Eye witness evidence vs forensic evidence and police manipulation of evidence

December 25, 2013, 5:39 pm 

Continued from Midweek Review of Dec 18, 2013

By A concerned scientist

Police manipulation of evidence

Senior readers may recall the famous Sathasivam case in the early fifties where a housewife was found murdered in a garage in a house in Colombo. The Police suspected the husband and the servant boy but later got the servant turn to a crown witness despite the fact that he had made a confession to the murder at the initial inquiry. Subsequently he had given evidence against the husband as an "eye-witness" implicating him to be the murderer.

Fortunately, the accused had the resources to defend himself by retaining a forensic expert brought down from UK and save himself from gallows (Those days death penalty was in force). Suppose he did not have the resources to produce expert evidence in his favour and the court believed the evidence of the crown witness, wouldn’t there have been a chance that the accused was sent to gallows? If it happened, who would have been responsible for such a "legal murder"?

More recently, it was reported in a Sinhala Weekly (Irida Divayina of 08.12.13) how a person alleged to have killed his father, an owner of a hotel at Biyagama, had attempted to implicate the caretaker of his land for the murder with the connivance of the local police and the police area crimes division. The attempt, however, got foiled because the villagers had brought the matter to the attention of higher authorities in the police.

Had the case not proceeded in this manner, couldn’t there have been a possibility that the accused was found guilty of the offence, particularly if an eminent lawyer was retained by the prosecution. In this instance, were the police officers involved in this dastardly act given any punishment? Isn’t this a worst crime than suppressing an inquiry to save an accused as has happened recently at Talangama Police?

Conviction record

It is also interesting to look at the statistics on grave crimes given in the Police Dept. website. During the 6 year period from 2005 to 2010, there have been a total of 8,106 homicides/suicides reported with an annual average of 1,351 ranging from 742 in 2010 to 2,044 in 2006. However, only in 85% cases that suspects have been apprehended. In more than 56% of the cases, police investigations are still proceeding and in another 25%, cases are held up at various stages in the system.

The database also reveals that during all these 6 years, out of 8,106 homicide cases, only 9 cases had ended up in convictions and in 75 cases the accused were acquitted, which means that there had been only 0.1% convictions and 0.9 % discharges, annually. This is indeed a very poor record for our legal system and is not acceptable by any standard.

The authorities, I believe, should examine the reasons for Sri Lanka having such a very low conviction record. Could it be the dependence too heavily on low quality eye witnesses? Or could it be the lethargic investigations conducted by the police? Or could it be the brilliance of the defending lawyers? Once the causes are identified, corrective measures could be taken to improve the situation.

Earlier in the article, I raised the question about the effectiveness of the SOCO programme. I believe the conviction percentage in homicides would be a good indicator. If this programme is going to be really effective, there should be a corresponding improvement in this factor in the future.

Legal support for the Police

In all criminal cases, I believe it is the police that handles the prosecution with the assistance of the Attorney General’s Department. The question is how competent are the police officers in handling complicated cases in which highly paid eminent lawyers appear for the defense trying to find loop holes in the evidence for the prosecution. If a case is taken up at a higher court, a state counsel may appear for the case. Yet, a single contradiction by a witness is sufficient to tilt the balance in favour of the accused.

According to a news item appearing in another daily on 09.12.13, a judge has acquitted all 8 accused in a triple murder case in Horana on the grounds that the prosecution was unable to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and that is after a 13-year long hearing.

Shouldn’t something be done to reform the entire system and improve the conviction record? Should an attorney be appointed to every major police station to handle serious criminal cases taken to courts? Should a mechanism be introduced to collect more forensic data in a scientific manner?

Solution- Bring back Govt.

Analyst’s Dept.

It would therefore be in the interest of the country, if the Govt. Analyst’s Dept. re-establishes the category of staff entrusted with the task of initial examination of scenes of crime that it had earlier, but with enhanced entry requirements and enhanced salaries. They need to be given a thorough training in scientific methods of criminal investigations overseas at the best laboratories at Govt. expense.

If the universities commence a discipline of forensic science as suggested earlier, graduates who have followed these courses should be recruited for these posts. They also should be given housing and transport facilities as well as security ensuring their safety from undesirable elements.

The SOCO division in the Police could continue but its officers need to work under the supervision of the Govt. Analyst’s Dept. scientists. The latter should be responsible for the collection of forensic data in a scientific manner following international standards. They could also testify and face any cross examination by defense lawyers with greater confidence without leaving any doubts in the minds of the jurors and the judge and prove a case beyond reasonable doubt. The public could then have faith in the system that justice will be done for the victims of criminal offences.

Concluded