"INNOCENCE TESTING IS ABOUT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM CAN MAKE MISTAKES AND HAVING AN EXTRA LAYER OF JUSTICE TO DEAL WITH THAT. IT IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT GIVEN THE CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY.
"IF EVIDENCE IS PROPERLY PRESERVED THERE IS ALMOST NO LIMIT ON HOW OLD A REOPENED CASE COULD BE."
LYNNE WEATHERED: THE GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY INNOCENCE PROJECT PER REPORTER ANNA CALDWELL: THE COURIER-MAIL;
WIKIPEDIA TELLS US THAT "THE COURIER-MAIL IS A DAILY NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED IN BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA. OWNED BY NEWS CORPORATION, IT IS PUBLISHED DAILY FROM MONDAY TO SATURDAY IN TABLOID FORMAT."
PHOTO: FERAH JAMA AND LAWYER;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: THE FERAH JAMA CASE: According to the Australian, Farah Jama was found guilty of raping a 40-year-old woman at a nightclub in Melbourne's outer-eastern suburbs after the victim was found unconscious. She had no memory of the crime but Mr Jama's DNA was later found on the victim. The then 20-year-old denied ever being near the nightclub on that night, saying he was reading the Koran to his critically ill father at his bedside in their home in the northern suburbs. The only evidence police had was the DNA sample of Mr Jama, which was coincidentally taken 24 hours before the alleged crime after he was investigated over another unrelated matter but not charged. Prosecutors told the Victoria Court of Appeal earlier this week that it had since been discovered that the same forensic medical officer who took the first DNA sample of Mr Jama had coincidently taken the DNA sample from the 40-year-old rape complainant 24 hours later. They said it had emerged that the officer had not adhered to strict procedure when taking the sample and therefore they could not “exclude the possibility” of contamination. Therefore they argued the guilty verdict was unsafe and satisfactory and should be quashed. His lawyer Kimani Adil Boden hailed a “momentous” day for Mr Jama, whose case he described as “tragic”. “He's been in custody for close to one-and-a-half years on charges he didn't commit. “Justice has finally been done, however, at a price.” Victoria's police chief responded to Mr. Jama's release by banning all forensic officers from submitting DNA evidence or providing statements to the courts until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: THE SHANE DAVIS CASE: Shane Davis was convicted by a Supreme Court jury in Brisbane in November 1991 of the murder of South African tourist Michelle Joanne Cohn at a Surfers Paradise apartment block on Boxing Day in 1990. He was sentenced to life in prison, but has always maintained his innocence and has even refused the opportunity of parole several times during the past five years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"IN LEGAL circles, they call it "the CSI effect" - television's promise that fluorescent fingerprints, magnified hair strands and DNA swabs crawling with cells are the definitive answer to solving crime," reporter Anna Caldwell's January 2, 2010 Courrier Mall story begins, under the heading "Truth behind DNA."
"But what if DNA isn't the panacea the small screen promises?," the story continues.
"Queensland DNA expert Carol Mayne says juries expect to be handed the type of evidence they watch come to life on plasma screens in their living rooms.
"There are papers written about how juries won't convict unless they get the DNA evidence they see on shows like CSI – prosecutors say it is a battle when they have an otherwise solid case," she says.
The capability of DNA is set to come under the microscope in coming months after Queensland history was made last month, with a prisoner of almost 20 years promised a retest of the forensic evidence used to convict him
Brisbane's Wolston Correctional Centre inmate Shane Davis has fiercely proclaimed his innocence after being convicted for the murder of South African tourist Michelle Cohn on Boxing Day, 1990, on the Gold Coast.
Attorney-General Cameron Dick has revealed DNA used in the Davis trial would be retested and new material located in South Australian laboratories would be examined for the first time. It marks the first Queensland case of DNA innocence testing following a suspect's conviction.
Ms Mayne says DNA technology has improved, and will continue to improve at lightning pace. "DNA can be analysed from something so microscopic now, whereas 20 years ago testers needed a significantly larger sample," she explains.
"You can get DNA from a piece of dandruff in a hat, from a half-eaten Snickers bar or even a lipstick.
"There is no longer a need for a bloody towel or semen sample – there are lots of other options."
But, she admits, the scope for error is very real.
All Victorian court cases using DNA evidence are currently suspended because police discovered a systematic breakdown in how samples were interpreted.
"There can be mistakes in analysis, interpretation and sampling," Ms Mayne says.
"Not all labs are accredited. But perhaps more significantly, when you're talking about analysing something as small as a piece of dandruff, it can be a huge mistake to presume the DNA links a person to the crime.
"There is too often a belief that DNA means guilty – and it is so much more complicated than that.
"My company's motto is that DNA stands for Do Not Assume."
At the start of last month, 22-year-old Farah Jama had his 2008 rape conviction overturned in the Victorian Court of Appeal as the result of a DNA bungle.
Prosecutors admitted to the court that the same forensic medical officer who took the DNA sample from the 40-year-old rape victim had taken a sample from Jama 24 hours earlier in an unrelated matter.
DNA from the rape victim was used to convict Jama, but last month prosecutors admitted they couldn't exclude the possibility of a contamination.
Jama had spent 16 months in custody.
The Griffith University Innocence Project spent eight years reviewing the Davis case and project director Lynne Weathered says the volunteer group has spent thousands of hours reviewing more than 300 other cases and their boxes of files.
Of those, she says there is a handful that could qualify for DNA innocence testing.
Weathered's team need to see that the case has DNA evidence available. They believe there is a chance that evidence will reveal the profile of someone other than the person convicted.
As yet, there is no Queensland legislation around innocence testing, but Attorney-General Cameron Dick admitted this week that Weathered's team had suggested another case to the Government for testing.
"So, the Davis case isn't going to open the floodgates, but we are hoping some legislation is put in place so that DNA innocence testing becomes another layer in the legal system," Ms Weathered says.
"Retesting is crucial if the case exists for it. We can only imagine what it must be like to sit in jail having done nothing wrong.
"Innocence testing is about acknowledging that our justice system can make mistakes and having an extra layer of justice to deal with that. It is particularly important given the changes in technology.
"If evidence is properly preserved there is almost no limit on how old a reopened case could be."
In the US – where about 240 people convicted of serious crimes have been cleared because of DNA innocence testing – a prisoner of 35 years has just been exonerated.
Officer-in-charge of the Queensland Homicide Group Detective Superintendent Brian Wilkins says DNA is just as useful in ruling people out of crime as it is ruling them in.
"The advances of technology and the ability to drill right down is good for both sides really," he says.
"The crime scene is the Holy Grail and it is treated as such. We can spend up to four weeks there if necessary.
"But DNA isn't the panacea. It's just one part of any investigation.""
The story can be found at:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26542662-3102,00.html
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
