Australian Capital Territory Current Acts

CRIMES (FORENSIC PROCEDURES) ACT 2000 - SECT 29

    (1)     The police officer must be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that—

        (a)     the suspect is in custody that is lawful custody; and

        (b)     if the forensic procedure is a procedure other than the taking of a handprint, fingerprint, footprint or toeprint—the offence for which the person is a suspect is a serious offence and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspect committed—

              (i)     that offence; or

              (ii)     another serious offence arising out of the same circumstances as that offence; or

              (iii)     another serious offence for which the evidence likely to be obtained because of carrying out the procedure on the suspect is likely to have probative value; and

        (c)     if the forensic procedure is the taking of a handprint, fingerprint, footprint or toeprint—the offence for which the person is a suspect is an offence other than an offence that may be dealt with by way of infringement notice and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspect committed—

              (i)     that offence; or

              (ii)     another offence (other than an offence that may be dealt with by way of infringement notice) arising out of the same circumstances as that offence; or

              (iii)     another offence (other than an offence that may be dealt with by way of infringement notice) for which the handprints, fingerprints, footprints or toeprints are likely to have probative value; and

        (d)     there are reasonable grounds to believe that the forensic procedure is likely to produce evidence tending to confirm or disprove that the suspect committed the relevant offence; and

        (e)     the carrying out of the forensic procedure without consent is justified in all the circumstances.

Note     Section 107 states that the burden lies on the prosecution to prove on the balance of probabilities that a police officer had a belief on reasonable grounds.

    (2)     In deciding whether the carrying out of the forensic procedure without consent is justified in all the circumstances, the police officer must balance the public interest in obtaining evidence tending to confirm or disprove that the suspect committed the offence concerned against the public interest in upholding the physical integrity of the suspect.

    (3)     In balancing those interests, the police officer must have regard to the following matters:

        (a)     the seriousness of the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence and the gravity of the offence;

        (b)     the degree of the suspect's alleged participation in the commission of the offence;

        (c)     the age, physical and mental health and cultural background of the suspect, to the extent that they are known to the police officer;

        (d)     whether there is a less intrusive but reasonably practicable way of obtaining evidence tending to confirm or disprove that the suspect committed the offence;

        (e)     if the suspect gives any reasons for refusing to consent—the reasons;

        (f)     any other matter considered relevant to balancing those interests.