Hi-tech DNA machines cause concern

DNA testing is generally done in a lab by trained technicians. UK police are now udnergoing two-week training courses to analyse DNA themselves, sparking contamination concerns. File photo: Supplied

DNA testing is generally done in a lab by trained technicians. UK police are now udnergoing two-week training courses to analyse DNA themselves, sparking contamination concerns. File photo: Supplied

Published Apr 26, 2015

Share

London – Police forces across the UK are testing technology that allows officers to analyse DNA samples in custody suites, amid fears that civil liberties could be infringed and evidence compromised.

RapidHIT machines remove the need for forensic science expertise, with police officers operating the machinery after a two-week training course. Developed in the US by IntegenX, the technology is being marketed in the UK by Key Forensic Services Ltd.

Patrick Carroll, senior director of international sales at IntegenX, told The Independent he expected to see the technology used in all major UK custody suites in the near future. Although data is currently double-checked by a forensics expert, he said he believed officers could soon input information directly into the national database.

“What we want is the data from this to go directly into the national database, so that you skip that step of having to have a forensic lab,” he said.

However, civil liberties groups and lawyers yesterday raised a number of concerns.

Emma Carr, director of Big Brother Watch, called for robust and proper public consultation before its use was further implemented. “Laws were changed in the last parliament to attempt to restore some common sense to the way DNA of suspects is gathered,” she said.

“Yet this message has not been heeded by police forces who, by using this sort of technology, continue to ensure that the UK’s DNA database remains one of the largest in the world. There has been little to no information given about the fact that these sorts of tests are being carried out and what checks are in place.”

In a meeting in September last year, the National DNA Database Strategy Board said the technology was being accredited, though it added there were concerns around the “business model that was driving its development”.

IntegenX has previously boasted that DNA samples retrieved from cigarette butts and cups, as well as clothing items, can be tested.

Raj Chada, a partner at Hodge, Jones & Allen solicitors, cast doubt over the reliability of evidence coming from DNA testing undertaken in custody suites – pointing to the issues of interpretation and contamination. He said: “At the minute it’s a sterile environment when it gets sent to a forensic scientist in the lab. Doing it in a custody suite would increase the potential for contamination.

Mr Chada added: “This is not a pregnancy test where you can say yes or no. You still have to interpret the analysis to show whether or not it’s a hit, and one would have concerns as to whether or not the police or this machine have the capability of doing that.”

It is believed that a handful of other UK forces are testing RapidHIT machines, with Nottinghamshire Police and Lancashire Constabulary both receiving finance for the technology from the Police Innovation Fund in 2012. Scotland Yard confirmed that it had tested the new technology. “The trial was run alongside existing forensic processes so no investigation was reliant on results from the trial technology,” a spokesman said.

Paul Hackett, Key Forensic Services’ managing director, said he had full confidence in the technology. “Like every area of DNA analysis there are risks throughout the whole end-to-end process and nobody claims that the current means of DNA testing in the UK is risk-free or contamination-free,” he said. “This technique is open to the same risk-assessment and anti-contamination procedures.”

Understanding the UK’s National DNA Database

The National DNA Database was set up in 1995 and from 2001, all samples were kept indefinitely. After complaints over this indiscriminate retention, the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 was enacted. It stated samples for those released without charge, or with only a minor charge, should be deleted automatically. Samples are still taken as standard from anybody who is arrested. These samples are held on the DNA database until proceedings conclude against that individual. A civil liberties lawyer said yesterday that that was “as long as a piece of string”. With around 5 million DNA profiles stored on the database it is the largest per capita database in the world, second in size only to the US. This includes the DNA of hundreds of thousands of innocent people taken before the change in law, including thousands of innocent children.

The Independent

Related Topics: