Thousands of convictions 'may be unsafe' due to concerns over forensic evidence

Thousands of convictions 'may be unsafe' due to concerns over forensic evidence

Two laboratory workers have been arrested on suspicion of manipulating data from blood samples used as evidence against criminals.
19:53, UK, Tuesday 09 May 2017



By Martin Brunt, Crime Correspondent

Thousands of criminal investigations are being re-examined after suspicions that lab staff tampered with forensic tests.

They could include murder and rape cases where defendants were convicted on evidence involving drug analysis.

Some 6,000 blood samples are being retested after two scientists working for Randox Testing Services since 2014 were arrested for "manipulating data".

Randox is one of six companies licensed to carry out toxicology tests for various police forces in England and Wales.

Dorset's Deputy Chief Constable James Vaughan said: "It is deeply worrying because the integrity of forensic testing is sacrosanct in the criminal justice system.

"The vast majority of these cases involve drug-driving, but there are likely to be more serious cases affected, including murder and rape."

Mr Vaughan said it was unlikely a murder or rape conviction hung on vital toxicology tests, but he could not rule it out.


Image: Several hundred samples have been retested. File pic 

So far, several hundred samples have been retested and have produced the same results as they did when first tested, Mr Vaughan said.

He believes scores of cases could be referred to the Appeal Court, and those where key blood samples had been destroyed would almost certainly result in acquittals.

The two suspects have been questioned on suspicion of perverting the course of justice and released on bail until the end of this month.

They worked for two other forensic science companies before Randox, so the investigation could expand.

Some suspects who had been told they faced no further action could end up being prosecuted if the data was altered in their favour.
The conclusions of some inquests could also be quashed.

Dr Mark Piper, head of toxicology at Randox Testing Services, said: "We regret the concerns that these developments will inevitably cause.

"We are taking all possible responsible actions to allay them.

"RTS are closely engaged with all related police forces, and the process of retesting samples at an appropriately accredited external laboratory is underway. RTS will manage this stage and cover all associated testing costs."

http://news.sky.com/story/thousands-of-convictions-may-be-unsafe-after-evidence-manipulation-10870314

It might be classified a science per se but forensic analysis is not infallable - au-contraire, as can be confirmed by the forensic samples sent to the UK's now defunct Forensic Science Service in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

The Forensic Science Service - world renowned exclusive leader in pioneer forensic analysis, established in December 2005 and closure announced in December 2010, citing monthly losses of up to £2m as justification (wikipedia).

The king is dead the king is dead -long live the king!   Finally closed in March 2012 - RIP
----------

Police review criminal DNA cases

New DNA techniques have become available since 2001

Hundreds of criminal cases are to be reviewed because vital DNA samples may have been missed by the Forensic Science Service.


The Association of Chief Police Officers has written to the 43 chief constables in England and Wales about cases that may need re-investigating.

Those under review fall within a five-year period between 2000 and 2005.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said it was important to maintain the quality of evidence.

A Home Office spokesperson said "a minimal amount" of cases were involved and that the situation would not have led to anyone being wrongly convicted.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6381969.stm

That was life before Madeleine.....

The prestigious world renowned UK's Forensic Science Service, a company wholly owned by the Home Office - the first of it's kind.

The Home Office who, under the secretariat of Theresa May, wholly sanctioned and financed the establishment of Operation Grange, to independently review and later re-investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Operation Grange with a remit limited to following the theory of abduction as if it had occurred in the UK.  Six years later and millions of public money squandered, have failed miserably to aid the memory of Madeleine McCann.

The UK's Forensic Science Service who, despite pioneering technology, failed abysmally to produce a single positive result from all the samples sent for analysis, to aid the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance - a three year old child! 

The UK's Forensic Science Service, formed in December 2005 and died in March 2012, being declared finished in December 2010 - after only five years active service!

Betwixt and between the birth and death of the Forensic Science Service, December 2010 and March 2012, Operation Grange was established - in May 2011.

Well! well! well! - what a coincidence!

This latest news about the forensics lab made me think of Andy Redwood getting himself along to the Coimbra lab in 2013. Though quite why he was poking his nose in matters of Portuguese forensic tests after the debacle at the FSS I don't know.
The following is an extract from a Guardian article of Oct 2013. I have bolded the part that leaps out at me in the body of the article.

Forensic scientists to join British police in McCann investigation
Analysts want to re-examine evidence retrieved from apartment from which Madeleine went missing in 2007

Brendan de Beer in Portimão
Monday 13 October 2014 23.18 BST

A team of British forensic analysts are expected to join DCI Andy Redwood and his team of detectives in Portugal this week in a renewed bid to uncover the truth behind the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Portuguese police sources told the Guardian that the scientists have asked to revisit some of the evidence retrieved from the holiday apartment from which the British toddler went missing on 3 May 2007. The forensic evidence gathered at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance has been stored at the National Institute for Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences in Coimbra in central Portugal.

Detectives and forensic technicians from the Metropolitan police are scheduled to visit the laboratory on Wednesday.

Detectives led by Redwood will meet with their Polícia Judiciária counterparts in Faro on Tuesday to discuss the request.

Police said they had not yet received any official orders from the public prosecutor’s office and that the next phase of the investigation was unlikely to commence for at least a fortnight.......... (article continues)
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/13/madeleine-mccann-forensic-scientists-portugal
------------------
And for context ... I seem to recall Alison  Saunders DPP was also in Lisbon for meetings with the Oporto team along with Jenny Hopkins(?) In June of that same year.

And finally.....
Jta My thanks to all for kind comments yesterday re my post.

Mirage wrote:This latest news about the forensics lab made me think of Andy Redwood getting himself along to the Coimbra lab in 2013. Though quite why he was poking his nose in matters of Portuguese forensic tests after the debacle at the FSS I don't know.
The following is an extract from a Guardian article of Oct 2013. I have bolded the part that leaps out at me in the body of the article.

Forensic scientists to join British police in McCann investigation
Analysts want to re-examine evidence retrieved from apartment from which Madeleine went missing in 2007

Brendan de Beer in Portimão
Monday 13 October 2014 23.18 BST

No so sure he was poking his nose - more likely picking his nose whilst procrastinating on yet another cul-de-sac.

Being an inveterate cynic, I never believed this particular media storm from October (that month again) 2014.  The Express also reported some cock 'n bull story about the UK team wishing to forensically test curtains from the children's bedroom in apartment 5a - apparently DCI Andy Redwood and his team reckoned there might be forensic evidence of the abductor on the curtain, deposited when the abductor left with swag through the bedroom window.



What a farce!

ETA:  Credit where credit is due .

As I have stipulated before now,If you have had your DNA taken by the UK Police forces and you have not committed any criminal Offence.  Then ask the appropriate Police force to destroy your DNA sample,Impossible!?
The FSS via the Police records indicate that If the Portugal PJ did not make contact with the UK Police Authorities over the LCN/DNA,stated to have been Madeleine's(Pillow)obtained by Gerry,from Rothley?
That the DNA samples would be destroyed on"Health Grounds",now surely this must be a First instance where a Police force destroys vital DNA on a still missing child,yet certain people state,"Madeleine,may still be alive"even after the parents had been shown Martin Grimes Dogs,Eddie,Keela,alerting to clothing,Blood from the Tiles?
Lesley Anne Denton, confirmed this from the Forensic Science Service by letter dated 28 June 2007(Blood sample)15;19 Markers to the Portugal PJ,did they wish to have the DNA posted back to them.if Not,then they will be destroyed?

Did they destroy samples to do with this case?

Irene 2 wrote:Did they destroy samples to do with this case?

Ugh - tricky one!  A lot of myth has been borne and rumour abound on the subject of forensics - largely because of a general misunderstanding of the science.

As a general rule, putting aside any possible skulduggery, the issue is covered here in John Lowes forensic report..

The laboratory has examined one or more of the samples listed below. They will not be returned to you but will be destroyed in due course unless we are requested by the Defence to preserve them. You should notify the Defence solicitors in accordance with Home Office circulars 40/73 and 74/82 which allow a period of 21 days in which notice in writing must be given, by the defendant or his legal representative to the laboratory to prevent the samples being destroyed.

- Blood samples.
- Saliva samples.
- Swabs from body orifices.
- Other swabs bearing potentially hazardous material.
- Vomit, faeces, urine, etc.

The above list includes perishable personal samples, the destruction of which is required by Section 64 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984).

B  -  Non-Perishable samples

The destruction of other, non-perishable personal samples is required by Section 64 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. These include:

- Control head hair samples.
- Control pubic hair samples.
- Finger nail samples.
- Casts- e.g of teeth or feet.

Except as below those non-perishable personal samples are returned to you as parts of exhibits for production at court, etc. The laboratory is not responsible for their destruction.

The part of these samples which were removed for examination, will be retained by the laboratory for the period of time as specified in the MOU for Retained Materials (3, 7 or 30 years) from the date of this notice to allow access to other legitimate parties. After this period, in the absence of written instruction to the contrary, the retained samples will be destroyed and a record made of their destruction.
----------

As regards any skulduggery in the form of samples being destroyed for nefarious reasons, I don't think it's possible to determine without reservations.  The chances of proving samples were deliberately destroyed hovers around zero - there was also talk of samples going missing (amounts to the same thing I guess) but what they are and where they are, again is a matter for conjecture.  Hints that samples weren't returned to Portugal after FSS testing is a distinct possibility but there could be any number of reasons why that might be - for starters, was it considered necessary and/or was a request made by the Portuguese for return?

Personally, I think much of this hype is another area of wishful thinking by those who, for whatever reason,  refuse to accept their misguided opinions are wrong.  If anyone can elaborate on the subject please feel free.  I'm not a forensic scientist, I'm only trying to make sense of the information available.

Thank you verdi. I think the samples should have been examined in a "neutral" country. Certainly not a Home Office owned lab in the UK.

Irene 2 wrote:Thank you verdi. I think the samples should have been examined in a "neutral" country. Certainly not a Home Office owned lab in the UK.

Amen to that!

I've never been quite able to understand why samples were sent to the UK's FSS.  It was said it was because of their expertise in a particular field of analysis but it was also said that other laboratories across Europe are also skilled in the same field.

Personally, I think the Portuguese arm was twisted!

Verdi wrote:

Irene 2 wrote:Thank you verdi. I think the samples should have been examined in a "neutral" country. Certainly not a Home Office owned lab in the UK.

Amen to that!

I've never been quite able to understand why samples were sent to the UK's FSS.  It was said it was because of their expertise in a particular field of analysis but it was also said that other laboratories across Europe are also skilled in the same field.

Personally, I think the Portuguese arm was twisted!

I have little doubt about that.

Irene 2 wrote:

Verdi wrote:

Irene 2 wrote:Thank you verdi. I think the samples should have been examined in a "neutral" country. Certainly not a Home Office owned lab in the UK.

Amen to that!

I've never been quite able to understand why samples were sent to the UK's FSS.  It was said it was because of their expertise in a particular field of analysis but it was also said that other laboratories across Europe are also skilled in the same field.

Personally, I think the Portuguese arm was twisted!

I have little doubt about that.

I wonder if another European laboratory was used, whether all the samples sent for analysis would have been reported as 'result too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion'.

Funny that!  If that's an example of the prowess of the FSS, it's no wonder they crashed after only fives years of gross overspending and controversial credibility.

I read also that there are possably people behind bars ,that should not be ,so its a wider problem than macs  case .joyce1938

Perhaps the Home Office or Assistant Commander Mark Rowley be available to Not give a"Running commentary"but offer an explanation as to what has happened to the LCN/DNA sample provided by one of Madeleine' Parents,that came from a pillow obtained by Gerry from the Rothley Home,as Madeleine' DNA?
Then,the storage for 3/7/30 years will become part of the case and if it(LCN/DNA)has been destroyed,this may require further answers as to why?