Director of Public Prosecutions, Cindy Clarke today announced the completion of a comprehensive review of criminal matters which involved the analysis or interpretation of DNA evidence by Candy Zuleger of Trinity DNA Solutions, which had been called into question in 2024 by the Privy Council in the case of Julian Washington.

The review, initiated in response to concerns raised in 2024 in Julian Washington's case, examined a total of 273 cases and its completion marks a significant step in ensuring the integrity and reliability of the justice system.

“DNA evidence is one of the most powerful tools we have in the pursuit of justice,” said DPP Clarke “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.”

The DPP review was launched following the Privy Council decision that highlighted procedural and interpretive issues in the presentation of DNA evidence, in select trials.

The review initially covered the six-year time period between 2009 and 2015 in which Trinity DNA Solutions undertook forensic analysis for the Bermuda Police Service, which encompassed 244 cases.

However, DPP Clarke later expanded the period of review to include all cases where Trinity DNA provided analysis from 2006, causing a total of 273 cases to be evaluated. For this review, another forensics expert, whose work and methodology were approved by the Privy Council, was retained and consulted.

All cases which led to convictions that involved DNA analysis done by Trinity DNA Solutions were reviewed first, prioritizing the cases of defendants in custody. This included cases involving jury verdicts, judicial rulings, and guilty pleas. After this, outstanding cold cases that have not yet been prosecuted were reviewed, followed finally by cases in which defendants were acquitted.

The methodology employed by the DPP Clarke in assessing the safety of the convictions was to first consider each individual case anew without reference to the DNA Evidence, to determine the viability of the conviction against each suspect on each charge. Thereafter, the DPP considered what the defence case was in assessing the prospects of conviction.

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

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.

The key findings of the review were the identification of two unsafe convictions, which engaged the protocols approved by the Privy Council. Those 2 convictions have been referred to the Court of Appeal.  One Conviction has already been quashed, and the second is in train.

In the remaining 271 individually evaluated cases, no issues were identified that materially affected the outcome of the trials under review.

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

“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 DPP thanks all stakeholders, including His Excellency, the Governor; members of the judiciary; Dr. Barbara E. Llewellyn, PHD; Helix Genetic & Scientific Solutions and law enforcement partners, for their cooperation and input throughout the review process.