The Interim Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Forensic DNA Testing in Queensland (by the former President of the Court of Appeal, retired judge Mr Walter Sofronoff KC) states
1. Immediately before early 2018, Queensland Health Forensic and Scientific Services (“FSS”) would process samples submitted for Major Crime Casework that returned a quantitation value between 0.001 ng/μL and 0.0088 ng/μL by submitting them automatically to concentration using Microcon filters (referred to within FSS as "auto-microcon"), amplification, capillary electrophoresis and profiling.
2. In early 2018, FSS began to process such samples in accordance with “option 2” referred to in paragraph 8 on page 9 of 'A review of the automatic concentration of DNA extracts using Microcon® Centrifugal Filter Devices: Options for QPS consideration' dated January 2018 and submitted under the names of Mr A3 and Ms B, both FSS officers.
3. Option 2 provided as follows: Cease the ‘auto-microcon’ process for Priority 2 (Major Crime) casework and report the exhibit result of ‘DNA insufficient for further processing’ based on Quantification result.
4. The result of the adoption of this process by agreement between FSS and the Queensland Police Service (“QPS”) was that samples for Priority 2 (Major Crime) Casework that returned a quantitation value in the range between 0.001 ng/μL and 0.0088 ng/μL:
a. would not be processed further (unless expressly requested by QPS or unless a scientist within FSS did so) and,
b. would be reported in the Forensic Register as containing “DNA insufficient for further processing” or words to similar effect (hereafter referred to as “the DIFP Statement”) and accompanied by the words: This item/sample was submitted for DNA analysis; however the amount of DNA detected at the quantitation stage indicated the sample was insufficient for further processing (due to the limitations of current analytical and interpretational techniques). No further processing was conducted on this item. Please contact Forensic DNA Analysis if further information is required.
c. would be reported in Queensland Police Records and Information Management Exchange (“QPRIME”) as containing the DIFP Statement and accompanied by the words: This item/sample was submitted for DNA analysis. Low levels of DNA were detected in this sample and it was not submitted for further profiling. Please contact the DNA Management Section if this sample is requested to be assessed for further processing. Further processing could include concentration of the low levels of DNA obtained, pooling with other samples (where appropriate), resampling of the parent item (where appropriate), or a combination of processes.
5. In instances in which a witness statement was required for criminal proceedings, samples with quantitation within the range 0.001 ng/μL and 0.0088 ng/μL would be reported as having “Insufficient DNA for analysis” or words to similar effect.
6. In fact, the possibility of obtaining a profile from these samples cannot be excluded because, although it might be that the samples contained insufficient DNA to develop a DNA profile, it might also be that the samples contained: a. sufficient DNA to obtain a partial DNA profile, or, b. sufficient DNA to obtain a full DNA profile.
7. It follows that the DIFP Statement as used in witness statements was untrue.
8. When a quantitation result is below 0.001 ng/μL, FSS reports the result on the Forensic Register as “No DNA detected”. When a witness statement is prepared for criminal proceedings, the result is reported in the same way.
9. In fact, such a quantitation result signifies that technical equipment did not have the capacity to determine either the presence or absence of DNA with reliability.
10. Samples with quantitation results below 0.001 ng/μL are capable of generating useable profiles although the likelihood is low.
11. As a consequence, the description “No DNA detected” as used in witness statements is misleading.
12. The following are my reasons for reaching these conclusions.
The Commissioner's recommendations are
a. Every Witness Statement issued by FSS since February 2018 in which a sample has been reported under the rubric “DNA insufficient for further processing” or any similar expression, and in which a sample has been reported as “No DNA detected” be identified by FSS without delay in a manner that will ensure ease of production of a list of such statements and, if required, the production of the statements themselves and the due provision of quants that were the basis for such statements.
b. For every such statement, a further statement be prepared by FSS stating that:
i. In each case in which the DIFP Statement has been used, that the statement was not correct and that the sample contains a low level of measurable DNA which, if fully processed, might produce an interpretable profile.
ii. In each case in which the statement “No DNA detected” has been used, that the statement was not correct and that the sample returned a quantitation result below the level of detection but that further work might result in a useable profile but that that is unlikely.
c. That the Queensland Government take steps to ensure that public bodies and publicly funded bodies that require additional funds or other resources to investigate, consider and resolve these issues be furnished with the necessary funds and resources so that any miscarriages of justice are resolved as promptly as is practicable.
