This episode contains adult themes and references to violence.

This podcast series is brought to you by me Headley Thomas and The Australian Aware.

The IDEs of March, wrote William Shakespeare in his play Julius Caesar.

He was talking about March fifteen, a day in the ancient Roman calendar that is associated with misfortune and doom.

It is the date on which Roman dictator Julius Caesar was assassinated in forty four BC.

On March fifteen and sixteen, twenty twenty three, a confidential briefing note about the Lab was prepared for the most senior public servant overseeing Queensland Health, a massive department.

The Commission of Inquiry, led by Walter Sofronoff, had delivered its findings three months earlier, in December twenty twenty two.

Doctor Lindsey Wilson Wilde had been the lab's interim CEO for just two months.

She was in total charge, awaiting the government's decision to confirm her in the big role on a permanent basis.

The subject of the briefing note to the Director General was Forensic Science Queensland Short Term Accommodation Options.

This land subject seriously downplayed the grave issues that the briefing note actually covered.

There was no shortage of misfortune and doom about the lab and its performance in its twenty twenty three IDEs of March briefing note.

The note was extensively referred to in doctor Kirsty Wright's scathing report two years later.

You've been hearing about it in these episodes of Shandy's legacy.

The current Attorney General deb Frecklington's office gave us a copy of the March twenty twenty three briefing note.

It has black boxes called redactions in places which conceal people's names and positions and some other information.

A reliable source said that a senior person in the lab wrote the briefing note and doctor Wilson Wilde approved its contents.

I have asked Lindsey about it, she declined to comment.

The start of the briefing note accurately described what was to come.

It says that since Lindsay Wilson Wilde started in the role of CEO in mid January twenty twenty three.

Multiple issues have been identified that present significant risks to business as usual operations at Forensic Science Queensland.

These risks also represent a significant threat to the successful implementation of the Commission of Inquiry recommendations and the ability to deliver on the Premier and the Minister's public commitment to becoming a world leading facility.

Attached to the briefing note was a sixteen page document called current Critical Risks at Forensic Science Queensland.

It identified eight risks said to be very high or critical risks requiring immediate attention.

They included contamination risk due to the layout of forensic biology facilities and the need for revalidation of end to end processes in forensic biology, the capacity and capability of existing forensic biology scientists, and the growing back of DNA samples.

The briefing Note warned that these critical risks affected the delivery of current forensic services as well as ongoing court matters.

Let's start now with what the document warned in relation to contamination risk.

Due to the layout of the lab's buildings, the significant potential for contamination introduces risks to the integrity of exhibits and therefore risks undermining the criminal justice process.

In particular, the evidence recovery function carries the highest risk for contamination and requires sterile DNA free spaces with minimal contamination risks.

As it currently stands, the Biology Facility LAYOUP cannot support Queensland delivering a world class forensic laboratory.

Next, the Critical Risks document identified an urgent need for a major revalidation of all equipment, processes and systems used in the laboratory, and according to the author, this was because of worryingly large gaps in the scientific knowledge and training of the staff who had already done the validations of crucial testing equipment and processes in the lab.

The warnings in the Critical Risks document from March twenty twenty three are stark and they are very serious.

Here's another section read by a voice actor.

There is a significant risk that samples being analyzed under current processes may not be delivering optimal outcomes or may require re analysis in the future.

Under the historical case review process, this risk will continue until all the processes are revalidated.

The CEO is unable to assert complete confidence in the methods utilized by forensic Biology until this work is undertaken.

This confidence is necessary to begin to rebuild stakeholder confidence in forensic biology and in the criminal justice system more broadly.

According to the critical risks document.

The forensic biology team fundamentally lack the capability and the capacity to implement the recommendations from Walter Sofronoff's inquiry.

A lack of openness to change and non acceptance of the findings of the Commission of Inquiry from some staff, including senior staff, is impacting on recommendation implementation.

There is a need to fully retrain existing forensic biology scientists in contemporary forensic biology techniques, including safety procedures and laboratory contamination minimization.

The level of knowledge of current forensic biologists within Forensic Science Queensland is a significant risk that must be addressed urgently to provide confidence that errors are not being made with current samples and processes.

The CEO is unable to assert complete confidence in the work being undertaken by forensic biologists until this further training is conducted.

Samples currently undergoing analysis may require re analysis in the future, and this situation will continue until staff training is adequate to ensure that all samples are processed in a way that meets best practice requirements.

In contrast, doctor Kirsty Wright's report after her investigations in twenty twenty five strongly defends the scientists.

Kirsty says that they had been following standard operating procedures and had completed all training required by previous managers.

The Sofronoff inquiry had found that it was the procedures, the training, and the previous managers themselves that were the problem, not the scientists.

We were shocked that the critical Risks document prepared by the lab warned that testing being done in and around March twenty twenty three might require a complete read do in the future.

Even more surprising was that the lab, under what was Lindsey Wilson Wilde's relatively new management in March twenty twenty three, did not suggest appause in operations.

Instead, it flagged the possibility of retesting in a somewhat cavalier way, given that it would actually mean the double handling of crime scene samples with all of the risks that would entail in cases, many of which would have proceeded through the criminal justice system before retesting, and the document did not acknowledge that shonky first round testing might compromise the samples and therefore affect the outcome of any retesting.

Moving on to testing backlogs, the Critical Risks document stated there were thirteen thousand unreported DNA samples as at March twenty twenty three, and these were growing at a rate of some one thousand samples a month.

The rate at which the backlog of unreported DNA samples is growing is not sustainable.

The impact that this growing backlog is having on an already highly stressed workforce cannot be underestimated.

The inability of the Forensic Biology Laboratory to conduct DNA analysis and provide results to the Queensland Police Service in a timely manner poses a significant risk to the continued detection and prevention of crime in Queensland.

In the Critical Risks document, a path forward for each of these risks was proposed.

For most of the risks, the focus was on recruiting new staff, staff training and cultural change.

For the significant contamination risk, which was said to arise from the layout of the facilities, the lab wanted immediate funding to spend on consolidating lab spaces, on construction and on buying new equipment, but it would be a temporary fix only if approved.

The document said.

A permanent solution would be building a new best practice DNA facility.

Despite the risks being stressed in this document.

There was no suggestion of stopping testing, no suggestion of ceasing to give possibly unreliable evidence to the police and courts, or of telling the police of the lab's concerns about the reliability of results.

This is both troubling and perplexing.

Kirsty's investigations in twenty twenty five make it clear that the dire situation outlined in the March twenty twenty three document demanded that drastic steps needed to be taken.

Put simply, if things were as bad as stated in that twenty twenty three document generated by Lindsey Wilson Wilde at an early stage of her lab leadership, then the onus was on hurt to shut the lab until it got fixed.

How could anyone rely on its science if its CEO held such grave doubts.

In her report in twenty twenty five, Kirsty said that these things should have happened.

All stakeholders should have been told of the critical risks.

All statements which the lab scientists had prepared for court cases needed to openly disclose what was going on, and crime samples needed to be sent to another lab which would not botch the testing and wouldn't compromise justice while the Queensland Lab staff were coming to grips with it all.

So what did happen next?

The briefing note recommended that the Director General of Queensland Health note four things they were one the current critical risks to Forensic Science Queensland as outlined in the document.

Two that the risks would be out lined at the Forensic Science Queensland Advisory Board meeting on March twenty eight, twenty twenty three.

Three that the risks had not been raised with Department of Justice and Attorney General or Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

And four that the risks had not been raised with the Minister for Health.

The briefing note proposed a meeting between we believe Lindsey Wilson Wilde and the Director General.

From our copy of the briefing note, it is clear that someone very senior in Queensland Health considered it on March seventeen, twenty twenty three.

That person's name and title have been redacted, but we assume it was the Director General to whom the briefing note was addressed.

At the time.

Sean Drummond was the Director General.

He resigned suddenly from Queensland Health.

A few months later, the Director General made so written comments in response to the briefing note.

He indicated that further information was needed.

He noted these points that it was the responsibility of the Lab CEO to work with the system to resolve and mitigate these risks.

That correspondence from the CEO is required outlining how the risks are being mitigated, That a meeting will be scheduled with the CEO and another unknown person whose name and position have been redacted, to discuss the mitigation strategies, and that until this occurred, the paper was not approved to go to the March twenty eight Advisory Board meeting.

There were some redactions in the Director General's comments.

It has been difficult to work out exactly what happened after this.

There has been a change of government and of course changes in staffing.

I asked doctor Kirsty Wright if she could shed any light on it.

Kirsty, did you see from your review how that was handled by the former government?

What did they do?

Is there a paper trail saying this is a problem, better go after it.

I didn't see any evidence of what happened next do.

We know whether the March briefing note was shared with the DNA Advisory Board.

There's no record of that in any of the minutes.

You have heard some references to the Advisory Board.

The first Commission of inquiry, the one that was led by Walter Soffronoff, recommended setting up such a board to provide independent expert oversight of the lab, to ensure scientific integrity and support new management and governance arrangements.

The board was made up of people from relevant government agencies, independent scientific experts, lawyers and victim's advocates, and it was initially chaired by the commissioner of that first inquiry, Walter Sofronoff.

Kirsty's review team did not uncover whether the information was disclosed to the then Attorney General Shannon Fentiman, the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, or to the then Minister for Health, a Vet Dath.

What we do know is that a meeting of several of the most senior public servants in Queensland was held on March twenty eighth, twenty twenty three, to talk about government reforms arising from the Sofronoff Commission of Inquiry.

Someone senior from the lab went to.

This one was a different meeting to the Advisory Board meeting held on March twenty eight.

You've written, though, that the critical concerns that were in that March twenty twenty three briefing note were not recorded in the minutes from that meeting.

That's Correctedley and I obtained the minutes from those meetings subsequent and there's nothing in any of the minutes in the many months after that either.

The next day, March twenty nine, twenty twenty three, the then Minister for Health, a Vet Darth, made a bland and trouble free sounding ministerial statement to the Queensland Parliament on the progress that had been made in response to the recommendations of the Sofronoff inquiry.

Here are parts of her statement to Parliament.

Since we received the final report on thirteen December last year, we've taken a range of immediate actions to restore faith in our crime justice system.

We have established the new Unit Forensic Science Queensland to help us deliver the best forensic DNA services in Australia, with the appointment of the highly respected Professor Lindsay Wilson Wilde as CEO.

Also soft Enough.

KC and Julie Dick SC have been appointed as co chairs of the Advisory Board for Forensic Science Queensland, and the first meeting of the full Interim Advisory Board occurred yesterday.

Work has been ongoing regarding the correction of one two hundred and sixty witness statements which were either untruthful or misleading, as recommended by the Interim port.

As of today, five hundred and sixty four cases have had their statements corrected.

The queens And Government made twenty nine point five million dollars available to support further testing and analysis of samples.

We will continue to deliver on the long term vision of establishing world class forensic DNA services and restoring the community's faith in our criminal justice system.

There were no red flags in that statement.

It sounded like the lad was getting on with things and implementing the inquiry's recommendations.

We cannot say whether the Minister knew at this time or subsequently about the critical risks at the lab that had been raised in that document less than two weeks earlier.

In the chronology of what looks like pretty shabby conduct by highly paid public servants and politicians, we now need to jump forward six months to September twenty twenty three.

As you heard in the last episode when we were talking about the testing of rape kits, it was in September twenty twenty three that Forensic Science Queensland got approval from Queensland Treasury to reallocate almost twenty million dollars to build Forensic Science Queensland's in house capability.

That money had previously been earmarked for external DNA testing.

By this time, the started cases testing backlog had blown out to eighteen thousand samples.

September twenty twenty three is also when the Queensland Government tabled in Parliament its first progress report since all the recommendations from the Sofronoff inquiry nine months earlier.

This glowing report had a foreword by Lindsey Wilson Wilde, as the chief executive Officer of the lab.

Her tone was positive and optimistic.

There was not a single mention anywhere of any of the critical risks raised in the March briefing.

Note another cover up Queensland style appeared well advanced.

Doctor Lindsey Wilson Wilde did acknowledge that the implementation of the recommendations from Walter Soffronoff's inquiry had, as she put it, not been without its challenges, but she said that with the resources and attitude towards change, she genuinely believed that the Lab could become a world leading forensic science service, and by December twenty twenty three, when the second progress report was prepared, Lindsey said she was unwavering in that belief.

Progress reports through twenty twenty four stated that the Lab was making significant progress on its journey and that Lindsey was confident the lab's work was of the highest quality.

Now there was another major event brewing in twenty twenty three.

Remember the briefing note which listed those critical risks that we talked about earlier, was written in March of that year.

But by July of twenty twenty three, I was working with my colleague David Murray on concerns which doctor Kirsty Wright had raised with us about something very significant that she had found in an inquiry document.

We're talking again now about the catastrophic Project thirteen, our revelations about Project thirteen, how it was the smoking gun, the reason the lab had failed to detect DNA in crime scene samples in Shandy's case and countless other cases going back to two thousand and seven led to the second Commission of Inquiry, the one the Government very reluctantly set up in late twenty twenty three.

That inquiry, run by Annabel Bennett, a retired Federal Court judge, states that it received an extremely large number of documents.

Most of those were produced by Queensland Health.

Now pause here to remember that the lab's March twenty twenty three briefing note was to the then Director General of Queensland Health.

We do not know whether the Bennett inquiries request for information to the Lab, Lab, Lindsay Wilson Wild or Queensland Health would have required the production of the March twenty twenty three briefing note to the inquiry.

We have asked the current Attorney General's Office for copies of the Bennett Inquiry's requests for information.

They're known as notices to produce.

The focus of the inquiry was, of course on Project thirteen, but the inquiry certainly did have an interest in the Lab's operation and progress.

In fact, the inquiry was used shamelessly, in my view, as something of a purported showcase for purported excellence of Lab leadership and operations.

Lindsay Wilson Wilde gave oral evidence to the inquiry over two days.

She also provided a very lengthy written statement.

It is common for an inquiry to ask a witness to cover certain tops in a written statement, and as you would expect, most of Lindsay's statement was concerned with the Project thirteen issues, but she did cover the then current practices at the LAB and the changes and reforms since she started as CEO in January twenty twenty three, including in response to the Soffronoff Inquiry recommendations of December the previous year.

These are her words, it's not her voice.

My priority when I commenced as CEO was to ensure that the results that were presently being released to Queensland Police Service and the Department of Public Prosecutions were accurate and reliable.

But what she did not go on to say was that in March of twenty twenty three, and we assume for quite some time before and after this, she held grave concerns that the lab's results were neither accurate nor reliable.

The March twenty twenty three briefing note had admitted this and flagged the need for the possible retesting of samples that were being processed in that year.

Remember the situation described in the briefing note read like a forensic lab's worst nightmare, overwhelming contamination risks, a lack of confidence in both the science and the scientists and their equipment.

Along with Lindsay Wilson Wilde's statement to the Benett inquiry, she included a document titled Achievements to Date for Adjunct Professor Lindsay Wilson WILDEAM since joining Forensic Science Queensland.

It described her work and changes made at the lab since her appointment.

So far, I believe that the changes we have made at Forensic Science Queensland have resulted in substantial changes to the mesa culture, quality, innovation and therefore the provision of results to the justice system.

Lindsay's statement does not give any impression that the lab was in dire trouble as had been reported in the March briefing note.

Her oral evidence under oath in the court room in the heart of Brisbane where the inquiry was being held with public hearings, didn't refer to the critical risks either.

She was asked about the lab's progress in implementing recommendations from the Sovereign Off Inquiry.

Here are voice actors for the inquiry's lawyer and his witness, doctor Wilson Wilde.

For convenience, I was going to move to the final topic.

What I wish to just invite you to inform the Commission of is that, since your appointment, are you able to just provide a general summary of the main steps and actions that have taken place in terms of seeking to implement the recommendations from the sofign Off Inquiry.

Absolutely, it would be my pleasure.

When I arrived at the laboratory in January, probably my first task was to have a look at the processes that they were doing currently and try to get my head around how the processes were occurring.

My primary focus was the current methods and the results going out of the door, because we had imminent trials and so it really was ensuring and has been ensuring that those results are fit for purpose.

Lindsay Wilson Wilde went on to describe many of the so called achievements under her watch at the lab.

In an earlier episode of Shandy's Legacy, my colleague and good friend Matt Condon described this part of her evidence like this.

Lindsay Wilson while was permitted free range to explain what the new lab was doing and how successful various areas were.

And it was a monologue which I think extended anywhere between eight ten minutes.

The monologue continued until the Commissioner, Annabelle Bennett said.

You don't have to give me a shopping list of absolutely everything you've done.

Those were Annabel Bennett's words, spoken by a voice actor.

Kirsty Wright's investigations in twenty twenty five found that back in October twenty twenty three, two lab projects had identified significant failings with DNA extraction methods being used to recover DNA from crime scene evidence.

Those methods were recovering significantly less DNA than other methods.

The DNA Review has found that since October twenty twenty three, Forensic Science Queensland presented unreliable DNA evidence using these methods to the police, who then used that before the courts, despite the awareness they had given the commencement of the Bennett Inquiry into Projects thirteen and the reputational risks.

Kirsty's investigations found that these failings should have been immediately communicated to police, disclosed in the reports that are used in criminal prosecutions, and reported to the DNA Advisory Board.

The extraction methods should have stopped immediately and testing should have been outsourced to another lab, along with any retesting of affected evidence.

We do not know whether Lindsey Wilson wild was aware of those issues at the time of her giving evidence to the Bennett Inquiry.

Now, the second inquiry, the one run by Annabelle Bennett, only needed to be set up because doctor Lindsay Wilson wild had made such a hash of things.

When she was the expert witness for the first inquiry, she had examined documents that showed the failure of Project thirteen.

Incredibly, she had failed to tell the inquiry what those documents conveyed.

That's why it got missed.

However, at the second inquiry, its head, Annabelle Bennett said this about Lindsey Wilson Wilde, who had by then changed her title to doctor after wrongly promoting herself as professor for months until it was established that that was an honorary title.

Doctor Wilson Wilde is now the Chief Executive Officer of Forensic Science Queensland.

The evidence is unequivocal that she is performing well in that role and implementing in a staged and managed fashion the recommendations of the First Commission of Inquiry.

The evidence supports without contradiction the work being done by doctor Wilson Wilde to address the First Commission of Inquiry recommendations.

This includes making major changes to the cultural and work practices of Forensic Science Queensland.

This will take some time.

There is no evidence to support concern for the ongoing work of Forensic Science Queensland under her direction and under the external supervision of the Interim Forensic Science Queensland Advisory Board and of Queensland Health.

There is no evidence that would undermine public confidence in the current work of Forensic Science Queensland.

It is impossible to reconcile the March twenty twenty three Briefing Note and Critical Risks Document with just seven months later Lindsey Wilson Wilde's evidence to the Benett Inquiry, and then that Inquiri's findings and the subsequent public statements about the lab's performance.

Given the seriousness and magnitude of the issues that are raised in the March twenty twenty three briefing note.

It seems extremely unlikely, if not completely impossible, that things could have drastically improved between March and October of twenty twenty three.

In our view, the Bennett Inquiry did not get a faint whisper of the catastrophic concerns raised in the March twenty twenty three briefing note, because we cannot see how Commissioner Bennett could have reached the conclusions you just heard if she had known about that document.

And if we're right and those issues were not raised with the Bennett Inquiry or after it, then why not.

It does seem extraordinary that such important issues with serious consequences would be raised so candidly in March twenty twenty three and then appear not to have been spoken of since, at least publicly.

In my view, relevant documents were withheld.

It looks like a cover up.

You might remember comments by the then Queensland Health Minister Shannon Fenterman when she spoke about the Bennett Inquiry's findings in a press conference in November twenty twenty three.

Importantly, Commissioner Bennett also found that there was no evidence that the public should not have confidence in the Lab and the work that is happening there now.

I do believe that Queenslanders should continue to have faith in the LAB and have faith in our criminal justice process, and I think that's what this commission has found.

I think now, given that the Commissioner Bennett has found that there is a lot of great work being done, I think we've now got to all move on.

Shannon Fenderman's comments were clearly based on the Bennett Inquiry's findings.

With all that has happened since, Shannon Fentamen is unlikely to be proud of these things.

Now.

We have invited Shannon Fentmen, who remains in State Parliament as a member, as well as her predecessor, Avet Darth, who has retired from politics, to explain to us what happened.

If they take up this offer, will include it in a future episode.

Your view though, as a result of that March twenty twenty three briefing note was that the LAB should have immediately ceased testing DNA evidence and told everyone what.

Was going on, oh, without question, as the number one priority, they should have stopped immediately.

That didn't occur.

No, that didn't occur, and the courts and the police weren't informed of these critical risks, and they were clear what the ramifications and risks were and public safety concern like they knew.

And within months we get this Commission of Inquiry that glosses over all of the problems that the then director, Lindsay Wilson Wilde, appears before, gives evidence under oath, and purports to that inquiry that everything in the lab is going swimmingly despite enormous challenges that she's inherited.

There's no indication of any of this current life disaster.

No, and that's completely opposite to the documents that the DNA review found showing that there was systemic contamination, unreliable results, and there was significant risks of incorrect judicial outcomes because the lab was knowingly releasing unreliable results.

On a breezy afternoon in late twenty twenty five, Mick Fuller has driven from the High Security Forensic Lab to our meeting place, a hillside overlooking a belt of green in the leafy western suburb of Brisbane.

There's a to talk about over an outdoor table, amid chattering cockatoos and nearby hackers wielding big sticks.

Welcome to the Saint Lucia Public Golf Course.

It's good to see you again.

As the new chief executive officer of the lab, the former Police Commissioner for New South Wales is trying to reverse major failures affecting the criminal justice system.

Mick Fuller has come alone to the interview.

There isn't a government media and communications manager insight.

He isn't trying to paint a rosy picture.

That would be a tall order.

He is candid and direct about the good, the bad and the ugly.

He is also relishing the opportunity to make a profound difference.

What did you know about Queensland's DNA testing laboratory before you came and given the due diligence you've asked have done before you took the job, why didn't you run a way and say anything but this.

One of the great challenges in being happy with work is a job where you have a sense of purpose.

Now, after five years of being the Commissioner, retiring in early twenty twenty two, I've had some great jobs, but they don't all come with a sense of purpose.

That was something that was missing in my life.

My wife had suggested to me that I was too young to retire and honestly, within ten minutes of having that conversation, the phone call came from Queensland.

Did I know anyone that would be interested and would have the ability to come in to really right the wrongs of the last ten years.

This will make it profound different people's lives.

Hence why I'm interested in It's about being the right person for the time.

My background is very regimented.

It's structure, it's accountability, it's reporting, it's statistics, it's data, and the lab doesn't have any of that.

And so people will say, well, how will we know if the scientists in the labs have stopped picking up DNA profiles from blood.

Which you should get every time.

Well, the answer to that is technology, and I'll be moving quickly to make sure that we are pulling all the data we can from the forensic register that will help pinpoint any problems at that front end where at the moment, all this systems are manual, and it could be a training issue, right, it could be an issue with the robot malfunctioning, But the cost of getting that wrong is the next victim of asexual assault or potentially homicide.

Purpose public duty, the themes arose in his interview with Sky News anchor Laura Jays after Mick Fuller was acknowledged for his leadership as the top cop.

After a decade as New South Wales Police Commissioner, Mick Fuller has been awarded an Order of Australia for his distinguished service as Police Commissioner and for criminal Intelligence Governance whils also advocating against domestic violence and alcohol related crime.

He joins me live now to be.

Recognized for doing something I love for thirty four years.

Very proud Australian today.

How do you reflect on your years of service?

Such a wonderful career.

It's been the most amazing adventure for myself and my family and it is so exciting and continues today.

There is such personal gain from giving back to the community.

Enjoy the day.

Recognize this award for what it is a very big honor.

Congratulations Meet Fuller.

Two years later, he has his hands completely full trying to fix the lab after stepping into the shoes of doctor Lindsey Wilson Wilde.

She became the CEO after Walter Soffronoff's inquiry and she lasted until June twenty twenty five, when she was abruptly stood down by the new government.

Listeners of The Teacher's pet from twenty eighteen will recall Mick Fuller as the police commissioner who made a bold decision back then to harness the power of that podcast series in a positive way.

His decision meant that police got more important information which went into the brief of evidence against Chris Dawson, who was ultimately found guilty in twenty twenty two of his wife Lynn's murder.

Mickfuller's strategy also helped repair the damage that had been done to the brand of New South Wales police for years of failure in Lynn's case.

But some judges who became involved when Chris Dawson and his lawyers argued that he could not get a fair trial because of the podcast, were disapproving of Mickfuller.

In my view, those judges were out of touch.

The then police chief took a pragmatic and victim focused approach.

It should be done more often.

He used the power of the podcast to help police deliver justice.

After four decades.

You go into those big events with the higher purpose about who's really important here and Lynn and family in the community, austrained community was so far behind that case.

I was criticized by the judiciary, and there was probably police who were unhappy with me.

Nick.

I formed the view then that you were a bit unusual as a senior public servant, as a police commissioner, A bit unusual in that you weren't prepared to just take the safe pathway, which would have probably meant avoiding me and avoiding the podcast.

You were prepared to take a risk, even against a bit of internal opposition.

Is that part of your ethos?

Is that part of your character.

Taking risks is part of being the boss.

I mean, they should be calculated risks, they should be well thought out.

I think in life there are gambles in terms of the risks that you do take.

But I felt in this case it was a worthwhile one if.

You think about the power of just the people that were listening, and the ability for you to build trust with people that perhaps don't naturally trust police, new witnesses or pieces of information that we would never have got access to, no matter.

How big the reward was.

I ran an organization with a.

Four point two billion dollar budget, twenty one thousand staff, eight million customers across the state of New South Wales.

I'm not a scientist right, but if you think about what forensic science Queensland should stand for, and that is protecting the victims of Queensland.

It is working with Queensland Police, Queensland dppery, the Queensland and Justice system.

They're all things that I dealt with every day.

He as not just the Commissioner or police but as a police officer.

The danger is me pretending that I'm a scientist.

Mick Fuller won't be peering into the microscopes in the lab on Brisbane's South Side, nor will he give scientific reports about an offender's DNA, but he is determined to grow his knowledge of the scientific techniques to better appreciate how things can be improved.

I need to understand the principle of how it works better every day and I do.

I invest, I ask questions and I'm writing stuff down.

And how the executive decisions that he can make will ensure the systems and staff are more effective.

People talk about changing culture like you change your meal order.

It's a big deal and it takes time, over years to really change the culture in the place, and unfortunately it involves changing people.

I think there will be people in time who won't want to come on the journey of transparency and accountability, and I think there's others that will flourish.

In that environment.

As exciting time to be coming to forensic science Queensland and you could be on the ground and be part of one of the biggest restructures and positive changes in Queensland government history.

When you were the commissioner at Police in New South Wales and in the years before you took on that top job, you would have seen the evolution of DNA to being the almost secret source the magic that can soolve so many unsolved crimes and more than perhaps any other piece of evidence has been considered above reproach absolutely head.

When I started, it was fingerprints, without a doubt.

DNA was this science that was infallible when you used properly.

It certainly is the most powerful tool we've ever seen in the justice system.

And yet we've learned that DNA in Queensland has failed many victims of crime and has failed the criminal justice system.

What is unbelievable in this case is it's almost a decade of disasters back to back.

At no point has someone drawn a line in the sand to say this is never going to happen again and at no cost should The other thing that was sort of shocking to me headly is I didn't feel as though anyone that Forensic Science Queensland had ever owned it.

I never apologized to the victims of Queensland for the state that the lab was left in.

I need to own this going forward.

Heavenly, I need to own every aspect of it if I'm to get any sense of trust back in the labs, not just from victims, from the community, from the media, from the courts, from the cops and the DPP, but it needs to have proper governance in place.

The structure needs to recognize the task at hand.

Training needs to be done mandatorily.

Policy documents need to be updated every year.

Quality assurance has to become one of the most important things that's embedded everything that we do.

It's the business that is broken that allowed the lad to do what it is today.

My business skills will be essential in getting the business.

Right that will hold the labs to account.

And I think that's the bit that we have gotten wrong in the past, is that we've focused on this science experiment while the business is failing.

Every aspect of it.

The brand is damaged, but not everyone who works there is damaged.

There are amazing things happening out there every day that unfortunately have been lost in the DNA debarkle.

What a fantastic opportunity for you to say to your counterparts of the police, we think we've got him.

It is a great feeling.

At the same time, scientists that are doing that work, they should celebrate those successes as well.

Police, particularly now collect a lot more evidence trying to solve crimes, which is their job, that does create backlogs.

And what we learned from the investigations that were done back in twenty twenty two was that the backlog was addressed by taking shortcuts, by changing thresholds so that fewer crimes were been detected.

The direct result of that was that offenders who should have been grabbed were never even identifying.

I think one of the problems is that the backlogs got so large that cutting corners was their only.

Option, but that was the worst option.

I will need the government support in outsourcing for some years to come.

My language and my actions is not about cutting corners.

Mick Fuller is adamant that the lab cannot compromise on its performance or its integrity again.

Otherwise, he told me its reputation will be so shot that it might have to close its doors and outsource all testing.

The consequences of getting this wrong is unbelievably huge in the justice system.

There are lots of smart people there who want to work hard and who want to do the right thing, who I would say ultimately will let down by leadership.

I asked Mick Fuller about the plight facing alleged rape victims like Magda from whom you heard in the previous episode.

Can you just clarify where your case is as you understand it from what you have been told, Hadley.

I think that's one of the challenges here.

I can't actually clarify because when I speak to the officer in charge, he himself doesn't know.

There's just still no results, that is the answer.

So I want to know where is my case.

Is it in the started case, is it in the not yet started?

So I don't know if it's in a queue, I don't know if it's shelved.

And I think that's what brings even more distress to this, because there's just no end in sight as to when this is going to come to an end.

A victim of crime who has no idea even after eighteen months of waiting a test result, why can't that victim of crime have a better sense of what's going on within the lab.

One of the government's commitments with the fifty million dollars in outsourcing is to get the backlogged around those sexual assault kits sorting.

How do you prioritize, how do you work out which ones go to the front of the queue.

That really comes down to police in the first instance, because they're trying to solve crime ones and keep the next victim safe.

I want to move away from us being as decision maker in the process.

You've got smart police, you've got smart lawyers.

I talk to police every other day, I talk to the DPP every week, and we're in contact with the court.

We should providing a service with infallible evidence that proves or disproves something.

Mick Fuller wants an online service which gives up to date information about cases and samples.

As we all know, you can send a gift via Australia Post or make an online order for a book, and each stage of the process is logged and trackable online.

On the other hand, you can be raped and you can submit a biological sample and then be kept in the dark for a year and a half and longer about what is happening with crucial evidence in an attack that has fundamentally changed your life.

When you talk about sexual assaults, the victims need so much courage to come forward in what is a difficult journey for them.

We're not helping in that journey in waiting years for someone to have their day in court.

I think that's a real loss to public safety and Queensland.

Is there a risk that there will be the identification of so many more offenders that Queensland's criminal justice system will come under stress in terms of processing prosecuting these alleged defenders.

It would be a nice problem to have, to be honest with you, If we are producing evidence that is solving crimes and putting people in custody because they're dangerous individuals, that's a much better outcome for the people of Queen's Lane.

And is there a cost to that?

There?

Probably is, helly, but I hate to think what the cost is of getting it wrong for a decade.

How much time are you prepared to give to this journey.

I have time on my hand, but I'm not here to drag this out either.

I need a big jump forward in twelve months to have new robotics in place, properly validated scientists that understand the business transparency measures in place.

I need to be reporting stuff on our website in terms of the backlogs and our performance.

So there's a lot to be done in the next twelve months.

I've given them a promise that I've made a commitment to stay and help them be a world class lab, which it should be, and really grab this thing by the horns and make the changes that probably should have been made a decade ago.

This episode of Shandy's Legacy was investigated and written by me Headley Thomas and Karina Berger.

Audio production for this podcast series is by Wasabi Audio and original theme music by Slade Gibson.

This podcast series is brought to you by me Headley Thomas and the Australian newspaper and digital side.

Visit Shandy dot com dot au that's s H A N d e E dot com dot Au for additional documentary material.

Anyone with information about the murder of Shandy Blackburn can contact me confidentially by email by going to Shandy dot com, dot au