Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000 - NSW Ombudsman - NSW ...

Recommendation 81
An audit process be established between DAL and FPIT to ensure the information on the database is correct,
including that DNA profiles are identified by a person’s real name and not an alias.
NSW Police supports this recommendation in part, commenting that while auditing would be beneficial to database
accuracy, the use of aliases “should not affect the correct identification of persons through database matching.” 1078
However, NSW Health questioned whether an audit process would be worthwhile, given the resources required:
It would deliver very little benefit because the person’s name or alias is almost irrelevant on the database. The
DNA profile itself is the crucial identifier that is relevant, not the person’s name or the use of an alias. Once a link
is obtained to apparently more than one person with different particulars FPIT is notified and asked whether it is
the same person or not.
The key to ensure that the correct person has been entered onto the database is to ensure that the barcode
is correct. Since this is done through a barcode reader transcription errors are minimised. DAL attempts
at all times to ensure that the data on the sample information form that accompanies the person sample is
transcribed correctly to its database. However, differences in detail will not affect the reliability or accuracy of
links provided the barcode is the same and the other details are then checked. it is, however, considered that
IT functionality of the NSW Police should be improved so that details from the Sample Information Sheet can be
directly downloaded to DAL. This would mean that the details that the NSW Police supply would be absolutely
consistent at DAL.
Thus at present Health considers that the benefits of an audit process would not justify the considerable cost
involved. 1079
The Attorney General’s Department commented:
In order to maintain both the appearance and reality of DAL as an independent body responsible for the NSW
DNA database, any audit process would need to be carefully constructed to ensure that no central officer within
NSW Police was seen to have carte blanche access to all of the information on the database. 1080
Recommendation 82
The NSW Attorney General consider implementing, and/or facilitating the implementation of, recommendations
15 to 20 made by the Commonwealth Independent Review as they relate to the functions of the NSW
Government. It is also recommended that:
a. The Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000 be amended to enable the implementation of
recommendations 15-20 made by the Commonwealth Independent Review as they relate to NSW
b. The NSW Parliament consider establishing a scheme similar to that in the Law Enforcement (Controlled
Operations) Act 1997 and the Telecommunications (Interception) (NSW) Act 1987, to regulate external
audits of records relating to forensic material obtained under the Crimes (Forensic Procedures)
Act 2000.
NSW Police supports this recommendation. 1081 The Attorney General’s Department supports the recommendation but
commented its implementation requires consideration of resource issues. 1082
11.2. Accuracy of DNA records in the police system
As explained above, NSW Police does not have access to the DNA database. It submits DNA samples to DAL and
receives advice from DAL as to any links. However, NSW Police does keep records of forensic procedures on its
computer system, and relies on these records when taking action in relation to advice from DAL that DNA links have
been made. This means that, even if the information on the DNA database is correct, errors in police records of
forensic procedures can lead to action being taken against the wrong person.
226
NSW Ombudsman
DNA sampling and other forensic procedures conducted on suspects and volunteers under the Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000