Legal Studies (PLEASE HELP) (1 Viewer)

[T_Brendan_T]

Im currently working on my assignment about DNA evidence. Does anyone know when DNA evidence came to Australia and who implemented it. Also who opposed DNA evidence

 

[jimmysmith560]

Here's some information:

DNA evidence has had a significant impact on the Australian criminal justice system since it was first used at a criminal trial in the Australian Capital Territory in 1989.

I'm not entirely sure about who opposed DNA evidence though sorry.

 

[T_Brendan_T]

Here's some information:

DNA evidence has had a significant impact on the Australian criminal justice system since it was first used at a criminal trial in the Australian Capital Territory in 1989.

I'm not entirely sure about who opposed DNA evidence though sorry.

Thank you

 

[T_Brendan_T]

Does any one know who oppose DNA laws

 

[jimmysmith560]

I'm not entirely sure, but I would assume that the opposition consists mainly of scientists and lawyers (and any other parties/bodies to whom DNA evidence is relevant).

- Some scientists might argue things relating to the inaccuracy/unreliability of DNA testing and/or that DNA evidence/testing could be detrimental to a person's health if a person suffers from a particular health problem that doesn't allow them to be tested for example.
- Lawyers and other legal figures may use the scientists' argument of DNA evidence potentially being inaccurate/unreliable to argue that DNA evidence cannot be considered decisive, or in some cases even indicative of a particular case/accusation, making it ineffective, meaning it cannot be considered/treated as evidence.

That's what I think. I hope this helps!

 

[T_Brendan_T]

Sorry to ask you again but do you seem to know who implemented it to Australia

 

[jimmysmith560]

Implemented as in pass a bill for or enforce DNA laws? I'm going to assume you mean passing the actual laws into the constitution. In that case, the Australian Parliament would most likely be the entity responsible for implementing it after it has been thoroughly considered, because it is the legislative power:

The Constitution gives the legislative power of the Commonwealth — the power to make laws — to the Parliament. The Parliament consists of the Queen, represented by the Governor-General, and two Houses — the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Parliament passes legislation.

The Australian Law Reform Commission seems to have written a lot on this matter, I'll include some links here for you to have a look at, perhaps they contain some additional information that you may find useful:

Reliability of DNA evidence | ALRC

44.3 The technical reliability of DNA evidence depends on a number of factors, including the quantity and quality of the sample analysed and the laboratory equipment or technique in analysing the sample.Sample quantity and quality44.4 A DNA sample is capable of analysis if there is sufficient...

www.alrc.gov.au

Improving the use of DNA evidence at trial | ALRC

44.33 DNA technology is an evolving area of science. Different methods of DNA analysis and statistical calculation may be employed by forensic scientists who will then be required to give evidence about these methods and results in criminal proceedings. DP 66 noted that a number of proposals may...

www.alrc.gov.au

Independent analysis of DNA evidence | ALRC

Access to crime scene samples44.76 Where the prosecution seeks to rely on DNA evidence in a criminal prosecution, the usual procedure is for the prosecution to give defence counsel access to the crime scene samples, and the analysis results, as part of pre-trial disclosure.44.77 Where a DNA...

www.alrc.gov.au

I hope this helps!

 

[T_Brendan_T]

Thanks