Iris and retina scans could be other technologies of
interest to WA forensic authorities.

Image courtesy of iStockphoto

DNA alone will not turn the tide against crime, but its inclusion in a wave of new technologies such as biometrics and forensic profiling promises to pin criminals to crimes, both past and present.

University of Toronto associate professor of anthropology Martin Evison described the growth of forensic science over recent decades as amazing and "overwhelmingly positive". Just check out the number of CSI fans around the world.

"Courts have moved away from a relying on eyewitness and confession evidence, to physical evidence, which is generally seen as more reliable," Dr Evison told ScienceNetwork WA on the eve of his talk in Perth on Monday, May 12.

"It is physical evidence, including DNA profiling, that has been critical in a number of exoneration cases, most notably in the United States. Many cold cases have been solved when stored exhibits have been reviewed and tested."

In Western Australia, the State Government has moved to boost police powers to collect and store DNA samples as part of a review into the effectiveness of DNA legislation introduced in 2002.

A five-member reference group chaired by former Supreme Court judge Robert Anderson QC has been set up to review those powers under the Criminal Investigation (Identifying People) Act of 2002.

"The review of the legislation will enable advancements in science and technology to be considered with issues of sample collection and profile storage and management," Police Minister John Kobelke said. "Advancements in science and flexibilities that may be needed in the legislation for the future would also be considered in the review."

His office said these included investigating advanced technologies used by forensic and law enforcement agencies around the world.

Nearly 100,000 DNA samples have been collected in WA since the Act was introduced, with 73,385 people profiled on the WA DNA Database. Since 2002, 8,100 people have been linked to a crime scene.

The existing legislation does not cover just DNA samples, but finger, foot and ear prints, hair and blood samples and photographs, including CCTV cameras installed in public places.

"My experience of CCTV is that images can play an important role supported by other evidence in solving some very nasty crimes," Dr Evison, who heads the forensic science program at the University of Toronto, said.

"By this I mean serious assault, sexual assault and murder."

Facial recognition technology identifies a person of interest from a digital or video image. In a closed-circuit television system, police can scan crowds for persons of interest.

Dr Evison said authorities also had access to a number of technologies that might apply to WA.

"There are other options such as irises, and more ethereal biometrics such as retinas, ears, hands and pattern of blood vessels," he said, adding some may be likely to be impractical or of limited value.

Dr Evison also highlighted problems: "I predict delays, miscarriages of justice and other problems will continue to affect WA as it does in all comparable jurisdictions in North America, Europe and Australasia.

"The reason is that nowhere is there a coherent policy for promoting and nurturing academic and applied research, teaching and training, and professional practice across the police, public and private sector forensic science, forensic medicine, and the universities and research councils.

"This is a problem for politicians and governments: they fight crises, they do not build policy."

In many cases, DNA profiling is used to exclude people from criminal investigations.

Presently, police can take samples only from people charged with or suspected of committing a serious offence.

Dr Evison, who has given evidence at criminal cases involving DNA evidence, said: "No-one is perfect and people will always make mistakes.

"I think the public should normally expect that evidence in addition to a DNA profile will be provided to support a criminal prosecution.

"The more powerful the evidence, the more thorough the checks and balances need to be."