William Daniel’s role has scarcely been raised in evidence at the commission of inquiry into the Queensland government’s poor excuse for a DNA testing laboratory. Until now.
In a remarkable chain of events that demonstrates truth is sometimes stranger than fiction, the Indigenous man from the sugar and mining town of Mackay is at the heart of this inquiry.
On the second-last day of public hearings run by commissioner Walter Sofronoff KC, it became clear the DNA lab’s hopeless performance over many years was not limited to its failure to find the DNA of violent offenders in crime scene samples. We now know the lab’s incompetence cuts both ways.
In the police investigation after the murder of Shandee Blackburn in Mackay in February 2013, the Queensland Health-run lab filed an official report that tenuously implicated Daniel as a possible person of interest, or offender, in the murder. The lab’s report about a “mixed DNA profile” linked to Daniel – and found on clothing worn by Shandee Blackburn when she was stabbed to death – was a windfall for John Peros.
Peros, Blackburn’s former boyfriend, was in the sights of Queensland homicide detectives since soon after the slaying. In late 2014, Peros was charged. He has always strenuously maintained his innocence. In 2017, Peros went on trial for Blackburn’s murder. A jury in Mackay watched a spellbinding performance by his defence lawyer, Craig Eberhardt.
Peros did not answer any questions. As is his right, he stayed out of the witness box. But into the witness box for fierce questioning went William Daniel. Eberhardt, armed with the lab’s DNA report, which had made the link between the young black man and the “mixed DNA profile” found on Blackburn’s body – went in hard.
Eberhardt argued the wrong man had been charged over Blackburn’s slaying. He accused Daniel of murder and of having cunningly tried to cover his tracks.
He highlighted almost every offence on Daniel’s lengthy criminal record. His drug dealing, hot temper, and hostility towards white men and his own former partners were showcased.
But perhaps the clincher in the Peros murder trial in 2017 was the purported “forensic link” – DNA – which, according to the defence team for Peros, powerfully reinforced what was claimed by the defence to be a compelling case against Daniel.
At the same time, there was a lack of DNA connected to Peros. All of it created a vacuum that amplified the prejudice against Daniel, despite the fact he was not on trial. Eberhardt said in his closing to the jury “there is a forensic link between him (Daniel) and the deceased’s clothing”.
The top lawyer also said “a partial mixed DNA profile that’s six times more likely to come from him than a random member of the Aboriginal population was found on Blackburn’s pants”.
It was damning. Eberhardt was quoting the lab’s own evidence from its report. The aggressive defence lawyer did nothing wrong. He defended his client brilliantly.
But as we discovered during hours of very complex scientific evidence on Thursday, Daniel’s DNA – partial or otherwise – was never on Blackburn’s pants. The lab had stuffed up. Again.
Its 2016 report linking Daniel was wrong. If the lab had been doing its job with diligence and competence, no forensic link should ever have been drawn between the Indigenous criminal and the white murder victim.
The jurors should not have heard anything about it.
At the end of the murder trial in 2017, the jury returned a verdict for Peros of not guilty. The jury came back in less than two hours.
It is stranger than fiction because in June last year, when I began investigating for the Shandee’s Story podcast, a Mackay old-timer called Greven Breadsell raised with me the DNA evidence in 2017. He said it was well known in Mackay “the DNA all over Shandee Blackburn’s body was Aboriginal DNA”. He told me this “evidence” had persuaded him the Indigenous William Daniel had killed Blackburn.
Breadsell added laconically: “DNA, it’s ridgy-didge. You can’t get it wrong. And you wouldn’t get a Greek’s DNA mixed up with a bloody Aboriginal’s DNA.”
A day after talking to Breadsell, I Google-searched for an expert in DNA to help me explain this “mixed DNA profile”.
The result was Kirsty Wright. Her work with me in Shandee’s Story and her findings after months of investigation that the Queensland lab has been a forensic basket-case – guilty of serious systemic failure – is the reason this inquiry was established.
On Thursday, Dr Wright and two other international experts in DNA, Bruce Budowle and Johanna Veth, unpacked some of their findings, including those relating to Daniel. Where does this leave Blackburn’s mother Vicki and sister Shannah in their quest for justice? Retesting of all the samples from Blackburn’s case is ongoing – but Queensland’s discredited lab will play no part in this process.
Mackay coroner David O’Connell delivered a finding in 2020 that Blackburn was killed by former boyfriend Peros. As he had already been acquitted at trial, he cannot be retried – unless there is compelling and fresh evidence.
Peros denies wrongdoing. He has launched defamation proceedings against The Australian, Shannah Blackburn and me.
More Coverage
Read related topics:Shandee's Story
UN’s alleged ‘peacekeepers’ should pack their bags
Their continued presence is dangerous to themselves, helpful to Hezbollah and prolongs the conflict by making it harder for Israel to clear out Hezbollah infrastructure near the border.
Read more
When navigating shares, ignore the white noise
Although financial commentary is rife with near-term events and distant prognostication, almost none of this directly helps navigate sharemarkets. So what should we be looking for?
Read more