Evidence of meeting #17 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cases.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
That's correct. We do not accept some cases, and we do very carefully limit the amount of evidence we accept in cases as well.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
What is the main cause of these long turnaround times, which I find unacceptable? We were in fact told that when the bank was set up, the turnaround times were supposed to be about two months maximum.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We'll get an answer to that.
Monsieur Laberge has a comment.
Frédérick Laberge Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale
That is what we are aiming for. In Quebec we wanted a timeframe of two months for most cases. Unfortunately, given how popular forensics have become, since 2000, we have gone from 1,000 cases in Quebec to over 5,000. We have been able to improve productivity through robotization and improved techniques. We have streamlined resources to process more cases, but unfortunately, we find there is a lack of resources.
In Quebec, we are still receiving 5,000 cases but, because of a lack of resources we can only process 3,000 or so of them. The caseload is increasing from one year to the next which limits our capacity. Furthermore, our processing times are longer because of this increase. That is our current reality.
In Quebec, as in Ontario, minus a few exceptions cases have not been prioritized pursuant to Bills C-13 and C-18. Priority is granted to certain cases like those involving a sexual assault. To us these are major cases which need to be addressed as a priority. Processing times would be shorter in these cases than for break and enters, for instances.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Why is there a lack of resources? When you agreed to collaborate with the national data bank, did you not reach an agreement with the bank for it to provide you with the resources? What happened to these agreements?
Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale
Indeed, when Quebec committed to this in 1996 an agreement was reached with the federal government to subsidize part of our contribution to the national data bank. The agreement was to be permanent. We negotiate this agreement every three to five years, with optional years.
We have not had a permanent agreement since 2007 and we are currently negotiating with the federal government to that effect. We have not yet come to an agreement. It should be noted that contributions to the national data bank involves additional work.
As has been stated by Ontario our cases are never closed. So long as a case remains unsolved, it remains open. In time, police officers can make new requests. They have to do with cases dating back to 2001 on which we have to redo analyses. Cases remain open so long as they are not solved. You can understand how exponential the effect can be.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Prime, in Ontario, are you satisfied with your financial agreements or have you seen the same delays as has been noted in Quebec, in other words two years since the renewal of the most recent agreement?
Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
We have the same issues. We have a similar agreement with the federal government as Quebec has, and we're in the same position as they are. We've been waiting for the renewal of the agreement. We've also been trying to increase the proportional funding that comes to Ontario and Quebec, recognizing that we are contributing to a national service and are contributing a very significant number of samples to the database. Both provinces are doing that. We are certainly doing well within, or perhaps even more than, our share of contributions.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Thank you very much.
Now we'll go over to the NDP.
Mr. Davies, please.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I apologize for missing the beginning of your presentation. I could use a data bank of committee rooms; it would help me get around a bit better.
Now, for my first question. As we know, the DNA data bank is used not only to secure convictions, but also to exonerate people who have been wrongfully convicted. I'm wondering if there's any statistic on how many people have been exonerated from wrongful convictions in old cases.
Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
I'm not sure that's an easy question to answer.
I alluded to the fact that every time you search the data bank and you rule out suspects, you're exonerating people. I think what you're asking is whether there are people in prison who have been exonerated. At this point, I'm not sure we're in a position that we've had enough time to see that happen.
Look at the David Milgaard case, or the Lynda Shaw case. Those were cases where other people were eventually found to have been responsible for the murders. That was a time prior to the existence of the data bank, and prior to the existence of being able to bring in those samples. But even though some people have criminal records, they're not in the data bank, and that's the scenario you would have to have.
We have a lot of cases where we have used DNA to exonerate people. Our lab in particular has been helpful in providing that service to other provinces, simply because of the independence factor--when, for example, you're looking for a second lab that's independent of the first lab.
So we know it happens. We do it on a regular basis, but not through the fact that another name has popped up from the national data bank.
Deputy Director , Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale
I would like to mention an actual case which took place in Quebec. An individual with mental health problems incriminated himself in a sexual assault case. Police officers focused their investigation on the suspect who had already served a sentence for sexual assault. It turned out that through DNA testing of this individual, it was determined his profile did not match that found on the victim. Police officers had to start a new investigation. This individual would have been convicted of a crime he had never committed. That would be an example of a success story for the data bank.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Merci.
I want to turn to a related question. Do you have any sense of, or do you keep any figures on, the number of confessions that might have been generated by the disclosure of matching DNA to defence counsel?
In other words, does the data bank assist in sparing the judicial system, or helping it get more efficient, by promoting greater confessions when that evidence is presented?
Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
We know it happens. In the two examples I gave you, there were guilty pleas in those cases.
But we're the scientists. We're the people in the lab who do the work. We don't keep that kind of statistic.
I don't know if Jonathan has any reading on it.
Deputy Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
That's a question that we get asked quite a lot.
It's difficult, if not impossible, to conduct a meaningful survey--just to go back to your one example--of defence attorneys to determine what exactly has compelled their client to register a guilty plea. We know from police investigators, in the example that Ray has provided, that clearly the DNA evidence was a significant contributing factor, but we don't know factually. It's almost impossible to survey.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Got it.
I'd like to turn to the evidence, and maybe some of the science. The security and integrity of samples, of course, is critical to have a clean chain of possession of any evidence. I think it would be very critical with samples. I wonder if any one of you could maybe tell me a little bit about your practice in that regard. Do you have any concerns in that respect? Or how's it going?
Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
It's part of the business we do to preserve continuity. One of the most important things in a forensic environment is to ensure that the evidence that comes into the laboratory is the evidence that is showing up in the courtroom. Over our whole history, that's something we have very much taken pride in.
In recent years we have also had access to laboratory information systems that allow you to track evidence within the lab as well. We start with the process from the crime scene. We do training of police officers so that they know how to protect and how to deal with evidence. We have specialists in the police department, usually in identification services, who are the evidence collectors. When the items come into the lab, they're given unique identifiers within the lab. Currently we use bar-coding in our lab to track evidence as it goes through the laboratory. It's also tracked within our laboratory information systems.
Then there's the process to send it back, using proper packaging and seal numbers to identify any items that might be difficult to identify in some other way. For example, blood tubes all look the same, so you have to put a unique seal on each. We have processes to make sure that we can ship it back and ensure that the officer receives it unopened. We have systems to be able to demonstrate that the package has not been opened or interfered with, using, for example, frangible seals.
We have quite a sophisticated process in place to track that and to track the movement of items within the laboratory.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Thank you.
I'm getting the message that more resources are always helpful, and I'm hearing that strongly from Quebec. Where do you feel you need the most resources to improve your data bank? Is it more personnel you would need, more equipment, or more research? If you had more money, what would you do with it?
Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale
It would be mainly be invested on experts, because we're talking about analyses... To get results, you have to carry out comprehensive analyses, as you do when profiles are not unique to one individual, but are mixed. It is an area of expertise which cannot be automated. The human element is essential.
At our lab what we are mainly missing right now are experts to carry out these analyses and eventually to testify before the courts.
Director General, Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale
To that point, I simply want to add this: when new people, new experts come to work with us, they don't automatically work on cases the week after their start date. That is not how things work.
The people who come to work in our lab need a BA, a master's degree or a Ph.D. They need one and a half to two years of lab training before they can testify in court. The people working in our lab do forensic analyses, testify before the courts and also provide training.
Also, it should be noted that when individuals start working in our lab, either in biology or in other sectors, they receive training for a year to a year and a half. We may need perhaps 30 to 35 people dealing with cases pursuant to Bills C-13 and C-18, which is what we are supposed to be doing, but we are not because we are short-staffed. Nevertheless, it does not mean that if we hire 35 people tomorrow morning we could deal with these cases in three weeks or even in six months.
First of all, you cannot hire 35 people at the same time and train them all. You would have to train them in groups of five or six and take the time needed to train them adequately so they may do the work and also testify before the courts.
Laboratoire de sciences judiciaires et de médecine légale
This upgrading of skills takes from three to five years. To reach this level, it takes at least three years.
Conservative
Director, Centre of Forensic Sciences
I'll just be brief. I just wanted to make sure that you understand that we're not just whining about needing money. We put a lot of effort into our own labs in terms of trying to streamline our services. We have done engineering studies on the work flow, and we look at ways to minimize the work we have to do in the labs. For example, in our break-and-enter program, we pushed it back to the police to do the sampling so that we would have standard samples come in. We don't just have the clothing, the hats, and the apple cores and everything else. They actually do the sampling for us. We do all those things to try to minimize the work we're faced with, but we really need more resources, and the resources are mostly people.
We use robotics. If there's new technology that allows us to do more things faster, then we can adapt to that technology. But we need the people to look at those samples, extract the cuttings, look for the almost invisible spots of blood or semen or whatever other body fluid we're looking for on these very large objects, which might be bedsheets, carpets, or clothing. It's people we need.
Conservative