Tweet
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-12310494
South Wales man's daughter rape conviction quashed
A father who has served more than five years in jail after being found guilty of raping his daughter has had his conviction quashed.
The man, from south Wales, who cannot be named, was jailed at Swansea Crown Court in 2005.
Criminal Appeal Court judges have now ruled that vital forensic evidence at the heart of his trial was unreliable.
The man's solicitor said the case showed the danger of absolute reliance on DNA evidence.
The court heard that conviction of the man was largely based on evidence presented by a forensic scientist called by the prosecution.
At London's Criminal Appeal Court new scientific experts for both the Crown and the defence agreed that the original forensic evidence was in fact "of no value."
Counsel appearing for the man told Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Openshaw and Mrs Justice Sharp the evidence was incorrect and overstated.
Quashing the conviction and ordering no retrial, Lord Justice Hooper ordered the man's immediate release.
He said it should be reported to the Crown Prosecution Service and to those responsible for this type of forensic evidence.
After his release, the man's solicitor said he was delighted the man could return to his family.
He added that it was "unlikely" that this was the only case in which the jury has been misled by DNA.
AND
http://www.yorkshirewired.co.uk/news...iction-quashed
A father who has served more than five years in jail after being found guilty of raping his teenage daughter has had his conviction quashed.
The man from Port Talbot, south Wales, who cannot be named, was jailed for 10 years at Swansea Crown Court in 2005.
On Friday Criminal Appeal Court judges ruled that vital forensic evidence at the heart of his trial was unreliable.
The man's solicitor said the case showed the danger of absolute reliance on DNA evidence.
The court heard that conviction of the man, referred to as "E", was largely based on evidence presented by a forensic scientist called by the prosecution.
I am delighted that my client's ordeal is finally over and that he can return to his family”
The forensic scientist claimed DNA evidence found on the daughter's shorts led to the inevitable conclusion that intercourse with her father had taken place.
However at London's Criminal Appeal Court new scientific experts for both the Crown and the defence agreed that the original forensic evidence was in fact "of no value."
Andrew Baker, appearing for "E", told Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Openshaw and Mrs Justice Sharp: "The scientific evidence relating to the DNA found on the complainant's shorts was both incorrect and considerably overstated by the forensic scientist called on behalf of the Crown."
Mr Baker said newly-instructed experts had concluded that the scientific findings did not prove that intercourse had taken place.
"The DNA found on the front of the shorts was a weak partial profile," he said. "Statistical analysis of such weak partial profiles has no relevance.
"The DNA did not necessarily originate from semen, but may have originated from skin, sweat or even secondary transfer form such sources."
He concluded: "The conviction is unsafe...The conclusions which the Crown invited the jury to draw form the scientific evidence were overstated and of no evidential value."
It is important that this matter be reported to the Crown Prosecution Service and to whoever be responsible for this type of forensic evidence”
Quashing the conviction and ordering no retrial, Lord Justice Hooper ordered the man's immediate release.
He added: "It is important that this matter be reported to the Crown Prosecution Service and to whoever be responsible for this type of forensic evidence."
After his release, the man's solicitor, Chris Saltrese, said: "I am delighted that my client's ordeal is finally over and that he can return to his family.
"This case shows the dangers of placing absolute reliance on DNA evidence. This is a case where subjectivity, speculation and conjecture were presented under the guise of objective science.
"DNA like any other discipline is a matter of interpretation and this applies particularly in cases where genetic samples are small and in domestic cases where family members are likely to pick up traces of genetic material in the course of family life.
"
He added that it was "unlikely" that this was the only case in which the jury has been misled by DNA.
RF: I am delighted to say that I was present when the man in the dock was told that he can tell the world that he is innocent but to careful how he tells it, due to the nature of the allegations.
South Wales man's daughter rape conviction quashed
A father who has served more than five years in jail after being found guilty of raping his daughter has had his conviction quashed.
The man, from south Wales, who cannot be named, was jailed at Swansea Crown Court in 2005.
Criminal Appeal Court judges have now ruled that vital forensic evidence at the heart of his trial was unreliable.
The man's solicitor said the case showed the danger of absolute reliance on DNA evidence.
The court heard that conviction of the man was largely based on evidence presented by a forensic scientist called by the prosecution.
At London's Criminal Appeal Court new scientific experts for both the Crown and the defence agreed that the original forensic evidence was in fact "of no value."
Counsel appearing for the man told Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Openshaw and Mrs Justice Sharp the evidence was incorrect and overstated.
Quashing the conviction and ordering no retrial, Lord Justice Hooper ordered the man's immediate release.
He said it should be reported to the Crown Prosecution Service and to those responsible for this type of forensic evidence.
After his release, the man's solicitor said he was delighted the man could return to his family.
He added that it was "unlikely" that this was the only case in which the jury has been misled by DNA.
AND
http://www.yorkshirewired.co.uk/news...iction-quashed
A father who has served more than five years in jail after being found guilty of raping his teenage daughter has had his conviction quashed.
The man from Port Talbot, south Wales, who cannot be named, was jailed for 10 years at Swansea Crown Court in 2005.
On Friday Criminal Appeal Court judges ruled that vital forensic evidence at the heart of his trial was unreliable.
The man's solicitor said the case showed the danger of absolute reliance on DNA evidence.
The court heard that conviction of the man, referred to as "E", was largely based on evidence presented by a forensic scientist called by the prosecution.
I am delighted that my client's ordeal is finally over and that he can return to his family”
The forensic scientist claimed DNA evidence found on the daughter's shorts led to the inevitable conclusion that intercourse with her father had taken place.
However at London's Criminal Appeal Court new scientific experts for both the Crown and the defence agreed that the original forensic evidence was in fact "of no value."
Andrew Baker, appearing for "E", told Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Openshaw and Mrs Justice Sharp: "The scientific evidence relating to the DNA found on the complainant's shorts was both incorrect and considerably overstated by the forensic scientist called on behalf of the Crown."
Mr Baker said newly-instructed experts had concluded that the scientific findings did not prove that intercourse had taken place.
"The DNA found on the front of the shorts was a weak partial profile," he said. "Statistical analysis of such weak partial profiles has no relevance.
"The DNA did not necessarily originate from semen, but may have originated from skin, sweat or even secondary transfer form such sources."
He concluded: "The conviction is unsafe...The conclusions which the Crown invited the jury to draw form the scientific evidence were overstated and of no evidential value."
It is important that this matter be reported to the Crown Prosecution Service and to whoever be responsible for this type of forensic evidence”
Quashing the conviction and ordering no retrial, Lord Justice Hooper ordered the man's immediate release.
He added: "It is important that this matter be reported to the Crown Prosecution Service and to whoever be responsible for this type of forensic evidence."
After his release, the man's solicitor, Chris Saltrese, said: "I am delighted that my client's ordeal is finally over and that he can return to his family.
"This case shows the dangers of placing absolute reliance on DNA evidence. This is a case where subjectivity, speculation and conjecture were presented under the guise of objective science.
"DNA like any other discipline is a matter of interpretation and this applies particularly in cases where genetic samples are small and in domestic cases where family members are likely to pick up traces of genetic material in the course of family life.
"
He added that it was "unlikely" that this was the only case in which the jury has been misled by DNA.
RF: I am delighted to say that I was present when the man in the dock was told that he can tell the world that he is innocent but to careful how he tells it, due to the nature of the allegations.
Comment