Join Us!

Latest news from th...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Latest news from the UK Regulator  

  RSS
pbeardmore
(@pbeardmore)
Active Member

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/19/uk-police-forces-failing-to-meet-forensic-standards-safe-regulator-miscarriages-justice-outsourcing

"In her annual report, Gillian Tully highlighted her growing concerns about the failure of some forensic firms used by the police to meet basic quality standards. It means innocent people could be wrongly convicted and offenders escaping justice."

Quote
Posted : 19/01/2018 12:15 am
minime2k9
(@minime2k9)
Active Member

"There is a criminal investigation into claims that data at the Randox laboratory in Manchester may have been manipulated, causing the biggest recall of samples in British criminal justice history."

Fails to mention that this company complied with the FSR codes under 17025 for many years!

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 8:25 am
Brevs11
(@brevs11)
New Member

Fails to mention that this company complied with the FSR codes under 17025 for many years!

The article doesn't but the FSR's Annual Report does;

"Although RTS held accreditation to the appropriate quality standard, the malpractice was not discovered by the usual quality checks".

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 9:51 am
minime2k9
(@minime2k9)
Active Member

True, but the way the article reads it almost sounds like it wouldn't have happened if the FSR has statutory powers and this lab was forced to comply with the regulations

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 11:05 am
jaclaz
(@jaclaz)
Community Legend

True, but the way the article reads it almost sounds like it wouldn't have happened if the FSR has statutory powers and this lab was forced to comply with the regulations

IMHO, yes and no.

ISO 17025 is a (senselessly applied to forensic labs) norm, but the issues lamented should have been found/evidenced/noticed by much less stringent norms not only ISO 9001, but also the un-named, un-explicited and very un-common good ol' ones called "integrity", "knowledge", "professionalism" and "common sense".

The recent rape cases dropped because evidence of them being consensual intercourses came out (while already in the hands of the investigators or however easily obtainable by them) show - IMHO and well before the use of industry norms - a preoccupying lack of competence in the investigations.

jaclaz

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 1:45 pm
minime2k9
(@minime2k9)
Active Member

jaclaz,

I was referring specifically to the Randox situation as opposed to the rape cases.
I'm not sure whether the 'labs' dealing with the mobile devices were under ISO 17025, but I'm sure Randox was.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 2:42 pm
pbeardmore
(@pbeardmore)
Active Member

"The recent rape cases dropped because evidence of them being consensual intercourses came out (while already in the hands of the investigators or however easily obtainable by them) show - IMHO and well before the use of industry norms - a preoccupying lack of competence in the investigations."!

Do we know exactly what happend with these cases? Were there errors within the forensic process or within the wider investigation? We need to ensure that mistakes made possibly elsewhere do not reflect on the topic of forensics.

The media (wrongly IMHO) seen quite happy to put the whole topic into one melting pot.

"The regulator said she would be examining whether failures to follow correct procedures in digital forensic science could have played a role in a number of high-profile rape cases that collapsed before going to trial. “I have formally requested more information on those recent cases,” she said."

A little spin here perhaps as these cases are being referenced before any evidence at all has been received or reviewed by the regulator. "COULD" being the operative word.

Why rush to judgement and suggest a possible link before any evidence has been reviewed? Could it be because it fits a certain agenda that the media are happy to repeat and, therefore, re-enforce?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 2:51 pm
jaclaz
(@jaclaz)
Community Legend

Do we know exactly what happend with these cases? Were there errors within the forensic process or within the wider investigation? We need to ensure that mistakes made possibly elsewhere do not reflect on the topic of forensics.

Of course we don't know what happened, we have only what has been reported by the media based (hopefully) on statements by the Police, the Prosecution or the defense.

In one case the procedure of collecting digital evidence was (as said reportedly and IMHO ) well beyond "common sense" and "professionalism"
http//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5223567/Man-rape-conviction-quashed-police-blunder.html

The Mail on Sunday has seen a witness statement from the officer leading the investigation, saying the messages were obtained by asking the accuser to log in to Facebook and print them off. ‘I made sure that no messages were missed,’ he said. At no point did the officer cross-reference the accuser’s version of the conversation with Mr Kay’s archived messages.

In the other it may have been an accident (as well anyway IMHO beyond "common sense" and "diligence"),

https://www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=16232/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/rape-case-collapses-disclosure-eritrean-man-makele-photos-cuddling-snuggling-woman-metropolitan-a8160816.html

Mr Makele consistently denied the charge and said sex with the woman was consensual, but an initial request to see the photographs was turned down.

Paris Theodorou, Mr Makele’s solicitor, said prosecutors told his team that apart from selected text messages nothing else on the defendant’s phone could be disclosed.

@minime2k9
Oops, sorry, I was referring to the dropped rape cases, that seemingly are not connected to not conforming to a given procedure, but more to "no (proper) procedure whatsoever".

jaclaz

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 4:31 pm
minime2k9
(@minime2k9)
Active Member

@minime2k9
Oops, sorry, I was referring to the dropped rape cases, that seemingly are not connected to not conforming to a given procedure, but more to "no (proper) procedure whatsoever".

jaclaz

No worries, it just seems that she is using Randox as an example of why she should have statutory powers to force labs to hold ISO 17025 when it clearly didn't help in this scenario.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 4:52 pm
DCS1094
(@dcs1094)
Active Member

No worries, it just seems that she is using Randox as an example of why she should have statutory powers to force labs to hold ISO 17025 when it clearly didn't help in this scenario.

Agreed. The Guardian and FSR have taken issues from different forensic fields and mixed them into one big cluster… roll

ReplyQuote
Posted : 19/01/2018 5:13 pm
Share: