Heres the deal with the sample:
The Irish Times has learned that the semen, which was initially matched to Wayne O'Donoghue, was not introduced by the DPP after the scientist who carried out the tests expressed some doubts after testing a second sample.
The first sample was taken from the palm of Robert's left hand by State Pathologist Dr Marie Cassidy at postmortem and, along with other samples from Robert's body, was given priority by the gardaí and sent to Britain for analysis.
A team under Dr Jonathan Whitaker at the Forensic Science Service laboratory at Wetherby, Yorkshire, tested the sample using a new DNA-testing technique called low copy number (LCN), which allows matches to be found from very few sample cells.
Dr Whitaker tested the swab taken from Robert's palm and compared it with a DNA sample taken from O'Donoghue when he was arrested by gardaí on January 16th, 2005.
Dr Whitaker concluded the likelihood of the semen sample coming from anyone else but O'Donoghue was one in 70 million and, on foot of his report in the spring, the DPP directed that O'Donoghue be charged with Robert's murder.
However, gardaí had also taken a number of items from O'Donoghue's house, including a mat from the bathroom where he said he had lain Robert, as he tried to revive him after strangling him outside the house on January 4th.
Samples of material taken from this bathroom mat were later sent to Wetherby where Dr Whitaker again carried out DNA LCN testing and concluded it also contained semen which was not identical to the semen from Robert's hand.
This second sample led him to express some doubts about his first analysis and he revised his report, declining to give a statistical likelihood of the first sample belonging to anyone else but O'Donoghue.
Upon receipt of Dr Whitaker's second amended report on the semen found on Robert's hand, the DPP decided it would be unsafe to introduce the sample as evidence as it was not sufficiently certain and could prejudice the State's case.
So because they found a second sample on the mat they were forced to revise their opinion on the first (presumably since it may have come from the mat also?) - its not conclusive but strangely if no seamen had been found on the mat he would have been charged with murder - you would think that they would have to find O'Donohue's seamen on the mat to invalidate the first conclusion. In any case while I am completely sympathetic to the Mother there needs to be consistency in how the law is applied and this will mean evidence is not allowed.
Again you would hope that this case is a rarity and that there would be no major disputes over evidence.
The Irish Times has learned that the semen, which was initially matched to Wayne O'Donoghue, was not introduced by the DPP after the scientist who carried out the tests expressed some doubts after testing a second sample.
The first sample was taken from the palm of Robert's left hand by State Pathologist Dr Marie Cassidy at postmortem and, along with other samples from Robert's body, was given priority by the gardaí and sent to Britain for analysis.
A team under Dr Jonathan Whitaker at the Forensic Science Service laboratory at Wetherby, Yorkshire, tested the sample using a new DNA-testing technique called low copy number (LCN), which allows matches to be found from very few sample cells.
Dr Whitaker tested the swab taken from Robert's palm and compared it with a DNA sample taken from O'Donoghue when he was arrested by gardaí on January 16th, 2005.
Dr Whitaker concluded the likelihood of the semen sample coming from anyone else but O'Donoghue was one in 70 million and, on foot of his report in the spring, the DPP directed that O'Donoghue be charged with Robert's murder.
However, gardaí had also taken a number of items from O'Donoghue's house, including a mat from the bathroom where he said he had lain Robert, as he tried to revive him after strangling him outside the house on January 4th.
Samples of material taken from this bathroom mat were later sent to Wetherby where Dr Whitaker again carried out DNA LCN testing and concluded it also contained semen which was not identical to the semen from Robert's hand.
This second sample led him to express some doubts about his first analysis and he revised his report, declining to give a statistical likelihood of the first sample belonging to anyone else but O'Donoghue.
Upon receipt of Dr Whitaker's second amended report on the semen found on Robert's hand, the DPP decided it would be unsafe to introduce the sample as evidence as it was not sufficiently certain and could prejudice the State's case.
So because they found a second sample on the mat they were forced to revise their opinion on the first (presumably since it may have come from the mat also?) - its not conclusive but strangely if no seamen had been found on the mat he would have been charged with murder - you would think that they would have to find O'Donohue's seamen on the mat to invalidate the first conclusion. In any case while I am completely sympathetic to the Mother there needs to be consistency in how the law is applied and this will mean evidence is not allowed.
Again you would hope that this case is a rarity and that there would be no major disputes over evidence.
