Nicholas Cowerdy QC, DPP

Was pioneered in Australia by state Forensic Science Laboratory and introduced into casework in July 1989 As a result the following Acts were established: Crimes (Blood Samples) Act 1989 Crimes Legislation (miscellaneous amendment) Act 1991

1. offender leaves a DNA sample at the crime scene e.g. skin, hair, blood or bodily fluids 2. Forensic analyst will compare samples with either a sample from a suspect or a DNA database, to find a match 3. If there's a match the Forensic analyst will consider the statistic likelihood that the sample found at the crime scene could have come from someone other than the suspect or the victim

It will help provide the evidence to help prove the guilt of the guilty and set the innocent free Powerful identification tool where there is no reliable eyewitness identification Eliminate potential suspects

DNA mass population screening occurs where an entire class of individuals in an area undertakes voluntary DNA sampling to identify the offender in a criminal investigation. “Norfolk Island Undergoes DNA testing” – ABC news 1250 individuals gave their DNA in order to eliminate themselves as suspects It rose concerns of possible undermining of the right to silence and the privilege against self incrimination

Prove an element of the crime Indicate how a crime of violence has occurred

There were fewer unsolved cases after the advent of DNA profiling (26% pre DNA and 21% post DNA)

Old cases that were previously thought unsolved may contain DNA evidence capable of identifying the perpetrator More solved cases when DNA profiling is utilized Saving in police investigative resources Fewer trials because of a confession obtained based on DNA evidence Victims of the community are brought to peace of mind

DNA has been rushed into the courts without agreement in the scientific community Reliability and accuracy of DNA and whether its admissible in the proceedings Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000 : evidence derived from forensic samples that are not taken into accordance with this Act is not admissible

Facts: Frank Button for the rape a 13 year-old girl was quashed when the court unanimously accepted that a DNA test conducted after the trial indicated that someone other than the appellant had committed the offence The same DNA test could have been carried out prior to trial, but the prosecutor’s explanation to the court was that this was not done as ‘it would not [have been] of material assistance in identifying the appellant as the perpetrator of the crime Outcome: it was only after the defense lawyer insisted DNA samples be analyzed that it was shown the convicted man should have been excluded as a suspect

Many argue DNA profiling has been used as a lever for more police powers and eroding of civil liberties E.g: Crimes (Blood Samples) Act 1989 which enables the taking of blood samples from a suspect without consent Inappropriate use of DNA databases could lead to discrimination Under Section 4642FC of the Victorian Crimes Act 1958 if a member of the police force does not formally make an application for retention of a DNA sample the chief commissioner “must without delay destroy any sample taken and any related material and information”

Crimes (Forensic procedures) Act 2000 attempts to strike a balance between the protection of individual rights and societies law enforcement rights DNA evidence entails citizens having to prove their innocence as opposed to the state having to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt

DNA rapidly solves crimes Saves time and effort Saves costs Immediately prove a suspects innocence Method of post-conviction exoneration of the innocent Statistics show there were more suspects discharged post-DNA profiling for all cases (14% pre-DNA and 21% post-DNA)

Standardization of probes Standardization of protocols Development of standards for accreditation, quality control and personnel