Court backs tests of minute DNA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/8425599.stm

Version 0 of 1.

A controversial technique for analysing minute amounts of DNA has been backed by the Court of Appeal.

The court said challenges to the science behind Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA testing should no longer be permitted in most trials.

The Forensic Science Service, which has been routinely using LCN DNA testing in cases since 1999, welcomed the ruling.

It came as the court rejected an appeal from brothers Terry and David Reed who were convicted of murder in 2007.

DNA testing has been criticised by some scientists for being unreliable.

But a spokeswoman for the FSS, which analyses evidence from crime scenes, said the judgement endorsed the work the FSS had done in developing and improving LCN DNA over the past decade.

Temporary suspension

The Reed brothers, of Easton, near Middlesbrough, were convicted of the murder of Peter Hoe.

The forensic scientist in their August 2007 case at Teesside Crown Court had used LCN testing on two pieces of plastic fragments found at the murder scene.

DNA evidence was 'critical' in the conviction of David and Terry Reed

But following their conviction, a judge in Northern Ireland, hearing a case against a man charged with the Omagh bombing, said the LCN technique had questions about its validity as an evidential tool.

That led to its temporary suspension as the Home Office carried out a review of its applicability for court purposes.

In early 2008, that review concluded that it was scientifically robust and therefore appropriate for court cases.

The judgement on Monday provides further backing for the technique.

In reaching its decision, the Court of Appeal rejected evidence from Bruce Budowle, a former senior scientist with the FBI.

He told judges that DNA profiles obtained using the LCN method were not of high enough quality to be put before a jury and should only be used to help an investigation.

The Court of Appeal's ruling has been welcomed by the Crown Prosecution Service which said it needs to study the judgement in detail before concluding how it will practically affect cases.