A scathing report into Queensland Health's forensic DNA laboratory has laid bare a litany of failures and will trigger the review of thousands of criminal cases dating back almost 15 years.
Former judge Walter Sofronoff's report uncovered major issues at the Forensic and Scientific Services (FSS) lab, which led to a significant cut in the number of crime scene samples being tested for DNA and a risk of "miscarriages of justice".
Mr Sofronoff – who made 123 recommendations — was damning of the lab's managing scientist Cathie Allen, accusing her of lying and of significant failures in scientific oversight spanning years.
He described the size of the failures involved as "about as big as it gets".
Thousands of major crime cases to be reviewed
The retired Queensland Court of Appeal president, solicitor-general and criminal defence lawyer said he expected major Queensland crime cases to be solved if the Palaszczuk government carried through with the changes outlined in his report.
He also speculated that cases in which someone has been acquitted of a crime could "in theory" be re-prosecuted under Queensland's double jeopardy laws, if retesting of samples produced a DNA profile.
After a six-month commission of inquiry, his 506-page report recommended a retrospective review of "thousands" of Queensland crimes, including murder and sexual assault cases, dating back to January 2008.
"There'll be many samples that have not been tested that ought to be," he said.
"For victims of crime who may have been told that there's not enough DNA, or that the DNA didn't come up for proof, there'll be decisions made about testing samples in some of those cases.
"Then, in due course, upon those samples having been tested, contact will be made and the thing will be taken further. It will be a long process."
Mr Sofronoff suggested a sub-committee of scientists and lawyers could be established to retrospectively review cases during the next 12 months to determine which ones warranted re-testing of samples.
While the Queensland laboratory would be involved in re-testing some of the crime scene samples, he expected others to be sent to scientists both in Australia and New Zealand.
Queensland Sexual Assault Network secretariat Angela Lynch has welcomed the report, particularly the recommendation for a retrospective review of cases.
"We hope that it provides the government a way forward, and for victims as well, so that we can regain some trust in the criminal justice system," she said.
What did the report uncover about managing scientist Cathie Allen?
Mr Sofronoff was particularly critical of Ms Allen.
Ms Allen, who had been managing scientist at the laboratory since 2008, was suspended after his interim report in September.
Asked whether her leadership was the single biggest problem in the DNA laboratory over years, Mr Sofronoff replied: "Yes".
In his report, he accused her of lying about the work of the laboratory to her immediate supervisor and to senior police.
"Ms Allen has not been able to fulfill the responsibilities of her role," Mr Sofronoff wrote.
"I find that Cathie Allen mismanaged her time as managing scientist because she failed to devote sufficient time to scientific issues but was instead intimately involved in aspects of the laboratory that did not require her involvement."
He said that while Ms Allen's interest in scientific issues was compromised by her managerial focus, she felt it necessary to devote significant time and energy into the personal affairs of her staff, which included attempting to keep track of who was trying to fall pregnant for "budgetary reasons".
Forensic scientist Kirsty Wright, who helped trigger the inquiry by raising concerns about the laboratory in a podcast series last year, said Mr Sofronoff's report showed systemic issues had existed for years.
"It's proven that the lab has been broken for the last 10 years, even 15 years," she said.
"The inquiry showed the lab was broken at many levels, meaning that many of the processes weren't working properly.
"From the very early stages of recovering the DNA – so DNA extraction – all the way through to proper measuring of the DNA and interpreting the DNA.
"It's not just one or two things that have gone wrong, it's the entire system that has failed."
Dr Wright previously worked at the FSS lab and gave evidence at the inquiry.
What happens with the recommendations now?
While the report did not recommend criminal charges against anyone involved with the laboratory, it will be referred to the Crime and Corruption Commission for consideration.
Mr Sofronoff has suggested significant structural change at the lab, including that it should sit as an independent office within the Department of Justice and attorney-general.
He said a scientist "of the highest calibre" should be recruited as its head, with a focus on scientific integrity and the laboratory's purpose to serve the criminal justice system.
"Throughout the organisation, there must be new-found focus on scientific excellence, effective quality management and research and development," Mr Sofronoff wrote.
"To achieve those ends will require substantial fresh funding from the government."
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said she would convene a Cabinet Budget Review Committee to discuss funding Mr Sofronoff's recommendations.
"We will be thoroughly going through that over the next 48 hours," she said.
"The government is absolutely committed to the reform agenda.
"Paramount of all of this is justice for the victims."
