GIST: "As Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said in June when she released the terms of reference for the Commission of Inquiry into Forensic DNA Testing in Queensland: “The people of this state must have confidence in the reliability of results from the lab.” In view of the grave deficiencies uncovered by the inquiry, Ms Palaszczuk should waste no time in releasing the final report by commissioner Walter Sofronoff KC. It is due next week.
In his interim report in September, Mr Sofronoff found that scientists had made “untrue” statements to courts, prosecutors and victims of crime since early 2018.
If samples fell below Queensland’s unusually high testing threshold, they were reported by the lab as having “insufficient DNA” or “no DNA detected” to police and in the formal evidence statements scientists gave in court.
Mr Sofronoff found it was possible to extract “a full or partial profile” below the threshold, meaning statements routinely produced by the lab were untrue.
Queensland Health later revealed that 1260 court cases had been affected by the incorrect statements, casting doubt over convictions and acquittals.
Mr Sofronoff’s inquiry, sparked by The Australian podcast Shandee’s Story, has heard evidence that senior police signed off on an unprecedented DNA testing threshold in early 2018, which meant crucial evidence went undetected for years.
Hundreds of ignored samples from rape and murder cases now are being tested as a result.
Victims of crime and the public have been let down badly. For that reason we welcome the decision to introduce a plain-language DNA guide in the state as recommended by Queensland Court of Appeal former president Margaret McMurdo, who led a 16-month review into sexual and domestic violence.
The guide will be written for judges, defence lawyers and police to better understand DNA science.
“If investigators, lawyers and judicial officers do not have the skills to understand forensic evidence, they are unable to question and critically analyse results, question witnesses or provide correct explanations to a jury,” her report found. Beyond that initiative, the sooner the government releases Mr Sofronoff’s report and implements its recommendations, the sooner confidence in DNA testing in the criminal justice system should be restored.""
The entire editorial can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resurce. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
-----------------------------------------------------------
