Queensland forensics rape case disasters snowball

Shocking examples of DNA evidence being missed in rape cases have been revealed as Queensland’s forensics disaster snowballs.

Results from the police review, revealed by The Australian in June and which triggered the commission of inquiry, found the chance of finding useful DNA when testing below the threshold was as high as 66 per cent. Picture: AAP

Shocking examples of DNA evidence being missed in rape cases have been revealed as Queensland’s forensics disaster snowballs.

Detective Sergeant John Saunders was this year tasked with ­assisting a police review of sexual offences, focusing on cases in which the government-run lab came back with results stating there was “insufficient DNA” for testing.

In an email to a senior officer in August, Sergeant Saunders wrote that the review stemmed from intimate DNA sample exhibits being tested “and failing to provide either complainant donor or offender” profiles.

This problem was first revealed in The Australian’s investigative podcast series Shandee’s Story in February this year.

“The result often received after testing was ‘Insufficient DNA for further processing’,” Sergeant Saunders wrote. “This may cause evidential deficiency in prosecution or negatively affect decisions to commence proceedings.”

Sergeant Saunders said he was told to look only at results in cases that remained unsolved and open.

Further testing was not to be carried out in cases that were solved, still before the courts, withdrawn or unsubstantiated.

He reviewed 286 cases involving 601 exhibits, recommending further testing in 156 cases.

Of the 336 exhibits submitted for further testing, 137 returned a DNA profile, 49 returned no profile, and 150 remained the subject of further testing.

“I am aware of certain positive outcomes that have assisted prosecution of offenders as a direct result of further testing instigated during the review process,” Sergeant Saunders wrote. “Notably of particular interest is a rape offence alleged to have occurred at (redacted).

“During that investigation, four intimate samples taken from the body of the complainant were initially reported ‘insufficient DNA for further processing’. Upon review and request to continue testing, all four samples yielded offender profile with likelihood ratio > 100 billion.”

The email was obtained by the Commission of Inquiry into Forensic DNA Testing in Queensland, being led by former Court of Appeal president Walter Sofronoff.

Results from the police review, revealed by The Australian in June and which triggered the commission of inquiry, found the chance of finding useful DNA when testing below the threshold was as high as 66 per cent.

Inspector David Neville, head of the police service’s DNA unit, told the inquiry this was “disturbingly high and raises the risk we may be missing evidence that could identify an offender”.

The consequences of the failure to test samples from one north Queensland rape case was outlined to the inquiry on Wednesday.

Investigators collected six forensic samples from the victim and three from the suspect and despite the presence of sperm found, they were not fully tested. Police in May this year asked for the samples to be tested, with all nine samples yielding DNA profiles.

“So there were six samples in total taken from the victim originally reported as DNA insufficient and then later tested and reported matching the offender,” Inspector Neville said.

“There were three samples taken from the offender, from his penis, all reported in November last year as DNA insufficient, all retested between May and June this year which came back matching DNA to the victim.”

He said when originally tested, in November, sperm could be seen under a microscope in swabs taken from the woman’s vagina, back and perineum. The DNA results helped corroborate t her version of events, that she was pushed down, raped from behind and the accused ejaculated on her lower back.

If you think your case has been affected by the DNA lab problems, please contact [e-mail]