Marc Renton - another DNA mistake? Qld government must reopen the case

On 21 August 1996 Cox examined a blue balaclava located inside a stolen white Ford Laser allegedly used in the Biggera Waters bank robbery and found dumped in a back street. Two areas of fabric in the balaclava were sampled in an attempt to isolate DNA that could originate from mouth cells via saliva. No DNA was isolated.

The trial of Renton and Festa commenced on 2 April 1997 but it was marred with controversy from the outset when Festa jumped bail and fled interstate. Festa remained a fugitive until her 1998 recapture in Sydney but the trial continued with Renton as the sole accused.

Kenneth Cox claimed in sworn testimony he had completed a second examination of the balaclava on 17 April 1997 and isolated a stain that yielded some DNA. Although Cox's second examination did not correspond with his 21 August 1996 examination of the blue balaclava it was claimed that the DNA sample belonged to Renton, Festa and a third unidentified person. The Crown's circumstantial case was bolstered by the late inclusion of the expert DNA evidence and resulted in Renton's conviction for the Biggera Waters bank robbery.

Cox claimed he did not conduct his second examination of the balaclava until the second week of Renton's trial and the late inclusion of the evidence restricted Renton's defence counsel from having independent testing done. The DNA evidence was argued as being conclusive and irrefutable proof that Renton had committed the Biggera Waters bank robbery and Judge Hangar allowed it to go before the jury untested.

A request for a review of the DNA evidence presented at the Renton trial was made to Professor Barry Boettcher, Professor Emeritus of Biological Science at the University of Newcastle and a Member of the Order of Australia for his work in the field of reproductive immunology.

Professor Boettcher reviewed evidence given at the Renton trial, including trial transcripts, DNA profile collation sheets, gene scan analysis printouts and two statutory declarations sworn by Cox on 14 October 1996 and 17 April 1997. Professor Boettcher disagreed with Cox's evidence, arguing that the DNA was more likely to have come from a third party than from Marc Renton.

Unlike the Thomas and Button cases Marc Renton was convicted and imprisoned on suspect DNA evidence for a bank robbery he claims he didn't commit. Professor Boettcher's independent scientific evidence supports that claim. An independent investigation by the ABC's Catalyst program in June 2002 also raised serious doubts about the use of DNA evidence in the Renton trial.

Conclusion

Generally, the courts have accepted the reliability of DNA testing and admitted DNA tests into evidence without question. However, DNA profiling is controversial in a number of areas; the accuracy of the results, the cost of testing and the possible misuse of technique. The possibility of human error during the interpretation of tests, as indicated by the Arnott's extortion case, could also lead to false results.

Until the Queensland government re-opens the Renton case and investigates the suspect DNA evidence that has possibly resulted with one of Australia's gravest miscarriages of justice, Marc Andre Renton will remain inside the maximum-security block at Townsville prison for a crime he might not have committed.