An independent review is needed to determine if flawed DNA evidence was used in criminal trials in Bermuda between 2007 and 2016, according to the head of a British charity.

Parvais Jabbar told The Royal Gazette that an internal review of more than 400 cases — already embarked on by the Department of Public Prosecutions, after a miscarriage of justice was discovered in the murder conviction of Julian Washington — was not enough.

The co-executive director of the Death Penalty Project, based at UK law firm Simons Muirhead Burton, said there would “need to be a review of all the cases” in which forensic scientist Candy Zuleger, of Florida-based Trinity DNA Solutions, gave expert evidence, and it should be done by an independent commission.

“Our concern is that people have been convicted based on DNA evidence, specifically indistinguishable DNA mixtures, evidence which should never have been admitted at trial,” said Mr Jabbar.

“If you convict somebody on the basis of this, that raises serious concerns about the possibility of a wrongful conviction.”

Mr Jabbar’s call for an independent commission was backed by the Bermuda Equal Justice Initiative, which said in a statement: “Julian’s release marks a significant victory for justice, yet it raises profound questions about the depth of injustice in our criminal justice system.”

The local campaign group claimed that anything less than an independent commission of inquiry would “shatter the public’s confidence in the legitimacy of our criminal justice system”.

Mr Washington was convicted in 2014 of the gun murder of Stefan Burgess and attempted murder of Davano Brimmer, after prosecution witness Ms Zuleger told his Supreme Court trial that there was a 1-in-46 million chance that he was not a possible contributor to DNA found on bullet casings near the murder scene.

The 34-year-old, who was jailed for life, has always protested his innocence and a hearing was due to take place before Bermuda’s highest court of appeal next month, when his legal team was to argue that Ms Zuleger’s evidence was inaccurate and should not have been placed before the jury.

He was released from Westgate on May 3 after the Crown decided not to contest the case, instead inviting the board of the Privy Council in London to allow the appeal, quash all the counts on the indictment, and order that there be no retrial.

Cindy Clarke, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said she accepted there was a “miscarriage of justice in his case with respect to the DNA evidence”.

She explained this month: “The DNA evidence in that case was undermined by the lack of policies and procedures in place at the time for the specific typing and analysis that was relied upon at his trial.”

Ms Clarke said she had “ … directed that an immediate review commence of all matters which may be affected by the DNA issues raised in the Washington appeal”.

She added: “To date, over 400 matters have been reviewed. Three have been brought to my attention and none of those matters had been approved for prosecution.”

The Death Penalty Project, which was helping Mr Washington with his appeal, relied on the expert opinion of Dan Krane, a professor of biological sciences at Wright State University in Ohio, who concluded it would have been more appropriate to characterise the testing of the casing as “inconclusive” and exclude the evidence against Mr Washington entirely.

Mr Jabbar said that the May 8 Gazette article quoting the DPP was the “first I have heard about the DPP’s position”.

He said it was not sufficient or appropriate for the Department of Public Prosecutions to review its own work to see if there were other cases when Ms Zuleger may have given inaccurate DNA evidence that led to criminal convictions.

“It could have really wide implications because obviously [flawed DNA evidence] should never be used at the trial level,” he said.

“Right now, in Bermuda, there should be some serious concerns about whether this evidence has been used in other matters.”

His legal charity is also working on other Privy Council appeals in which DNA evidence might be critical, including that of Jeremiah Dill, who was found guilty of the murder of Perry Puckerin and sentenced to 35 years behind bars in 2018.

Mr Jabbar said any defendant convicted of a crime after Ms Zuleger gave DNA evidence at their trial, or carried out analysis, would likely want to take legal advice and counsel should be appointed to advise them.

He added: “This case has implications both in terms of Bermuda but also in other countries where this expert and the protocol they employed has been used, such as Cayman, the Bahamas and parts of the United States.“

Ms Zuleger was given a contract worth almost $1 million in 2009 by the Bermuda Police Service to set up the island’s first DNA database.

The BEJI said: “The question must be asked: what is the BPS now doing to ensure that the database is accurate?”

Darrin Simons, the Commissioner of Police, did not answer questions about the database or how many contracts Ms Zuleger had with the BPS.

In a response provided last week, he said: “I respect the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which resulted in the release of Julian Washington.

“Up until 2016, Trinity DNA Solutions provided DNA analysis of crime scene evidence and relevant expert witness testimony locally.

“The issues that led to the Privy Council ruling relate to the methodology used regarding testing of DNA found on bullet casings in the Stefan Burgess murder trial and how the conclusions, based on that analysis, were presented to the jury.”

A police spokesman said yesterday: “The Director of Public Prosecutions has already addressed the matter regarding a review of relevant cases, which has been completed.”

There was no response by press time to an e-mailed request for comment from the Chief Justice or the Attorney-General. It was not possible to reach Ms Zuleger.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers