Archive for March, 2011

 

Is our Portfolio Committee waiting to board their 5 Star Junket Ship?

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

It was reported in the Sunday Times this weekend (27 March 2011), that a delegation of 49 government officials, including eight ministers and deputy ministers, flew business class to New York on a two-week ‘junket’, yet failed to attend many of the sessions of the United Nations gender summit where they were supposed to represent South Africa.

The Sunday Times reported that:
* The delegates stayed at five-star hotels including the exclusive Ritz Carlton on Central Park, where prices start at R5500 a night;
* Some of the Ministers failed to attend any of the sessions;
* A return business class ticket on SAA costs R81104 per person); and
* The South African mission at the UN complained to the Department of International Relations about the size of the delegation.

It was further reported by a government official who was part of the trip, that most members of the South African delegation who did not make it into the conference venue spent their time shopping and clubbing in New York.

So why does this concern me?
Because the Portfolio Committee for Police who have been delaying reviewing our DNA Bill for the last year are preparing to board their own junket to both Canada and the UK on their mission which they have called a “Study Tour”. It remains to be seen what in fact they will be studying, because as we all know so well, the best way to study international trends and developments on any subject these days, is from the comfort of your computer chair. And with the plethora of information available on the internet today, you can access every single country’s policy on DNA databasing, their legislation as well as any other information relevant to the development, expansion and use of their database for criminal intelligence. Trust me, I have done just that and have all the documents to prove it!

If it is forensic DNA laboratories they need to see – this too can be seen, ‘live’ in Pretoria, where international delegates in fact visit South Africa to see the automated robotic system we have in our state of the art DNA Forensic Lab.

And as for the size of the delegation embarking on the planned study tour, I believe the majority of the Portfolio Committee (15 members), a Parliamentary Researcher, two legal advisors, 3 members of the Forensic Services, and possibly a further 9 delegates who have expressed an interest on joining the junket, will be making the trip.

Excuse me if I sound bitter – but having heard a series of international experts talk on the issue of DNA Databases and its phenomenal use in crime fighting last week (all of which seminars were held here in South Africa and I noted, none of which even one member of the Portfolio bothered to attend, albeit they were free and local!), I cannot understand why the reviewing of this important piece of legislation pivots on the need for possibly 30 government officials to embark on a 10 day international trip to look at two forensic labs, which are doing precisely the same thing we are dong here in South Africa? Each day they delay getting on with the job of actually reviewing the DNA Bill, more victims are being murdered and raped because their perpetrators haven’t been at the very least identified or that evidence documented on a database which could lead investigators to apprehend the real suspect.

Why do we accept this? How can we allow 15 people and their delegation of henchmen to stand between justice and the fate of literally thousands of victims and future victims?
Those government officials are afterall accountable to us, may we remind them – and as such, I think that they owe us an official and detailed explanation as to why they deem it necessary to embark on the study tour, who they will be taking with them and why, when they actually intend making this trip, what they expect to see and learn in those two countries and at what cost to us, the tax payers – the cost to the victims is clear – it will in the meantime  be counted in lives lost and damaged.

Madame Chairman of the Portfolio Committee for Police: are you able to answer these few very simple questions?

We await to hear from you.

Vanessa

Exciting DNA Forensic Events happening this week (22-25 Mar 2011)

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

There are a number of Forensic DNA Conferences and Seminars being held throughout South Africa this week (22-25 Mar 2011) which I will be attending, ranging from Victim Empowerment through the use of DNA to establishing a DNA Innocence Project in SA to unleashing the power of a criminal intelligence DNA database in SA. All of these seminars and events will be of value and interest to anyone involved in DNA forensics in SA .

I have posted details of all these on the events page – click here for more information.

Hope to see you there!

with thanks

Vanessa


Jack Mogale: Serial rapist and murderer, how did DNA evidence assist in getting him convicted?

Friday, March 18th, 2011

Jack Mogale: Serial rapist and murderer, how did DNA evidence assist in getting him convicted?

In a case where there were so many victims, especially rape victims, you would expect more DNA evidence. However, DNA evidence was only used to link Mogale to four of the victims, two of which were murdered.

The one victim, a prostitute who was raped and murdered by Mogale, had a condom discovered nearby the body from which DNA evidence was collected which matched Mogale. Two of the other victims had vaginal and cervical swabs for DNA evidence taken matching Mogale as well. A fourth victim who was bludgeoned, raped and then left unconscious in the open veld for 24 hours had a vaginal swap at the hospital which produced DNA evidence matching Mogale.

He was found guilty on 52 of the 61 charges brought against him, these included 16 murders, 9 kidnappings, 2 thefts and 2 robberies with aggravating circumstances.

When Mogale was being led down to the court cells, he is quoted as saying, “In life you face challenges and this is just one of them. I did not commit the crimes they say I committed. Even now, I still maintain my innocence”, but DNA evidence doesn’t lie.

For more of the full story please follow these links.

http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2011/03/17/serial-rapist-to-be-sentenced

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/West-End-killer-awaits-sentencing-20110316

New Rape Kits will help crack Rape Cases

Monday, March 14th, 2011

The forensic DNA laboratory of the University of the Western Cape (UWC) has been researching and developing a forensic kit to identify male perpetrators in rape cases. We heard last week that this kit has now been fully developed and is available to Crime Labs to help crack rape cases, specially in those cases where a victim has been raped by more than one perpetrator. 

The UWC research team looked at local regions with high gene variability between individuals, and the kit they developed was thoroughly tested against South Africa’s different population groups. It had been proved that the kit would help increase the conviction rate in rape cases. The police currently use kits that analyse both female and male DNA but this can be confusing and cluttered. This kit will supplement those in use and will support circumstantial evidence.

The kit, developed under the leadership of Professor Sean Davidson together with Dr Eugenia dâ Amato, is similar to those made in America and Europe, but is more accurate with South Africa’s population groups, UWC’s An Wentzel said.

How does it work?

The test isolates information of the Y-chromosome — which is present only in males — and is able to narrow down suspects to the range of father, son or brother.

Why is it such a ‘breakthrough’?

Because father passes his Y-chromosome to his son, meaning that they have identical Y-chromosomes and therefore they would both be suspects based on Y-DNA evidence. Davidson said forensic pathologists could now pick up male DNA more easily in a rape case, and this made it more useful in identifying the rapist, with investigators able to narrow down the range of possible aggressors. “The technology is also good at excluding innocent men,” he said.

Davidson said the test takes “a matter of days”. However, it would not eliminate the time taken in the administration of DNA processing.
The findings and results have been welcomed by the international forensics community and has been hailed by UWC  as a giant step forward for justice and rape victims in South Africa.

14 March 2011

‘Familial Searching’ – an explanation

Tuesday, March 1st, 2011

“While the sins of the father should not be visited on the son, the sins of the son should not go unpunished because the sins of the father are ignored….”

We posted a poll on the website last week asking whether Familial DNA searching should be allowed in SA? [Familial Searching .i.e. a process by which an unidentified DNA profile is run through the state's DNA data-bank looking not for an exact match but for a close match that would identify a family member of an unidentified perpetrator and could point in the direction of potential suspects.]

Notwithstanding the fact that only 2 people have voted so far, it has caused quite a lot of debate on Facebook! As such, I though that I should use this opportunity to open the debate further, as Familial Searching for criminal intelligence as well as the identification of unidentified bodies is being used in more and more countries throughout the world. It is however not without controversy, and whilst in some cases has been used to identify a previously unknown suspect of a violent crime, it has sparked some debate. This is not to say that the information presented here represents the views of The DNA Project – I am simply going to try and present the facts as objectively as possible and hopefully receive some constructive comment on the subject from some of you who read this blog.

In those countries where Familial Searching is allowed, it is important to remember that searches are only conducted on the National DNA Databanks which hold the profiles of previously convicted offenders, crime scene profiles and arrestees who have not yet been convicted.  Furthermore, a ‘hit’ when conducting a familial search,  does not mean that that person is the suspect – it is simply an investigative lead which may lead the police to the actual suspect who committed the crime. A DNA  Database for Criminal Intelligence is NOT a population database – in other words it is a database containing profiles of crime scene samples and convicted offenders & arrestees and not the general population. A familial search on a National DNA Database will therefore extend the size and reach of the DNA database to effectively include the parents, children and siblings of the offenders and arrestees whose DNA profiles are already stored in databases.

“Familial searching” is being used in some countries for efficient identification of possible crime suspects when traditional investigative efforts fail. Crime laboratories benefit from searching not just for perfect matches, but also for close ones, when trying to connect DNA from unsolved crimes to the DNA of known offenders whose DNA profiles are held in a national database. Because relatives share common DNA profiles, close matches can implicate family members as possible crime suspects.

As experience with familial searching increases, more and more countries will probably embrace the technique. And as they do, so does the need to create policies that will ensure both efficiency and accuracy in case selection, statistical thresholds and follow-up testing and investigation.

For those of you who would like to read more on the subject, the following report compiled by Sophie Rushton (July 2010) for the Australian & New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency looks at both the positive and negative aspect of Familial Searching and Predictive DNA Testing for Forensic Purposes: Report Familial Searching and Predictive DNA Testing 2010.

Case Solved – The Bloody Brick: Craig Harman

This was the first familial search in Great Britain in which the suspect was apprehended and convicted of the crime. In the early morning hours on March 21, 2003, Mr. Michael Little, a 53-year-old truck driver, was driving his truck on a highway in Surrey, when he drove beneath an overpass. A brick was thrown from the overpass and crashed through his windshield. It hit Mr. Little in his chest and caused fatal damage to the heart. Before Mr. Little died, he was able to bring his truck to a stop on the side of the road.

Michael Little

Law enforcement analyzed the blood on the brick and found two DNA profiles, one of Mr. Little and one of another unknown individual. That evening, before the brick was thrown from the overpass, a car had been burglarized in the same town. The burglar could not get the car started and he left his blood at the scene.

The police were able to extract a full DNA profile and it matched the DNA profile on the brick which killed Mr. Little. The profile was run through the DNA Database, but no match was found.

However, the DNA analysis established that the offender was caucasian. A police profiler looked at the details of the crime, and suggested that he was under the age of 35. Also, Surrey police believed the killer lived locally and so authorities performed a DNA dragnet screen involving 350 people from the surrounding area who volunteered to give samples. But still no match was found.

Law enforcement then decided to perform a familial search of white males under the age of 35 living in Surrey or Hampshire. Twenty five people with similar DNA were located including a relative of the suspect whose DNA matched 16 of 20 DNA markers. They interviewed the relative and discovered that he had a 19-year-old brother, Craig Harman, who lived where the crime had occurred. Harman gave his DNA voluntarily and confessed. In April, 2004, Craig Harman pleaded guilty to manslaughter and was sentenced to 6 years.

Case where Familial Searching was used in the USA: It was an unfinished slice of pizza that led to the identification of Lonnie David Franklin Jr. as the prime suspect in the Grim Sleeper murder investigation. But the pizza was just the final clue leading to his arrest. The key break in the investigation, intermittently conducted over 25 years, came when investigators found a close — but not perfect — match between the DNA recovered at multiple crime scenes and a man being held in a California prison. Such a near-match strongly indicated that the person wanted by police was a close relative of the man in prison, and police soon focused on the man’s father, Lonnie Franklin. They put him under surveillance, obtained his discarded pizza and found that his DNA matched that recovered at a Grim Sleeper crime scene.

Click here for more stories on cases solved by Familial Searching.

Vanessa