|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 12 January 2003 |
 |
|
 |
News |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
"No scientific crime investigation laboratory" - retired Government Analyst Meanwhile, Dr. A. R. L. Wijesekera, retired Government Analyst states: "We all know that DNA was used as a scientific tool since the mid 1980's and has now reached most laboratories in the West and East as a standard scientific procedure for identifying ("fingerprinting") individuals in criminal case work. It is, doubtless, the greatest discovery of the century as far as scientific crime investigation goes. In the circumstances, it is a tragedy that our own scientific crime investigation laboratory has still not been able to have this facility as part of its own scientific investigation tools for identification of criminals. Having said that, I must reassure all readers of the article entitled "Forensic Blunders" and the general public that before the advent of DNA, scientific investigation involving "matching" of physiological samples (blood, semen, etc) was carried out, in forensic laboratories, not (I repeat not) with a lesser degree of accuracy, but with certainly a lesser degree of "exclusivity." Use was made of the various types of blood group systems available, cellular and enzyme systems - to achieve a certain degree of "exclusion," although nowhere near what is achieved by DNA "fingerprint" identification which can in certain cases have an exclusion ratio of 1 in many millions. However, whatever the inadequacies of the Government Analyst's Department (GAD) may be, in terms of the lack of "state of the art" investigative scientific techniques, it can never be stated with any degree of truth or honour that "conclusions were based on the faulty system of matching blood samples etc." broadly yielding miscarriages of justice through scientific incompetence or "manipulation of justice". Might I state with great responsibility that in all instances of the Department's scientific activities, the benefits of all doubts, whenever they arose, as indeed, they do in scientific work, were resolved in favour of the accused or suspect, be it in blood grouping, calculation of percentages in heroin cases or in any other. In such circumstances, I can without fear of contradiction by any one, categorically state that no "innocent person would have been found guilty" on the basis of "forensic scientific evidence provided by the GAD" whether in a murder, rape or any other criminal case. It is well for everyone to be made aware that all Reports of the GAD's in criminal cases are "defended" by officers of the Department giving expert evidence in the Highest Criminal Courts in the land-formerly the Supreme Courts in Assize and now the High Courts. The officers are not only cross-examined by leading Counsel but also questioned by the Honourable Judges who are all distinguished, intelligent men. Though all of them may not be well versed in scientific procedures and other technical details, when the life or liberty of an individual is at stake, Hon'ble judges and Counsel do ensure that justice prevails. Towards this end, may I repeat here, the report of the GAD always gives the benefit of any doubt or scientific ambiguity to the suspect or accused. I refer specifically to the period in which I was in the Govt. Analyst's Department (1954-1992) and have no reason to doubt that the situation is any different now, despite the severe shortage of staff and equipment, which I am aware the Department is faced with. This situation will, no doubt, be confirmed by the immediate past Government Analyst, Mr. T. W. P. Pieris, who was himself an accomplished serologist and retired from service late last year (2002). |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
