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

In order to conduct a thorough and balanced review, we sought the views of people who have been directly affected
by the legislation. This included people in the community who have undergone forensic procedures; police officers
who carry out forensic procedures; the Forensic Procedures Implementation Team (FPIT), which coordinates DNA
sampling by police officers at a management level; the Division of Analytical Laboratories (DAL), which analyses DNA
samples and manages the DNA database. We sought information from a range of sources on the central research
question of whether police officers are exercising their functions under the Act in a proper, fair and effective manner.
By adopting this method, we also aimed to minimise reliance on any one source of information or research method.
For the first part of this review, of the DNA sampling of serious indictable offenders, we interviewed nearly 200 inmates
who had provided a DNA sample under the Act. Through these interviews we were able to obtain information directly
from inmates about their experiences of DNA sampling. 21 For this part of our review, which deals with suspects and
volunteers, it has been difficult to obtain information directly from people who have undergone forensic procedures.
We considered advertising for submissions from people who had undergone forensic procedures but decided against
it due to the significant cost involved and the likelihood of receiving a very limited response. We also sought to access
the views of these people through legal centres, but without success. We were, however, able to review the responses
of people undergoing forensic procedures through watching videos of the procedures, and through reviewing the
consent forms filled in by police officers, which provide for the person’s response, if any, to be recorded in writing.
Some of our interviews with police officers also gave us an insight into the experience of people undergoing forensic
procedures, for example where police raised concerns about the complexity of the information provided to suspects
and volunteers.
In some of our activities, time and resources limited us to auditing small samples. The size of the samples examined
means it was not always possible to draw conclusions about the way forensic procedures have been conducted
throughout New South Wales through the whole of the review period. However, these audits were extremely useful in
providing a context for the findings from our other research activities, and enabled us to identify areas of concern.
From time to time during our review, our research pointed to areas of police practice or policy which were of concern.
In these situations, we brought the issue to the attention of NSW Police and provided an opportunity for police to
respond to our concerns. This approach was consistent with the Ombudsman’s role in assisting agencies to remedy
deficiencies and improve service delivery. This report describes the actions taken by NSW Police and other relevant
agencies in response to concerns we have raised during the course of our review.
Details of our main research strategies are set out below.
1.5.1. Examining police computer records
We examined information from the NSW Police Computerised Operational Policing System (COPS). COPS provides a
structure for police officers to record details of forensic procedures, including the name of the person undergoing the
procedure, as well as the date, location and type of procedure.
COPS also contains a ‘narrative’ field, which allows officers to describe an event in their own words, and to record
other important features of the incident. We examined information in the ‘narrative’ field for events which resulted in
police conducting forensic procedures, to get an idea of the types of circumstances in which police are conducting
forensic procedures. Many of the case studies in this report are based on information from COPS narratives.
We discussed the limitations of the COPS system in a previous report, Policing Public Safety. 22 We found similar
problems during the current review, the main problems being incorrect or incomplete entries of information about
forensic procedures on the COPS database.
In our report on the DNA sampling of serious indictable offenders, we noted that data entry was carried out by small
teams of police officers who were responsible for carrying out the mass sampling of inmates, and for this reason there
were fewer errors on COPS. 23 By contrast, forensic procedures conducted on suspects and volunteers are carried out
by police officers with different levels of skills and experience in police stations across the whole of New South Wales.
As expected, inaccurate information on COPS was a more significant problem for this part of our review.
1.5.2. Audit of police local area commands
We audited eight police local area commands, which is ten per cent of the total number of commands in New South
Wales. In determining which commands to audit, we decided to select at least one command from each of the five
regions of NSW Police; 24 four metropolitan and four regional commands; and some commands which conducted a
large number of forensic procedures and some which conducted a small number of forensic procedures, compared
to the rest of the state.
NSW Ombudsman
DNA sampling and other forensic procedures conducted on suspects and volunteers under the Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000 5