Forensic Science Service

Written evidence submitted by the Centre for Forensic Investigation, Teesside University (FSS 79)

Teesside University has been involved in forensic and crime scene science education for many years. It has specialist staff including academic and practitioner, suburb facilities and a number of successful partnerships. Two partners are the Metropolitan Police Service and the National Policing Improvement Agency. Teesside University has developed various foundation degrees with these organisations as part of their overall professionalization of their workforces within the forensic industry.

The Centre for Forensic Investigation at Teesside University works with the forensic science and public protection subject groups to deliver various awards, coordinate research and maintain links with the industry.

1. What will be the impact of the closure of the Forensic Science Service on forensic science and on the future development of forensic science in the UK?

1.1 The announcement was by enlarge a major shock and triggered much discussion in the forensic community on the resulting impact. The FSS had an international reputation of respect built up over many years. Unfortunately the move into the commercial market in the early 90’s found the FSS lacking and it never really adapted or was allowed to adapt its business adequately to survive. As a consequence, the UK is no longer openly acknowledged as the world leader in forensic science. In fact it lives on its historical reputation. If the FSS is to close or partially shrink, this event needs to acknowledge the contribution the FSS made to the early development of forensic science, in terms of research, but also looking to the future to rebuild a world class reputation.

1.2 The key impacts include the comprehensive provision of forensic evidence and expert opinion to the criminal justice system by the remaining market and, to a certain extent, research.

1.3 Research – in terms of future development of forensic science, research is vital for the future success and impact of forensic science. A particular need is to identify and take advantage of new technology and concepts from medicine, science and engineering with potential forensic applications. With a shrinking market it is not conceivable that the commercial market of forensic providers will fund 100% of the research. A certain amount can be contributed in collaboration with universities and links to funding bodies. Police forces need to appreciate that innovation and research is essential for progress providing the best technology and information to an investigation and best evidence to the courts.

1.4 Development of forensic science is a very complex area but the current proposal for a QAA bench mark for forensic science education links Universities to support innovation and research.

1.4.1 The whole research arena is currently very uncoordinated and not sufficiently integrated. Universities can support forensic science development but coordination is essential to minimise duplication and ensure the appropriate areas are explored. There are relatively easy steps to address this in the early stages.

1.4.2 The area of research funding has always been an issue hence the link to the QAA bench mark will help with the creation of a research funding stream.

1.5 The government may wish to consider if there are alternative innovative solutions to take forward forensic science research. There is an overseas model in which the government own a state of the art research facility which is made available to those wishing to carry out research.

2. What will be the implications of the closure on the quality and impartiality of forensic evidence used in the criminal justice system?

2.1 In terms of quality and impartiality it is vital that those providing professional and expert evidence to the courts accept that they need to provide reliable, robust evidence. The court needs to be assured of the quality standards behind all the professional and expert witnesses and further that the public have confidence in the provision of the evidence.

2.2 Quality – This is probably the most serious of all the fallout from the FSS closure. All of the leading providers have accredited quality management systems incorporating competency testing, training, peer review etc. Such systems take time to implement and should be ‘built-in’ to the staff with the overall thinking and working procedures. Anyone who contributes to forensic investigations must comply with these stringent quality standards. The court requires these standards and the public expect them. This means that any new providers into the industry must comply with the high standards. Reaching such standards takes time to get in place. If these new providers include police forces they will need many months if not years to reach the standard to gain and maintain accreditation.

2.2.1 The future will require that the burden on the Forensic Science Regulator, who holds responsibilities for setting, maintaining and monitoring quality standards, will increase many times due to a greater number of smaller providers. ACPO and NPIA both need to fully support the FS Regulator.

2.3 Impartiality - In theory there should be minimal impact on the overall impartiality of forensic evidence because anyone who provides forensic evidence must appreciate and understand that they are responsible to the court irrespective of commissions or who pays for the work. However with the closure there may be more work carried out within the various police forces and small companies new to forensic science and the employers will need to accept and make staff aware that although they are helping police investigations the ultimate customer is the court.

2.4 Interpretation of evidence – Latterly forensic science has been evaluated and interpreted using the Bayes theorem involving the likelihood ratio; this was fully implemented in the FSS, however, less so with other forensic science providers. There will need to be a significant debate and resolution on how best to evaluate forensic evidence for a consistent approach.

3. What is the financial position of the Forensic Science Service?

I have insufficient knowledge of this area.

4. What is the state of, and prospects for, the forensics market in the UK, specifically whether the private sector can carry out the work currently done by the Forensic Science Service and the volume and nature of the forensic work carried out by police forces?

4.1 In the short term it would seem unlikely that the commercial companies could completely mop up the FSS work and the police are certainly not in a position to the take up the work. The police forces don’t have the necessary facilities, resources or accreditation to deal with the work – in the short term. There may therefore be a case for partial or staged shrinkage.

4.2 There will need to be a review of the tendering process – a very elaborate process to provide work for the commercial providers. Again with a shrinking market the process will need to ensure that the standards to deliver work to the investigation and the justice system are the same for in-house and commercial providers. There are a number of key questions such as - do the commercial providers have sufficient resources to deliver the work they win in a timely manner and do the police forces have the appropriate accreditation and competency to deliver forensic services?

5. What are the alternatives to winding-down the Forensic Science Service?

5.1 If the government has undertaken a thorough due diligence to the closure of the FSS then the decision may be correct. However there continues to be a commercial market, albeit reduced. The government may wish to consider if there are viable examples of commercial markets such as within Northern Ireland or New Zealand. In both these countries there is essentially one police force to one provider. Within the UK it may not be appropriate to have one police force to one lab but it may be worth considering one lab and several like minded forces such as the ACPO 2 region in the North East of England with the one laboratory being Wetherby. Further, the London laboratory and the Metropolitan Police may be a viable proposition [1] . The government may wish to consider these options.

6. So far as they are known, are the arrangements for closing down the Forensic Science Service, making staff redundant and selling its assets adequate?

6.1 I am not sufficiently knowledgeable on the overall arrangements but this is a major piece of work with many facets from personnel issues, scene and court samples, case files, ongoing cases and databases to consider.

6.2 The recent news item relating to the provision of analysis of blood and urine samples for the purposes of the Road Traffic Act (1988) suggests that insufficient planning and understanding of the extent of work carried out by the FSS has not yet been fully understood.

Brian W J Rankin

Head of Centre for Forensic Investigation (CFI)

Teesside University

14 February 2011