Dr. Sheila Willis:

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to speak to the committee on behalf of Forensic Science Ireland, FSI, which I passionately believe provides a very good service to the people of Ireland. We number 96 but partly due to issues raised earlier and partly to retirements we have much fewer staff available for work. We are civil servants. The majority are qualified scientists such that the standard of science in FSI is probably higher than anywhere else outside academia, mainly in the areas of chemistry and biology.

We provide a scientific service to the criminal justice system in the area of DNA, chemistry and drug analysis. We work on samples submitted by An Garda Síochána from crime scenes in a broad range of cases such as possession and supply of controlled drugs, armed robbery, murder, burglary, assault, explosives, fires, accidents, criminal damage and firearm cases. I heard it said earlier today that the world is getting more and more complex. That is certainly true of our business too.

We examine approximately 13,000 cases annually. This number varies and the fluctuation is due primarily to variation in the numbers of submissions of controlled drugs. The numbers of drugs go up and down, in line, I think, with economic factors. Recently there has been a steady increase in DNA submissions. This is in line with experience around the world. We are no different from anywhere else. The most important work is the laboratory examinations which can either be to identify material such as a controlled substance, a drug or an explosive or to link a suspect and a victim. These links, which are sometimes referred to as trace evidence, consist of a wide range of materials such as fibres from clothing, paint, glass and fire accelerants.

The biggest breakthrough in forensic science in my lifetime was the discovery by Sir Alec Jeffreys in the mid-1980s of the use of DNA profiling in crime investigations. We began offering this service in the mid-1990s and have been in a state of continuous development and change ever since because of the changing technologies. In the early days a sample the size of a bloodstain was needed to generate a DNA profile whereas nowadays it can be obtained from virtually any invisible surface.

We do not fit the clinical model of small samples submitted in a uniform manner. The committee members who visited the laboratory will have seen the range in size and type of samples that come in. For example, when they came in there was a door with footprints on it. There might be a bicycle from a hit and run traffic accident, sets of clothing, bedclothes, knives, guns, and large volumes of drugs. The logistical issues are the biggest challenge rather than the analytical difficulties, particularly in the context of the facilities we work in and the concern about ensuring there is no cross-contamination.

The President signed the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Act into law in June 2014. When implemented this will significantly aid crime investigation. Ireland is one of the last countries in the developed world not to have such an aid. The experience in other countries is that as soon as such a system is implemented the case work demands increase.

People who watch “CSI” on television are used to seeing everything done in 47 minutes by one person. In real life, however, we work in very close partnership with a range of people, the principal ones being An Garda Síochána. The gardaí mainly examine crime scenes and submit samples to us. On occasion scientists go out to scenes. Even when they do not go out to scenes scientists have a responsibility to provide training to gardaí on scenes-of-crime needs. This includes what needs to come into the laboratory in order to ensure that something sensible in the way of evidence is generated.

We have a service level agreement with An Garda Síochána as a way of agreeing what services there are between the two organisations and some level of cooperation is vital because although the independence of FSI is important the work is only relevant if it addresses questions raised in crime investigations. Ultimately, the work of the laboratory ends up in some contested court cases, not many but enough to be a big draw on resources. On some occasions the science is probed very deeply and on other occasions the main issue is almost administrative, such as continuity. It is a very expensive way of using court time. In other jurisdictions, even ones that have an adversarial system, it is my understanding that many issues are addressed outside the court such that the matters at issue to be contested are confined to the court rather than what happens here where it is almost a case of set them up and see what falls.

Although I have said several times the laboratory is the main focus the staff are involved in a wide range of other activities between court, scenes and training. The independence of forensic science of law enforcement is an active discussion around the world, particularly in the United States of America.

I am comfortable that we have a good model in Ireland. While we have independence and a strong association and liaison to science, we enjoy a good working relationship with An Garda Síochána. That is good and is one of the values of a smaller society.The laboratory is inspected at various levels.We carry ISO17025 which is the international standard for testing laboratories. As part of this process we have external oversight and visits from other scientists. These assessors generally come from abroad because the work we do is fairly specialised in nature and there is not a great number of people available in this country to do it. This accreditation consists of a couple of days each year where a number of people from other countries come and go through the various systems in the laboratory. We also have the pleasure of defence visits. The defence can employ a scientist who is obliged to review the work of the laboratory on behalf of the defence. That can be a challenging exercise, not necessarily because there is anything wrong with the work, but I believe very few people are exposed to the level of scrutiny in their everyday work as individuals in our organisation are.

The organisation has been reviewed on three separate occasions since its establishment 40 years ago. The most recent was the Kopp report published in 2006. More and more countries are recognising that forensic science is not really a stand-alone function, it is almost a co-produced product. There are struggles across the world as to what is a good model to deliver forensic science. To my knowledge there has not been an ideal model identified, but more and more countries are going towards more integration. The Chairman mentioned Scotland. It is looking at scene of crime laboratory and pathology services being united into one package. In our case this would necessitate integrating the State Pathology Service, the Garda Technical Bureau and Forensic Science Ireland.

Facilities as an issue is very close to my heart because I have been involved in up to seven projects to produce appropriate facilities for Forensic Science Ireland. The most recent project fell at the economic downturn, and I can well understand that, but I am very anxious to put it back onto the agenda. The situation has changed even since the committee's visit. The UK has a forensic science regulator. Although we are not under the auspices of the UK regulator, we are very much exposed to the thinking of that office because, as I have mentioned, the defence visits come to our laboratory - either as oversight for accreditation, or for individual cases. That office recommends very stringent conditions for laboratories producing DNA profiles, conditions we certainly could not comply with in our present environment. There was a proposal some years ago that Forensic Science Ireland be merged with the State Laboratory, an agency of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. We would submit that, if rationalisation and efficiencies are sought, it would make far more sense that we work more closely with the agencies I mentioned earlier.

We have strong links with various networks across the country with the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes, ENFSI being the most common one. We work with individual working groups on different topics as well as working with an organisation that is placed across the UK and Ireland. Ongoing co-operation with colleagues also happens, particularly at operational level. Although we are an operational service we cannot survive unless we have some research and development. I said earlier that technology changes are ongoing and there would be little value if we were producing technology of ten years ago, in fact prosecutions would be at risk. I hope from this gallop through the service that the committee gets a sense that the work of the laboratory is not solely laboratory based. There are many related functions - crime scene work or training in relation to same; quality systems which take significant time and resources; the time gap between court cases and examinations puts a strong onus on good record keeping systems; keeping up to date with developmentsboth in terms of knowledge and application of technology; keeping our stakeholders aware of the potential and limitations of the service and of course attendance at court.

Forensic Science Ireland can be both an exciting and a frustrating place to work. Maybe that is true for all public service, but I can only speak for the one I know. Staff are very conscious of their public duty and I am proud to lead a group of people who I believe provide a good service to the State, very much relying on an ethos of science and integrity. By its nature it is a demand-led service. Although we have the service level agreement between FSI and An Garda Síochána, if the work comes in there is an obligation to do it. If our service is not properly resourced there will be a knock-on effect in the whole system. I do not have to tell this committee that the criminal justice system is a very expensive, high resource system. We are a tiny but key part of it. Delays with us, or indeed flaws in our service, will have knock-on effect down the way.