[ Home ] [ Up ] [ The Forensic Scientist ] [ The Crime Scene ] [ Physical Evidence ] [ Forensic Disciplines ] [ Case Histories ]

These articles are based on seminars given at Deakin University,  Geelong by Lt Col Roger Lewis (Retd.)

Lt Col Lewis, formerly of the British Army Legal Services, gained extensive courtroom experience of the presentation of forensic evidence whilst trying cases from burglary to murder as a senior prosecutor. Roger Lewis retired from the British Army Legal Service in 1999 with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn in 1983 and the larger part of his career was concerned with the prosecution of criminal cases. He was appointed an OBE in 1995. He is currently a visiting lecturer for the Bachelor of Forensic Science degree at Deakin University, Geelong and an Honorary Fellow of the School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Deakin University.

The Forensic Scientist in the Dock: The Lawyer, the Forensic Scientist and the Prosecution of Offenders

Download: scientists_in_the_dock.PDF

This article is based on a seminar given at Deakin University, Geelong in October 2001. A shortened version appeared in The Forensic Bulletin (National Institute of Forensic Science, November 2001).

You will need the Acrobat® Reader™ available from Adobe® to view this document

The aim of this article is to explore how scientific evidence may assist in the successful prosecution of offenders. What the prosecutor requires of his scientific witness is first considered and the circumstances in which scientific evidence may assist the prosecution are reviewed. The difficulties that can arise in the use of scientific evidence are examined in the light of decided cases including the Chamberlain Case ,the IRA Terrorism Cases (the Guildford Four and Judith Ward Cases). The benefits derived from good forensic evidence will be illustrated through the recent successful prosecution of the mass murderer, Dr Harold Shipman.

A Miscarriage of Justice? Forensic Science and the Case of James Hanratty

Download: hanratty.PDF

This article is based on a seminar given at Deakin University, Geelong in September 2002. 

You will need the Acrobat® Reader™ available from Adobe® to view this document

A miscarriage of justice is usually taken to mean the conviction of an innocent person for a crime he or she did not commit but can also arise where the guilt of an accused properly tried and convicted is brought into question

Miscarriages of justice have a serious effect on the administration of justice. They lead to the suspicion that investigators are inefficient or incompetent, if not actually corrupt; that legal advisers are incompetent and that the courts are inflexible and unwilling to admit error.

Forensic scientists have been involved in such cases both in creating the original error and in bringing about its subsequent rectification.

This article will consider in detail the case of James Hanratty who was convicted of murder in 1962. For many years his case was used as an example to exemplify the failings of the legal system but recent developments in forensic science, in particular the use of DNA evidence have helped establish the true position. The case also demonstrates the limits of ESDA evidence and the need for the proper retention of exhibits in criminal cases.

[ The Forensic Scientist ] [ The Crime Scene ] [ Physical Evidence ] [ Forensic Disciplines ] [ Case Histories ]