DNA Data Bank in Canada

RCMP Collects DNA Profiles in Data Bank

The Canadian National DNA Data Bank opened for business in June 2000. DNA profiles from biological samples are kept in two indexes - one for convicted offenders and one for unsolved crime scenes. The Canadian DNA Data Bank is part of the RCMP National Police Services and is available to all law enforcement agencies across Canada.

Purpose of the DNA Data Bank

The DNA Data Bank helps investigators identify suspects, link crime scenes where there are no suspects, eliminate suspects, and determine if a serial offender may be involved in a crime.

DNA Profiles

Under the Canadian Criminal Code, judges can order those convicted of designated offences to provide samples for DNA analysis. Young offenders can be included in the DNA Data Bank. The Canadian National Defence Act also lets military judges make DNA Data Bank orders.

For purposes of the DNA Data Bank, offences are designated primary or secondary.

Primary designated offences are the most serious criminal offences - for example, murder and manslaughter, sexual offences and aggravated assault. A judge who convicts a person of a primary designated offence is required to make an order for the collection of a DNA sample from the offender, unless the offender can convince the court that the impact on his or her personal privacy and security outweighs the public interest. Internet luring of a child, child pornography and criminal organization offences were added to the list of primary designated offences when legislation strengthening the DNA Data Bank was passed in 2005.

Secondary designated offences include less serious crimes like arson. For secondary designated offences, the Crown must apply for a DNA collection order and show the court that it is in the best interests of justice that it be granted.

When a new DNA profile is added to the DNA Data Bank, it is compared with profiles already there. If a match is found, the investigators are informed. Data comparisons and sharing information with foreign law enforcement agencies are permitted, as long as there is agreement that the information will be used to investigate or prosecute a criminal offence.

Privacy Protection of DNA Profiles

To protect the privacy of individuals, limits have been placed on the access and use of the DNA Data Bank and on communications about both profiles and the bodily substances used. The DNA Data Bank is used strictly for law enforcement purposes. All other uses, including medical research, are against the law.

Results of DNA Data Bank

By May 2006, the DNA Data Bank had nearly 100,000 entries in the Convicted Offender Index and over 28,000 DNA profiles in the Crime Scene Index. Since its inception, the DNA Data Bank has resulted in over 5,200 crime-scene-to-offender matches, and more than 750 crime-scene-to-crime-scene matches.

 

Public Policy

Thanks to a shift in values from individual rights toward public safety, society tolerated the creation and use of DNA Databases.

 

DNA Identification Act

 

The purpose of the Act is to establish a national DNA data bank to help law enforcement agencies identify persons alleged to have committed designated offences, including those committed before the coming into force of this Act.

 

Public Policy Principles:

 

(a) the protection of society and the administration of justice are well served by the early detection, arrest and conviction of offenders, which can be facilitated by the use of DNA profiles;

(b) the DNA profiles, as well as samples of bodily substances from which the profiles are derived, may be used only for law enforcement purposes, and not for any unauthorized purpose; and

(c) to protect the privacy of individuals with respect to personal information about themselves, safeguards must be placed on

(i) the use and communication of, and access to, DNA profiles and

(ii) the use of, and access to, bodily substances.

National DNA data bank, consisting of a crime scene index and a convicted offenders index.

 

Crime scene index:

 

The crime scene index contains DNA profiles derived from bodily substances that are found: (a) at any place where a designated offence was committed; (b) on or within the body of the victim of a designated offence; (c) on anything worn or carried by the victim at the time when a designated offence was committed; or (d) on or within the body of any person or thing or at any place associated with the commission of a designated offence.

Convicted offenders index

The convicted offenders index contains DNA profiles derived from bodily substances.

Primary designated offences:

·        Terrorism related offenses: hijacking, endangering safety of aircraft or airport, using explosives, participation in activity of terrorist group, facilitating terrorist activity,

·        Sexual offenses: sexual assault, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, sexual exploitation, incest, juvenile prostitution,

·        Culpable homicides: infanticide, murder, manslaughter,

·        Aggravated assaults: assault with a weapon or causing bodily harm.

·        Kidnapping

Secondary offenses

·        Bestiality in the presence of or by child.

·        Child pornography, indecent acts.

·        Parent or guardian procuring sexual activity

·        Causing death or bodily harm by criminal negligence

·        Impaired driving causing bodily harm or death.

·        Assault

·        Torture

·        Robbery, breaking and entering.

·        Mischief that causes actual danger to life

·        Arson

 

The Value of the DNA Data Bank

The use of forensic DNA analysis has emerged as one of the most powerful tools available to law enforcement for the administration of justice. The National DNA Data Bank assists in solving crime by:

  • linking crimes together where there are no suspects;
  • helping to identify suspects;
  • eliminating suspects where there is no match between crime scene DNA and a profile in the data bank; and,
  • determining whether a serial offender is involved.

The National DNA Data Bank, located in Ottawa and operated by the RCMP on behalf of all Canadian police agencies, is responsible for two principal indices:

  • The Convicted Offender Index – an electronic index developed from the DNA profiles of offenders convicted of designated Criminal Code offences, as well as persons who are subject to the military’s Code of Service Discipline and convicted of a designated offence under the National Defence Act.
  • The Crime Scene Index – a separate electronic index composed of DNA profiles obtained from unsolved crime scenes of the same designated offences.

As of May 15, 2006, the Convicted Offender Index had just under 100,000 entries and the Crime Scene Index contained more than 28,000 DNA profiles. The National DNA Data Bank has recorded over 5,200 crime-scene-to-offender matches, and more than 750 crime-scene-to-crime-scene matches


Evidence in the Canadian Criminal Justice Process

Evidence are the rules that govern what can be presented to a trier of fact in a criminal justice process

 

Principles of evidence

·        Relevance:

·        Finality: the case must eventually come to a satisfactory resolution.

·        Efficiency: the trial won’t have to take too much time.

·        Fairness: to give each side equal access to justice and to protect the fact finder from prejudicial evidence.

 

Sources of evidence

 

In Canada: primarily judge-made through common law rules, with some supporting statutes. Judge has: principled flexibility.

 

To prove a fact:

 

  • Relevant: makes a fact more or less likely to be true.

 

Relevance depends on purpose, evidence will be admitted as relevant for a purpose but cannot be used in any other way.

 

  • Material:

Relevant evidence must be material. Its relevance must go towards proving a fact that is of consequence to the trial. That is, there must be a relationship between the evidence and a legal issue put to the court.

Evidence can be material in one of two ways. It can be either direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is evidence that supports a proposition directly at issue in case. For example, finger prints at a murder scene in a criminal trial. Circumstantial evidence, however, is evidence that can be used to infer a conclusion. For example, a sighting of the accused in the neighbourhood at the time of the crime. One type is not necessarily stronger than the other.

Circumstantial evidence is the result of combining seemingly unrelated facts that, when considered together, can be used to infer a conclusion.

Probative value

The degree of relevance is called "probative value" of the evidence. The "probative value" becomes important when issues arise around the appropriateness of the evidence. Given the limited time allocated to a case, less probative evidence will often be overlooked in order to present more valuable evidence. Probabtive value of evidence is often of particular importance when a particular piece of evidence is also prejudicial to the accused. Certain evidence can inappropriately influence triers of fact as it appeals to their emotions or baises. The positive value of evidence must be weighed against the potential hostility or sympathy that it may create.

 

Exclusion of evidence

 

Prejudicial effect

Although the first rule of evidence is to admit all relevant evidence there are certain types of relevant evidence that should not be admitted as it will have a prejudicial effect on the fairness of the trial. It is said that there are three grounds of excluding evidence on the basis of its prejudice: "moral", "logical", and "time".

First, there is evidence of moral prejudice which has the potential of creating outrage in the jury and could influence them to make their decision based on emotion. For example, a jury may get the urge to punish an accused for past bad acts even though they are not at issue in the trial. Second, there are logical prejudices that suggest to the jury to make improper inferences, such as relating the accused race with a particular disposition. Last, there is evidence that is prejudicial to time and resources. The jury should not have their time wasted with minor evidence that will waste their time and confuse them from the real issues.

All judges have a discretion to exclude any evidence on the basis that its prejudicial effect will outweigh the probative value.

Standard of Proof

 

The standard of proof asks to how convinced the trier of fact must be of some something. Generally speaking, in Canadian Crimina Justice, the standard is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

 

Classes of evidence

  • Real evidence

Real evidence consists of all tangible evidence, physical objects such as , tape recordings, computer printouts or photographs. Real evidence, as all other evidence, must first be relevent. Secondly, it must be authentic.

Authentication is often proven by having witnesses identify the object and verify its authenticity.

·        Documentary evidence

Documentary evidence is any kind of evidence on which relevent information is printed upon.

 

  • Testimonial evidence

 

Testimonial evidence is evidence given by a witness in the form answers to posed questions.

Who can be a witness at a trial depends on two factors, competence and compellability. The competence of a witness asks whether a willing witness is permitted to testify. While compellability asks whether the competent witness can be made to testify even if it’s against their will.

At common law, all individuals are presumed competent to testify, except for children (<14), people of low mental capacity (inquiry by the judge), and spouses (except in sexual offenses and sex crimes against children). In each of these it is up to a challenger to establish the incometence of the witness.

To testify, a witness need only be able to a) observe, b) recall his or her observations accurately, c) communicate his or her recollections.

Lay witnesses vs. expert witnesses

 

When a witness is put on a stand their primary role is to recall their knowledge of some past event at issue in the case. As a general rule non expert witnesses are not allowed to give any opinion. Experts are generally allowed to give their opinion in matters within their expert knowledge.

 

Examination of witnesses

 

The prosecution presents its main case through direct examination of prosecution witnesses, including expert witnesses by the prosecutor (leading questions are not permitted).

Cross-examination. The defense may cross-examine the prosecution witnesses (leading questions are permitted). Redirect. The prosecution reexamines the defense witnesses.

The defense presents its main case through direct examination (leading questions are not permitted) of defense witnesses (accused may choose not to testify). The prosecutor cross-examines the defense witnesses (leading questions are permitted).

 

Objections

 

  • Irrelevant: Something is irrelevant when it is collateral, or totally unrelated to the charges or the penal code which applies in the case. A question is irrelevant if it invites or causes the witness to give evidence not related to the facts of the case at hand. Asking an offbeat question like "Do you believe in UFO’s?" would be an example of an irrelevant question.
  • Immaterial: Something is immaterial when the jury doesn’t need to be bothered with it. Examples of immaterial questions affecting the jury would be requests to visit the crime scene (when the sketch should suffice) or other in-court demonstrations (when the jury should be allowed to draw their own inferences).
  • Incompetent: Something is incompetent when it has no place in court, e.g., when the person or the evidence is of such low quality as to be beneath the court's dignity. Examples would include using the testimony of some shady private investigator to dig up evidence when that person has lost their license or is unethical in their work.
  • Ambiguous, confusing, misleading, vague, unintelligible: the question is not posed in a clear and precise manner so that the witness knows with certainty what information is being sought.
  • Arguing the case: when lawyers state their version of the facts and then go on to state what conclusions should be drawn from them.
  • Argumentative: An argumentative question is where counsel states a conclusion and then asks the witness to argue with it, often in an attempt to get the witness to change their mind. It is asked for the purpose of persuading the jury or the judge, rather than to elicit information. It calls for an argument in answer to an argument contained in the question.
    It calls for no new facts, but merely asks the witness to concede to inferences drawn by the examiner from proved or assumed facts.
  • HEARSAY: Hearsay is a statement made by someone other than the witness testifying and offered to prove its own truth. There are exceptions to the hearsay rule, but it exists because second-hand statements are unreliable and cannot be tested by cross-examination.
  • A question assumes facts not in evidence if: it presumes unproved facts to be true. Example: "When did you stop beating your wife?" This question assumes that the person has beaten his wife.
  • LEADING: A leading question suggests the answer one expects to hear; "You were at the victim's home that night, weren't you?". The lawyer should not be doing the testifying. Leading questions are permitted under certain circumstances, usually in cross-examination, with expert witnesses, and with any hostile, evasive, or adverse witness.
  • Compound: a question is objectionable on the ground that it is compound if: it joins two or more questions ordinarily joined with the word "or" or the word "and."
  • NON-RESPONSIVE ANSWER: Used when an answer does not directly answer the question. And if the answer goes beyond the question, the excess is objectionable.
  • OPINION BY AN UNQUALIFIED WITNESS Opinion testimony is proper only in the area of expertise or specialized knowledge that an expert witness is qualified in. Lay witnesses may give opinions only when their perception is helpful to the jury; e.g., time, distance, speed, sobriety.
  • Narrative: A question calls for a narrative answer if it invites the witness to narrate a series of occurrences, which may produce irrelevant or otherwise inadmissible testimony.
  • Speculative: Anything that invites a witness to guess is objectionable. Speculation as to what possibly could have happened is of little probative value. Some leeway is allowed for the witness to use their own words, and greater freedom is allowed with expert witnesses. question is speculative if it invites or causes the witness to speculate or answer on the basis of conjecture.