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

15.3.5. Failure to maintain proper records
Several complaints we received highlighted poor record keeping.
Complaint 04 (continued)
Complaint number 4, outlined above, also involved poor record keeping. A police officer took a makeshift
‘balaclava’ to DAL for analysis in relation to an armed robbery. At the time of the movement of the exhibit, two
Detectives wrote the date in the ‘Date/Time out’ column of the Specimen/Item Register, but neither wrote the
time in the column.
In February 2002, the brief of evidence was served on the accused. At that time, the Specimen/item Register
appeared without the time in the correct column. Some weeks later, additional documents, including a
further copy of the Specimen/item Register were served on the accused. On perusing those documents, the
complainant noted that a time, which appeared to be ‘8.00am,’ had been added to the Date/time out’ column.
The subsequent police investigation showed that the ‘time’ record (8.00am) had been added after the exhibit
had been returned from DAL to the local area command.
Neither detective could recall adding the time to the exhibit sheet.
The investigator was unable to establish who made the entry and as such could make no adverse finding
against any police officer. The investigator noted that the issue highlighted the need for supervisors to ensure
accountable records are completed accurately at the time, and audited on a regular basis. The local area
commander advised that police had been reminded about the need to keep accurate and accountable
records, and that supervisors’ daily checklists had been updated to include checking of accountable records.
The Ombudsman found that given that the exhibit was properly sealed, the issue of adding the time on the
sheet did not compromise the continuity of the sample, particularly as the date was correctly recorded.
However, when the matter went to court, the case was dismissed. It was found that there was a lack of
continuity of the DNA evidence because of the records of time being altered. The court did not make any
adverse comments about the exhibits or the police investigation.
Complaint 07
Police sent a blood stained piece of paper to DAL for DNA analysis, in relation to a break and enter offence.
However, DAL returned the exhibit unexamined, as the seal on the exhibit bag had been broken, indicating the
exhibit may have been tampered with.
Police investigated the matter and found no evidence that the exhibit had been tampered with. One of the
officers involved stated that the other officer had opened the exhibit bag to ensure the exhibit was inside, as
the exhibit bag had been sealed by Forensic Services Officers in his absence some months earlier. The exhibit
was about to be taken to DAL and as the case officer, he wanted to ensure it was still contained within the bag.
Furthermore, a senior forensic biologist at DAL subsequently advised that the exhibit should not have been
returned, but that in the circumstances DAL staff should have resealed the bag themselves. He pointed out
that the correct procedure at DAL would have been that the escorting officers be asked to reseal the bag on
the spot and then accept the exhibit.
However, in the process of the investigation, the investigator identified some other issues relating to the failure
of an officer to reseal a forensic security bag correctly, and the failure of two officers to record the movement of
an exhibit.
In recognition that the incident may have revealed a wider failure on the part of police to recognise correctly
sealed biological exhibits, the investigator supported a proposal that a presentation on the subject be given at
the next command training day to ensure exhibit integrity, and to prevent contamination.
280
NSW Ombudsman
DNA sampling and other forensic procedures conducted on suspects and volunteers under the Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000