As my keynote address at the recent International Symposium on Emerging Paradigms in Forensic Science concerned standards, I found this very interesting:
http://touch.policeoracle.com/news/article.html?id=62256
The introduction of requirements for ISO standards in forensic science has been a long time coming; there are arguments for and against.
It is now being requred for police forces:
The reliability of forensic evidence in a criminal prosecution can often be called into question, but when that evidence is the only difference between a conviction and an acquittal, it can become a nightmare for a senior investigating officer.
That was the case in the murder of BBC television presenter Jill Dando, when a minute particle of firearms discharge residue was found in the jacket pocket of Barry George. He was acquitted during a retrial in 2008 after the evidence was ruled inadmissible, since the jacket could have been contaminated while at a police photographic studio, which housed ammunition.
Forensic science provision in the Police Service is now set to face further cross-examination in court as high standards are enshrined nationwide.
The service is currently pursuing two national forensic accreditations for all forces in England and Wales from the UK Accreditation Service (UKAS). This is to meet European Standard IO17025, as agreed in the Lisbon Treaty, which ensures in-house forensic specialisms have robust procedures, processes and training in place inside force laboratories.
With the first accreditation deadline for DNA labs in November this year, forces must ensure they comply or that their forensic service providers obtain the accreditation themselves.
The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) is confident that all forces will achieve the first deadline, but a market leader in the Service has already set itself the target of obtaining complete accreditation.
Lancashire Constabulary believes IO17025 will prove vital in the courtroom and provide a safety net to scientific experts under cross examination from often intimidating barristers.
Opportunism from defence teams
It has not escaped many defence teams’ notice that the service’s forensic landscape has changed in the past year and a more fragmented approach is now being adopted between crime scene and court, following the closure of the Forensic Science Service (FSS). As forces increasingly insource their provision or use external providers – as is now the norm – defence counsel could seek to use this to their advantage, challenging forces over their standards on a case by case basis. While the FSS had a world-renowned reputation, forces are to an extent still in their infancy, and this is where the accreditation will help.
Lancashire Constabulary forensics operations manager Beth Joule said the force was already seeing anecdotal signs that barristers were challenging forensic evidence because it had been produced in-house.
I would love to get some comments on this!
http://touch.policeoracle.com/news/article.html?id=62256
The introduction of requirements for ISO standards in forensic science has been a long time coming; there are arguments for and against.
It is now being requred for police forces:
With all police forces requiring forensic accreditation by the end of 2013, PoliceOracle.com examines how this could be crucial in the courtroom
The reliability of forensic evidence in a criminal prosecution can often be called into question, but when that evidence is the only difference between a conviction and an acquittal, it can become a nightmare for a senior investigating officer.
That was the case in the murder of BBC television presenter Jill Dando, when a minute particle of firearms discharge residue was found in the jacket pocket of Barry George. He was acquitted during a retrial in 2008 after the evidence was ruled inadmissible, since the jacket could have been contaminated while at a police photographic studio, which housed ammunition.
Forensic science provision in the Police Service is now set to face further cross-examination in court as high standards are enshrined nationwide.
The service is currently pursuing two national forensic accreditations for all forces in England and Wales from the UK Accreditation Service (UKAS). This is to meet European Standard IO17025, as agreed in the Lisbon Treaty, which ensures in-house forensic specialisms have robust procedures, processes and training in place inside force laboratories.
With the first accreditation deadline for DNA labs in November this year, forces must ensure they comply or that their forensic service providers obtain the accreditation themselves.
The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) is confident that all forces will achieve the first deadline, but a market leader in the Service has already set itself the target of obtaining complete accreditation.
Lancashire Constabulary believes IO17025 will prove vital in the courtroom and provide a safety net to scientific experts under cross examination from often intimidating barristers.
Opportunism from defence teams
It has not escaped many defence teams’ notice that the service’s forensic landscape has changed in the past year and a more fragmented approach is now being adopted between crime scene and court, following the closure of the Forensic Science Service (FSS). As forces increasingly insource their provision or use external providers – as is now the norm – defence counsel could seek to use this to their advantage, challenging forces over their standards on a case by case basis. While the FSS had a world-renowned reputation, forces are to an extent still in their infancy, and this is where the accreditation will help.
Lancashire Constabulary forensics operations manager Beth Joule said the force was already seeing anecdotal signs that barristers were challenging forensic evidence because it had been produced in-house.
I would love to get some comments on this!
No comments:
Post a Comment