A review into cases potentially tainted by questionable DNA evidence has been completed, with two “unsafe” convictions identified among almost 300 matters.

Cindy Clarke, the Director of Public Prosecutions, announced yesterday that 273 cases had been reviewed after a ruling that called into question DNA evidence provided by Candy Zuleger of Trinity DNA Solutions.

Ms Clarke said that no issues were identified in 271 of the reviewed matters but two cases were found to be unsafe and have been referred to the Court of Appeal.

She added that one of the convictions, that of Anwar Muhammad, had already been quashed, while the second was progressing through the process.

“We have a duty to learn from past shortcomings and improve future practices,” Ms Clarke said.

“Our justice system must be rooted in truth, science and fairness.

“This review was not only about revisiting past cases but about ensuring that the administration of justice remains beyond reproach moving forward.”

The review was launched in 2024 after it was found that evidence submitted by Ms Zuleger, a US-based forensics expert, in the case of Julian Washington was “flawed” and unbalanced to the point that it wrongly implicated Mr Washington.

Ms Clarke said the review initially covered the six-year period between 2009 and 2015 in which Trinity DNA Solutions carried out forensic analysis work for the Bermuda Police Service, including 244 cases.

However, the review was later expanded to include all of the 273 cases in which Trinity DNA provided analysis since 2006.

The statement, released by a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice, said that as part of the review another forensics expert, whose work and methodology were approved by the Privy Council, was retained and consulted.

Cases which led to convictions were reviewed first, with priority given to cases where defendants were in custody, including as a result of jury verdicts, judicial rulings and guilty pleas.

The review subsequently examined outstanding cold cases that had not resulted in a prosecution and cases in which defendants were acquitted.

The statement said that as part of the review, the individual cases were each assessed to consider whether convictions were safe if DNA evidence was excluded, along with the viability of the conviction against each suspect on each charge and the defence case.

“The finding of whether a realistic prospect of conviction existed was based on an objective assessment of the evidence, guided by established legal principles,” the statement continued.

“What was considered was whether an objective, impartial and reasonable jury or magistrate, properly directed and acting in accordance with the law, was more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge alleged, without the DNA evidence.

“If the conclusion was that the jury or magistrate would so convict, then the conviction was considered safe.

“If the conclusion was that the jury or magistrate may not have convicted, the DNA evidence was sent to the independent expert to be reviewed.”

Ms Clarke said: “DNA evidence is one of the most powerful tools we have in the pursuit of justice but it is essential that such evidence is used accurately, responsibly and transparently.

“This review demonstrates our commitment to upholding those principles and to ensuring that every conviction rests on sound legal and scientific footing.”

Eron Hill, the director of the Bermuda Equal Justice Initiative, called for a “truly independent review” to be conducted.

He said: “The DPP is the one who prosecuted these cases and it was only after Julian Washington advanced his appeal to the Privy Council that this was discovered.

“So it was only accepted by the DPP that there were errors after hundreds of thousands of dollars and ten years of a man languishing in prison.

“It’s completely unacceptable and insufficient for the review to only be conducted by the DPP and we call on the Governor and the Government to ensure that a full Commission of Inquiry into the conduct of Trinity DNA Solutions and then that DNA is done.”

Mr Hill added: “We are working with a number of individuals who are still incarcerated who have not been contacted — not once at all — to confirm that their case was being reviewed and that’s concerning.

“The unfortunate part of the way that the review was conducted by the DPP is that there are now going to be a slew of judicial review challenges by affected individuals questioning the lawfulness of the DPP’s review.

“You cannot be the judge, the jury and the executioner, and that’s precisely what has happened here.”

• 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