DNA evidence is inadmissible where the forensic biologist who prepares the report and gives evidence did not conduct the laboratory testing and no evidence is led from the persons who did, as the report is based on hearsay and the expert opinion lacks the necessary evidentiary foundation. However, wrongful admission of such evidence may not result in a successful appeal where the trial judge effectively directed the jury to disregard it and the remaining evidence proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A Liberato direction need not follow the precise formulation suggested in Anderson provided the directions given are in substance those required by Liberato v The Queen.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 13 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 13 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.