions, multiple alleged assailants, multiple bladed weapons recovered and evidenced with voluminous testing and retesting of samples including complex and low-level multiple contributor mixed DNA profiles.

This complex matter seeks to methodically evaluate the crime scene factors minded towards understand the contributions of potential blood upon various weapons and moveable items related to both the crime scene itself and numerous subsequent locations. Further, DNA transfer presents as a significant consideration which is complicated further by multiple known and unknown persons within the crime scene and the potential for those individuals to have contacted persons and surfaces both before, during and after the brawl itself.

DNA in CASES
×

LAWYERS-DNA TOOLKIT

Enter