A DNA investigation reveals a “concentration” incident amid strained work and personal relationships

The managing scientist at Queensland’s forensic science laboratory wanted to discipline several scientists over an office incident dubbed the “garbage gate”, an investigation into DNA testing has revealed.

Therese O’Connor, a former human resources adviser at the government-run Forensic and Scientific Services Facility, told the committee investigating the lab’s processes on Tuesday about the incident.

Ms O’Connor said it happened on senior scientist Amanda Reeves’ last day of work as she was cleaning her desk after being made redundant.

Ms Reeves moved a confidential container – a locked bin where confidential documents are left for shredding and burning – to her desk and emptied folders into it, Ms O’Connor told the inquest.

“While she was doing that, there were three people standing around talking to each other,” Ms O’Connor said.

“I can’t remember who was actually throwing the papers in the bin or exactly if all four of them were throwing papers in the bin or if it was just Amanda.”

Managing scientist Cathy Allen later retrieved the documents from the bin and called the three workers seen near Ms Reeves’ desk for interviews, the inquest heard.

“I remember Cathy Allen wanting to take disciplinary action against everyone involved,” Ms O’Connor said.

“What’s wrong with tossing confidential documents into a confidential disposal container? That’s what it’s for, isn’t it?” asked Commissioner Walter Sofronov KC.

“The implication was that they were documents that should have been retained and destroyed only when they met planning requirements,” Ms O’Connor said.

Ms O’Connor said she told Ms Allen there was insufficient evidence to support the disciplinary process.

“There wasn’t enough information to base a charge on because we couldn’t say who had put which confidential document in the bin,” Ms O’Connor said.

The investigation found that no disciplinary action was ever taken in relation to “bin-gate”.

Ms Allen’s barrister Matthew Hickey asked Ms O’Connor whether someone in his client’s position would have a duty to “gather information in circumstances where suspicion has arisen”.

“The alleged destruction of documents that should not be destroyed is something that a person in Kathy Allen’s position should not overlook?” Mr Hickey said.

“Absolutely. If proven, this would be a breach of potential policy-specific legislation,” Ms O’Connor said.

A culture described as “unhappy, very stressful, dysfunctional”

Counsel assisting Laura Rees sought Ms O’Connor’s professional opinion on the culture of the lab.

“It will be what we have described as a toxic workplace,” Ms O’Connor said.

“It’s a very unhappy, very stressful, dysfunctional workplace,” she said.

“There were underlying issues that were never resolved, and when you get an operating environment where those issues can build up and build, the emotional investment in that creates a lot of animosity between certain parties.”

Ms O’Connor said she understood relations between Ms Allen and Ms Reeves soured after they both applied for the managing scientist role.

“Cathy was successful and I understand that since then the working relationship between the two of them and the personal relationship between them has deteriorated significantly,” Ms O’Connor said.

Ms O’Connor said Ms Reeves’ role had been “effectively reduced” during the restructuring, despite plans to reintegrate her into the workplace.

Ms O’Connor said that while she was based at the lab, scientists had confided in her with concerns about processes, including DNA testing of the bones.

“They always wanted the matter to be confidential and I didn’t have to take any action,” Ms O’Connor said.

“They were afraid of Kathy Allen and that if they made a complaint they might be treated the same as Amanda [Reeves],” she said.

Not using bleach to clean tools ‘unambiguous’, says executive

The former head of the evidence recovery lab, Alan McNevin, was convicted of changes to cleaning processes that potentially caused contamination of bone samples.

The inquest heard that Mr McNevin recommended using bleach or TriGene, a type of disinfectant, followed by ethanol to clean the bone crushing equipment.

But Mr McNevin’s instructions on the procedure did not warn staff not to use bleach, which causes corrosion on metal tools.

The inquest heard earlier that rusty equipment contaminated bone samples after the protocol was changed.

Mr McNevin said he assumed those receiving his instructions would know how to use TriGene, which does not corrode metal.

“Why don’t you just say that in your email?” Counsel assisting Michael Hodge asked KC.

“I’m sorry, but it seemed pretty obvious to me when I was writing the email,” Mr McNevin replied.

“My apologies if it’s not obvious to anyone else. I also assumed that for all the lab stuff it would also be obvious because, like I said, that’s the way we do things in multiple areas of the lab,” he said.

“Isn’t that what you put in a document? Don’t use bleach on metal tools?” Mr. Sofronov asked.

“Isn’t the idea that you don’t use bleach on metal tools something fundamental to the new process you’re introducing?”

“I think Commissioner, because it’s so fundamental to laboratory processes that it’s a given,” Mr McNevin said.

“A lot of things are ‘givens’ that are in instructions in the form of standard operating procedures,” said Mr. Sofronov.

“Truck drivers are told not to enter the cab without having three points of contact. That’s a given. But they are called,” he said.

The investigation continues.