Forensics experts raises doubts over trial evidence

A British forensics expert has suggested that the manner in which forensic evidence in a rape and murder trial was collected prior to testing in the State Forensic Science Laboratory could have left it open to tampering or contamination.

Dr Denise Syndercombe Court, a forensic haemogeneticist and expert in genetics, was appearing as an expert witness for the defence in the trial of a Corkman whose DNA profile matched that of semen found in the body of Rachel Kiely, a 22-year-old woman who was raped and strangled as she brought her dogs for a walk in a park in Ballincollig in October 2000.

The 18-year-old accused cannot be named for legal reasons. In the Central Criminal Court trial, he has pleaded not guilty to the rape and murder of Ms Rachel Kiely (22) at the Regional Park, Ballincollig, Co Cork on October 26, 2000.

Cross-examined yesterday(Fri), the accused suggested that DNA and fibre evidence linking him to the crime was wrong. "It wasn't mine. I didn't kill or rape her", he told Mr PJ McCarthy SC, prosecuting.

The jury has heard that DNA samples taken from the accused matched DNA recovered from vaginal, vulval and anal swabs from Ms Kiely's body. Dr Maureen Smyth of the Forensic Science Laboratory has said that on a statistically-adjusted "conservative figure", there was a one in a billion chance that someone else in the population had the same DNA profile. She said that, prior to the statistical adjustment that was carried out o rid the analysis of any possible bias, the chance was one in 650,000 million, a far greater figure.

The jury has also heard that fibres found on Rachel Kiely's clothing matched fibres from clothes the prosecution alleges that the accused wore on the night of the killing.

Dr Syndercombe Court was asked by the defence to review the work of the Forensic Science Laboratory in the case. She told defence barrister Mr Blaise O'Carroll SC that she saw the forensic scientists' reports, all the raw data they had made their interpretation from, and all their case notes which detailed the continuity of evidence and the tests that they undertook.

"One of the conclusions that I came to was that the continuity of evidence provided in the reports was not what I would normally expect", Dr Syndercombe Court said. "But beyond that, the work that I saw undertaken in the Forensic Laboratory in Dublin I perceived to be of high quality and undertaken with respect to all the required controls".

The expert witness, who said she has in the past undertaken genetic services for both prosecution and defence teams in criminal investigations in England, said materials she received at the Lab were "not always received in a condition in which they could not have been tampered with".

Handed a sample swab kit such as one used by the state pathologist Dr John Harbison in collecting evidence for forensic testing, she said that in the sample shown, in order to use the test tube, its seal had to be broken. "Then presumably he would put the swab into it and unless it was sealed across the seal or put in a tamper-proof bag, there's a possibility that it could be tampered with", she said.

The witness said that usually the person would also sign across the new seal and that an entry would also appear in the lab report. If used swabs were not sealed, "It has the potential for someone who ought not to have opened it to have opened it", she said. She also agreed that, "there's a possibility that if something is floating around in a bag unprotected from the air, contamination could arise."

Earlier, in cross-examination, the accused man was asked to respond to the DNA evidence. "Well, I know myself, I didn't kill or rape Rachel Kiely", he said.

He claimed that gardai did not seal a bag containing fibre evidence and that a red Arsenal hat found in the Regional Park whose fibres matched fibres found on his own clothes could have belonged to anyone else.

Asked were gardai and forensic scientists mistaken about the fibre evidence, he said, "I don't know, all I know is what I didn't do."

Another British DNA expert, Mr David Ballard, a specialist in the Y chromosome, also gave evidence for the defence. Mr Ballard said he compared the accused's DNA to over 9000 profiles in the European Y Chromosome Database. He found the profiles found in Rachel Kiely's body matched the DNA of the accused man and that of two other people in the database - a person in Tuscany and one in Sweden.

Cross-examined by Mr McCarthy, Mr Ballard agreed that the Y chromosome was less varied than other DNA chromosomes. He agreed that the Forensic Science Laboratory had not relied on the Y chromosome in their analysis. He agreed that the Y chromosome test was "not a particularly discriminating one" and that the test applied by the Forensic Science Lab in this case was "more discriminating."

The defence case continues before a jury and Mr Justice Butler on Monday.