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 of a DNA transfer having taken place, and in particular that there was no proper basis for the evaluation of the various possibilities to support the prosecution expert’s evidence.
Held: The appeal failed. On the basis of the state of the science at the date of the trial, the evidence was capable of being evaluated. The defendant now sought to bring in new unpublished material of his expert: ‘it is unrealistic to examine a field of science of this kind only by reference to published sources. A court in determining whether there is a sufficiently reliable scientific basis for expert evidence to be given and a jury in evaluating evidence will be entitled to take into account the experience of experts and, if their experience is challenged, to test that. If the evidence upon which they rely for the basis of their experience is challenged, then that can be evaluated by cross-examination.’ Notwithstanding, there was no fresh evidence to disturb the conviction.
Thomas LJ, Coulson J, Sir Geoffrey Grigson
[2010] EWCA Crim 1085
Bailii
Criminal Procedure Rules 33
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Abadom CACD 1982
A properly qualified expert is entitled to rely on what might otherwise be considered as hearsay, that is to say findings by other experts in the same field in support of an opinion on any given set of facts. ‘In the context of evidence given by . .
Cited – Regina v Reed and Reed CACD 21-Dec-2009
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 . .
Cited by:
Cited – London Borough of Richmond v B and Others FD 12-Nov-2010
Caution in Use of Hair Samples to Test Alcohol
The court considered the extent to which reliance could be placed on tests of hair samples for alcohol in care proceedings.
Held: Such evidence should be used with caution: ‘(i) When used, hair tests should be used only as part of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.415926