DNA and The Justice Game

Barry Boettcher, professor emeritus of biological science at the University of Newcastle was the foremost DNA expert in Australia. He practiced and taught the principles of the scientific method involving DNA structure and its use in forensic work. He also taught courses on forensic biology including the use of variable DNA sequences that resulted in collaboration with overseas scientists to publish studies of variable DNA sequences suitable for use in forensic work.

Renton wrote to Boettcher and asked for his help.

Eighteen months after Renton was convicted Professor Boettcher reviewed the evidence presented at Renton’s trial: trial transcripts, DNA profile collation sheets, gene scan analysis print-outs and two statutory declarations sworn by Ken Cox on October 14, 1996 and April 17, 1997. He concluded that the DNA evidence used to convict Renton was scientifically incorrect and that the methodology used by the Crown’s DNA expert was wrong.

In a statutory declaration Professor Boettcher explained his conclusions: “The DNA in the sample came from more than one person since normal persons have only one or two FES Alleles. The simplest explanation is that the DNA in the sample came from two people possessing the pairs of Alleles: 10/11 and 12/13 or 10/12 and 11/13 or 10/13 and 11/12 (Renton possesses the FES type 12/12).

Although Professor Boettcher’s interpretation of the DNA cleared Renton of bank robbery, the Queensland government was not convinced it was sufficient to release him from prison or institute an inquiry into his conviction. The options for Renton had run out. He had already lost an appeal to the Supreme Court based on points of law, and Queensland only allowed one appeal against conviction.

When the ABC-TV Catalyst programme began to examine the interpretation of DNA evidence used in Australian criminal trials it discovered further discrepancies in the DNA evidence used to convict Renton. Catalyst researcher, Robyn Smith, made a formal request to interview Renton in the maximum-security block of Townsville prison after he had been transferred there in 2000.

“Renton was convicted primarily on the DNA evidence,” Smith recalled. “Renowned forensic scientist Professor Barry Boettcher later investigated that evidence and felt that the interpretation by the Queensland forensic scientist was flawed, and there was a good chance that Renton had been wrongfully convicted. We were featuring Renton’s case in our June 27, 2002 programme. We wanted to do an interview with him but we were denied access.”

QDCS refused permission on the grounds that Renton was a dangerous prisoner - a convicted bank robber who had participated in a prison riot.

The Catalyst team was undeterred, and went ahead with the investigation. When the programme, “A Shadow of Doubt”, was broadcast in June 2002, presenter Karina Kelly interviewed both Boettcher and Cox. It revealed a chilling insight into how the interpretation of scientific evidence can be tilted to favour the prosecution.

Boettcher explained that there were four peaks of DNA in the forensic analysis that was presented during the Renton trial. Those peaks were best interpreted as DNA coming from two people and excluded Renton because his DNA was not present. The evidence presented in court assumed the four peaks came from three people because that interpretation favoured the prosecution case against Renton.

Cox was asked why he had concluded there were three people present in the DNA profile but he denied that he came to that conclusion. Kelly dropped a bombshell. She confronted Cox with the transcript of his evidence in the Renton trial.

The Catalyst team uncovered another disturbing factor - the DNA evidence presented at Renton’s trial could implicate 94 per cent of the white Australian population.