Police put ban on DNA evidence

Statistical models used to interpret the data are now inadequate

POLICE forces across the country could have their DNA evidence thrown into doubt after Victoria Police discovered a systematic breakdown in how it interpreted DNA samples and warned that other jurisdictions would face the same problem.

No DNA evidence will be used in criminal cases in Victoria until at least mid-January after Chief Commissioner Simon Overland banned his forensic officers from testifying until the method used to interpret samples was reviewed.

He said yesterday that new technology -- brought online in September-- meant that more detailed information was obtained from DNA samples but the statistical models used to interpret the data had fallen behind and were now inadequate.

It is expected the ban on DNA testimony will affect at least six criminal cases in both the magistrates and county courts and lead to appeals of trials that have been heard in the past four months.

The ban comes on the eve of a Victorian Ombudsman's report on the troubled state of police forensic services and just days after a rape conviction based on contaminated DNA evidence was overturned.

Deputy Commissioner Ken Jones -- who has been asked by Mr Overland to lead the review on the scientific models used to interpret DNA data -- said Victoria was the first state in the country

to introduce the new technology and he predicted other states would face similar interpretation problems.

"I have spoken to some people around the commonwealth and their view is . . . that they are going to be in the same place that we are," Mr Jones said.

However, a spokesman for NSW Police last night said he did not believe the state would experience the same problems as Victoria because it used more "conservative" methods of statistical interpretation.

Mr Overland said he was taking the drastic action to protect the integrity of DNA evidence and he hoped a working party led by Mr Jones would find new interpretation models before the courts reopen in January after the Christmas break.

"We have taken this step because it is absolutely about maintaining the confidence in the science of DNA and I think the best way to do that is to be absolutely transparent about this issue," Mr Overland said.

He denied the court freeze had anything to do with contamination problems or was a pre-emptive response to the ombudsman's report, saying he had decided only on Tuesday night to go ahead with the unprecedented step of banning DNA evidence.

The Law Institute of Victoria said the decision left defendants in legal limbo, while the Victorian Criminal Bar Association head John Champion said he expected defence lawyers to revisit some cases.

Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls played down suggestions that the suspension of DNA evidence would lead to a flood of appeals.