The defendants had been convicted by the use of low copy DNA evidence.
Held: Their appeals failed. Where the quantity of DNA evidence recovered was above the minimum threshold to exclude randomness, and subject to the emergence of further DNA scientific reliability evidence, challenges to the validity of the procedures as such would not be accepted. The Court of Appeal had obtained further expert evidence of the reliability of the procedures, and said that supporting evidence might be required where the volume of DNA was between 100 and 200 picogrammes. Expert evidence, based on scenes of crime experience, could be given as to the likelihood of there being other sources for the samples found.
Lord Justice Thomas, Mr Justice Kitchin and Mr Justice Holroyde
[2009] EWCA Crim 2698, Times 08-Jan-2010, [2010] Crim LR 716, [2010] 1 Cr App Rep 23
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Weller CACD 4-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual offences, based in part on DNA evidence. He said that the court had not properly applied the rules when considering DNA cases and that there was now additional evidence as to the possibility . .
Cited – Broughton, Regina v CACD 24-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for arson, saying that the conviction had been based on low count DNA evidence derived from a sample at the very minimal acceptable level. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.392908