Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140-159)
Dr David Werrett, Mr Trevor Howitt, Mr Mike Loveland,
Mr Rod Anthony, Finance Director and Dr Bob Bramley, examined.
Q140 Mr Steinberg: Not many identical
twins go around raping and murdering, do they?
Dr Werrett: We have had instances
of the so-called "brother's defence", where someone
has said "It wasn't me, it was my brother and by the way
I have five or six brothers and they won't give you a sample,
so how are you going to address that one?". So we have had
to do a statistical analysis.
Q141 Mr Steinberg: That is out of
the ordinary. The point I am trying to make is why on earth a
policeman has to understand what the Latin or the name for it
is.
Dr Werrett: I am sorry if I have
misled you. I was not saying that we wanted them to understand
it, but that they always ask the question. So you go into the
position "What's DNA?" "DNA is the building blocks
of life and it is what makes up our chromosomes and so on."
"What does it stand for?" "It stands for deoxyribonucleic
acid." "Don't give me all that technical stuff".
That is the way the situation can develop sometimes.
Q142 Mr Steinberg: My final question,
because I had a pattern of questioning, is: is it because the
police are unable to understand what it is all about that they
actually waste your time by sending too much information which
is not relevant?
Dr Werrett: Sometimes that may
be the case and sometimes, due to the sorts of programmes you
alluded to, the police get a rather over-ambitious view of what
we can and cannot do. We have communicated with forces, particularly
when it comes to recovering material from scenes of crimes. For
example, we cannot analyse a bag of air for DNA and we cannot
analyse blood on snow; by the time it gets to the laboratory you
can imagine what it looks like. So education is constantly required
on the capabilities and what can be done. On the other hand, you
have to balance that against the fact that we now excitingly can
recover a single sperm from microscope slides and by putting a
few sperm together we can get a DNA profile. So there is a balance
to be struck and that balance to be struck depends to some extent
not only on the importance of the case, but the requirement of
the investigating officer. For example, we have done some work
with distraction burglaries, which are very upsetting and generally
to older people. These are the sorts of burglaries where an individual
will knock on a door and his accomplice will go round the back
and break in while the older person generally is engaged in conversation.
These people are very professional and we found that it was very
difficult to get any trace evidence in those cases and our success
rate was not high. When we did get a success, the police force
we were working with was very excited about it and said that in
terms of operational costs it was very cost effective because
what they had then was a very good link with a group of professionals
whom they had been observing and trying to catch for a long time.
It is fitting it into the scenario of whether it is value for
money or not.
Chairman: Thank you for giving us an
insight into your very interesting line of work.
Q143 Mr Rendel: May I start off by
saying that I think DNA analysis in particular and forensic science
in general has made a tremendous difference to policing? However,
it does seem to me that what some of my constituents get a bit
uptight about is the fact that they see the good work they do
in cases like murder, rape, violent crime and so on, but if they
have a burglary in their home and the mowing machine is taken
out of the back shed or wherever, even if they are pretty positive
that some DNA is likely to be around, for some reason the police
are inclined to say it is not the sort of things they can use
DNA analysis for, it is just too expensive, they do not have the
time to do it and so on. So people are frustrated that the methods
for detecting that sort of crime appear to be available yet not
used because of the cost and the time it takes. What are you doing
to bring down the costs and time so that you can use these vital
methods to solve more of the perhaps lesser grade crimes?
Dr Werrett: I refer you back to
the answers to the previous questions where I talked about the
automation procedures. I do envisage that the automation procedures
that we tried and tested with the samples we have used for suspects
on the DNA database, which has brought the turn around time down
to three and a half days, will do the same thing for the stains
recovered from scenes of crime. Equally I would expect that the
cost of that analysis would fall, as we involve fewer people and
more machines and expert systems to do the interpretation.
Q144 Mr Rendel: When are you going
to reach the stage at which you will be able to analyse the DNA
from any crime scene at which there is a potential for DNA to
be found and analysed?
Dr Werrett: In terms of capacity,
we will reach that stage by next April. The question is still
the awareness of the officer and the willingness of the officer
to collect the sample and bring the sample in.
Q145 Mr Rendel: So by next April
you will have the capacity to analyse the DNA from any crimes
for which there is DNA available.
Dr Werrett: Yes. May I ask Mr
Howitt to tell you a little more about the research?
Q146 Mr Rendel: By all means, but
let me first ask what efforts you are making to make sure that
the police forces all know that. It is very good news and I hope
it is going to be widely publicised, perhaps as a result of this
meeting, that from next April every crime for which DNA is available
can be analysed and the criminal hopefully apprehended.
Dr Werrett: I am saying that based
on the estimates of what they feel they want to bring in. We should
be able to match that demand. In fact we have excess capacity
in the suspect sample area now and the machinery we are building
currently, if everything goes to plan, will also have excess capacity
to do the sample analysis.
Mr Howitt: The other development
is that we are looking at new technology which will in fact complete
the testing in less than an hour when it currently takes the best
part of a day. Our throughput in the next three years or so will
be absolutely transformed in terms of what is possible.
Q147 Mr Rendel: Are you doing all
that research?
Mr Howitt: Yes; we are doing it
in collaboration with other technology organisations in North
America and in this country.
Q148 Mr Rendel: I understand that
something like 90% of the forensic science done in this country
goes through you and about 10% through the smaller private companies.
Is that correct?
Dr Werrett: Yes. There are different
parts of the sector, as it were. For example, in the analysis
of samples of suspects for the database we analyse about 78%.
Q149 Mr Rendel: Overall those sorts
of figures are right.
Dr Werrett: Yes; we do the large
majority.
Q150 Mr Rendel: How much research
do the smaller companies do?
Dr Werrett: I do not know; I could
not say. They will not tell us what they are doing.
Q151 Mr Rendel: How much government
money goes to them for research?
Dr Werrett: We do not know that.
Q152 Mr Rendel: Who decides how research
money is divided between the companies and yourselves?
Dr Werrett: We carry out our research
programme through revenue that we generate mostly. One of our
targets now is to generate research money from external sources.
Mr Howitt: We spend about £5.5
million on R&D.
Q153 Mr Rendel: Is that all internally
generated?
Mr Howitt: We get about £1
million from external sources, for which we compete; about £600,000
from Home Office funding, about £300,000 from agencies in
North America.
Q154 Mr Rendel: Therefore the Home
Office funding is about one third of your total. Is that right?
Mr Howitt: Six hundred thousand
from the Home Office.
Dr Werrett: Six hundred out of
£5 million.
Q155 Mr Rendel: Sorry. What was the
first figure? I thought you said £1 million.
Mr Howitt: We spend £5.5
million; £1 million of that is externally sourced and £600,000
of that £1 million is from the Home Office.
Dr Werrett: So it is £600,000
from £5.5 million.
Q156 Mr Rendel: I do not understand
where the rest of the money comes from then.
Dr Werrett: We generate it from
revenue.
Mr Howitt: Four point five million
comes from our own internal revenue resources.
Q157 Mr Rendel: So does the £600,000,
which is part of your external funding which comes from the Home
Office, have to be bid for?
Mr Howitt: Yes, we bid for it
in competition with other agencies both in the public and private
sector.[6]
Q158 Mr Rendel: That is all done
in open competition.
Mr Howitt: Yes.
Q159 Mr Rendel: May I turn to a slightly
different subject? I gather than the Reading street crime initiative
was extremely effective in terms of the use of DNA analysis and
so on. Would you agree with that?
Dr Werrett: I do not know about
that.
6 Note by witness: Later confirmed by the Home
Office Science Policy Unit that bids are only open to public sector
agencies. Back
| 
