Will it take a miscarriage of justice to show the government that the cheapest forensic scientist is not always the best one?

Post by: Tony Freitas 07/02/2018 0 comments 464 views

It has been reported (Law Gazette 19 January 2018) that the Forensic Science Regulator, Dr Gillian Tully, has highlighted the enormous damage that continuous cuts to police budgets and legal aid are inflicting on the criminal justice system.

Defence solicitors are often criticised for repeatedly instructing poor quality ‘experts’. Dr Tully says she wants to introduce a quality standard for case reviews – but acknowledges that legal aid cuts in this area make it difficult.

Dr Tully says in her report:

‘It is inevitable that the adoption of quality standards has an associated cost, and in a system where the prime determinant of contract award is price, compliant organisations would be at a disadvantage. Furthermore, the adoption of quality standards in general is proportionately more costly for small organisations than large ones, and many case reviewers work in small organisations or as sole traders.’

She further says experts have sometimes been required to give evidence based on interim forensic reports because some police forces have refused to pay for scientists to produce admissible statements of evidence in court.

Commenting on her report, Dr Tully said today:

‘A year ago I warned that funding was too tight, and now even more money has been taken out of the system. We cannot continue on this path. I urge the government to put the role of the regulator on statutory footing now, to enable me to ensure that all organisations providing forensic science evidence in the criminal justice system meet the high standards required.’

The Forensic Science Regulator role was created in 2007 under Royal prerogative without any statutory basis or direct powers to enforce standards. In 2011, the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology recommended the role should have statutory powers. The government agreed to review the idea. Home Office officials have been working on a draft bill, Tully says.

‘However, it is disappointing that given the length of time this issue has been under consideration, the level of support for statutory powers and the pressing need for these powers to be introduced, the bill is not part of the government’s legislative programme,’

Until this is brought into practice there will undoubtedly, and sadly, continue to be massive deficits in this area. What sort of miscarriage of justice will have to occur before the Government give this proper consideration?

How can we help?

If you have any enquiries, then please contact our specialised Criminal Defence teams at our offices. We have teams in Boston, Grantham, Lincoln, Newark, Sleaford and Spalding in which we will take time to listen to your enquiry in a friendly and empathetic nature. At Ringrose Law our motto is ‘where individuals count’. This is our core belief and we aim to make our clients feel valued from being first greeted by reception to speaking to one of our many fully qualified, experienced Solicitors. We know at Ringrose Law that satisfaction is linked to service,  so we will always provide the best service we can to you as we know that is exactly what you expect when you either make a phone call to us or walk through the door of one of our many branches.

 

 

LEAVE A COMMENT

Make sure you enter the(*) required information where indicated. HTML code is not allowed