DNA 17 evidence update

Transcription

1 DNA 17 evidence update Dr Duncan Woods Chief Scientist, KBC

2 DNA profiling kits The old SGMPlus The new DNA 17 NGMSelect, Powerplex ESI, Powerplex ESX, ESSplex The new DNA 24 Globalfiler, Powerplex fusion, Investigator 24 plex.

3 Part of a profile

4

5 Full DNA Profile Low level profile Partial profile Mixed profile Complex low level mixed profile Could have contributed possible contributor Unsuitable for comparison

6 Attribution Persistence and age Transfer possibilities How reliable? What value? Interpretation in context

7 Streamlined Forensic Reporting Dr Duncan Woods Keith Borer Consultants

8 What is it to the prosecution and Why? Reports that deliver forensic evidence proportionate to the needs of each case Complementary to other Criminal Justice System initiatives: Stop Delaying Justice Early Guilty Plea LJ Goldring

9 When and where? 2 nd April 2013 In all criminal justice areas of England and Wales Starting with all DNA hits and fingerprint identifications Forces are free to introduce SFR with other forensic evidence types as and when they wish Increasingly used for footwear marks and firearms Intended to be the way most forensic evidence is delivered Specifically separates identification from evaluation

10 The prosecution require one of two alternatives replies when an SFR 1 is disclosed: EITHER the defence responds by identifying the issues, thus generating production of an SFR 2 by the prosecution team, OR the defence signs (or provides written agreement that they will sign) a s10 CJA admission to the facts contained within the SFR1. OR you can commission an expert to report on the strengths, weaknesses and significance of the result(s), before deciding how to advise/proceed.

11 Streamlined Forensic (Evidence type) Report SFR Stage 1 Forensic Result Barcode Relates to R v Duncan Woods Ref No: /13M Location / Venue Locard House, Belmont, Durham Custody / URN 999 Date of Offence 30 th November 2013 Forensic Case Ref: CSI 17075/13 Crime No: 31BX/12345/13 Forensic Lab Ref:orensic Lab Ref: CFS/LGC/KFS 13579/13 Examiner/Officer/Scientist P/C H. Smith Report No: Other Ref: Case management To the court and to the defence: SFRs assist courts to fulfil their duty, to further the overriding objective of the CrimPRs, by ensuring that evidence is presented in the shortest and clearest way and by facilitating the early identification of the real issues. (CrimPR 3.2). Each party must actively assist the court in fulfilling its duty (CrimPR 3.3). The prosecution propose to rely on the forensic evidence contained in this SFR and if there is a trial, to adduce it by way of a s10 CJA 1967 admission to the general effect that the exhibit/s listed were forensically examined and the examination produced the result/s described. Therefore should there be a real issue in relation to the forensic evidence below, such that the admission cannot be made, the prosecution ask that the defence identify the issue at the earliest possible stage in proceedings. In the absence of such notification the prosecution will proceed as if the s10 admission will be made. The prosecution will not ordinarily undertake further forensic analysis unless and until the exact issue that such work needs to address has been identified. And unless, in light of that issue, it is appropriate that the next stage of analysis should be undertaken by a prosecution rather than a defence expert. If appropriate a direction under CrimPR 3.5(2)(h) as to the order in which the expert issues should be determined may be sought. We respectfully highlight R v Chorley Justices 2006 EWHC 1795.The days of ambushing and taking last minute technical points are gone. They are not consistent with the overriding objective of deciding cases justly, acquitting the innocent and convicting the guilty and Balogun v DPP [2010] EWHC 799..the spirit or letter of the CrimPRs is [not]complied with by asserting that the Crown is put to strict proof....

12

13 SFR 2 Evidential statement Is a section 9 statement Intended to evaluate the forensic test results in case context Frequently incomplete or inaccurate Frequently do not identify evidential weaknesses/limitations Frequently subject to significant changes when challenged by defence examination

14 Any Questions? Contact: Name Dr Duncan Woods Telephone: Web: