Reed & Anor, R v

Reed & Anor, R v

The court held that Low Template DNA evidence obtained using the LCN process is admissible where the quantity analysed is above the stochastic threshold (100-200 picograms), and that experts may enumerate and evaluate possible mechanisms of DNA transfer if the underlying science is sufficiently reliable and the evidential basis exists. The expert's opinion must not extend to matters lacking scientific foundation. The trial judge's directions to the jury were proper, and no misdirection or unfairness occurred. Fresh expert evidence was not admitted as it could have been adduced at trial and would not affect the safety of the convictions.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: David Reed; Appellant: Terence Reed; Appellant: Neil Garmson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Conviction
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; convictions upheld.
Legal Topics
DNA Evidence, Expert Evidence, Admissibility of Scientific Evidence, Murder, Rape, Kidnapping, Sexual Assault
Criminal Law Evidence DNA Evidence Expert Evidence Admissibility of Scientific Evidence Murder Rape Kidnapping +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

David Reed

Appellant

Terence Reed

Appellant

Neil Garmson

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility and reliability of Low Template DNA (LCN) evidence
  2. 2 Scope of expert evidence on DNA transfer mechanisms
  3. 3 Proper directions to jury on DNA evidence and alibi

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Low Template DNA evidence obtained using the LCN process is admissible where the quantity analysed is above the stochastic threshold (100-200 picograms), and that experts may enumerate and evaluate possible mechanisms of DNA transfer if the underlying science is sufficiently reliable and the evidential basis exists. The expert's opinion must not extend to matters lacking scientific foundation. The trial judge's directions to the jury were proper, and no misdirection or unfairness occurred. Fresh expert evidence was not admitted as it could have been adduced at trial and would not affect the safety of the convictions.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; convictions upheld.