The managing scientist accused of steering police toward a DNA processing method under scrutiny at a Queensland inquiry says she had nothing to gain from the 2018 decision.
During an emotional fourth day of evidence, Cathie Allen's lawyer Mathew Hickey asked if she felt she had been depicted as "some kind of Disney villain".
"That's how I feel yes," Ms Allen told the commission of inquiry in Brisbane on Tuesday.
"It upsets me as you can see. I'm just trying to do the best job I can to care about the community and I want to try to provide as many resources to the lab so they can do the best possible job that they can."
Ms Allen said the 2018 options paper looked at samples with low amounts of DNA that showed valuable information was obtainable in 10 per cent of cases.
Less than two per cent were useful for hits on a national DNA database, the inquiry was previously told.
Ms Allen was previously asked if she deliberately highlighted the smaller figure in an effort to sway police, which she denied.
As a result of the Queensland police decision, samples with low amounts of DNA were not automatically sent for further processing, but further testing could be requested.
Ms Allen told the inquiry she would gain "no personal benefit whatsoever" from the QPS decision and her pay was not tied to turnaround time.
She agreed the culture she worked in as a manager was one of "maximising savings rather than looking for opportunities to spend more money".
Ms Allen was stood aside earlier this year when the inquiry was announced and said she still hasn't received a reason for her suspension.
"I went into shock when I was told. I was given five minutes to leave the campus," she said.
Earlier, barrister for the police Jeffrey Hunter questioned if Ms Allen agreed with the proposition that Queensland Police could not have faith in the work of a lab with which she was "in any way connected".
"I don't know what to say to that because the work that I've done with QPS has always been in good faith," she said.
Ms Allen's evidence has now concluded as the focus of the inquiry turns to current practices in the lab.
A review by experienced forensic DNA scientists Rebecca Kogios and Heidi Baker found a number of features in the Queensland lab that fall below best practice, the inquiry was told.
The DNA insufficient for further processing threshold, which has been the subject of the inquiry, is not supported at all, counsel assisting Michael Hodge said.
"In terms of future thresholds, Dr Kogios and Ms Baker suggest no threshold at all for serious or complex crimes or only a limit of detection threshold which would be able to be overruled by a scientist," he said.
Significant problems with the culture of the lab were also identified.
"However... they have a very high regard for the scientists who work in the laboratory and were very impressed by the quality and experience of those scientists," Mr Hodge said.
A total of 47 recommendations have been made to bring the lab back into line with best practice.
The inquiry continues.
