Elizabeth Byrne

But what the scientists knew was that techniques were advancing all the time.

It was getting better and better.

I have seen a few trials collapse on the basis of DNA evidence that didn't stand up.

But as time went on, the sort of rates of how you could tell if it was one person against another increased.

really improved the techniques for even uncovering that there was DNA there improved.

And they would have known that that was the trajectory of this science.

And so the foresight was, you know, probably quite a reasonable thing to expect of them.

But, you know, it is pretty incredible that they did go –

Exactly to the right place.

And that's because Gregor had remembered seeing somebody take a swig out of something from the fridge and they knew to test anything you could drink from.

Well, yes, she did.

This isn't unusual.

It often happens in cases where there's an overlap in what the defence will be.

Now, in this particular case, it was poking holes in the forensic evidence.

That was sort of the best part of the best chance to

get their clients off and to introduce, you know, doubt about things that the police had put forward and the prosecutors had put forward.

So Sky Jerome did take the lead.

She covered all the common ground and then covered some extra ground for her own client, which was, you know,

that he had admitted being there, even though he says he was only the lookout.

So Travis Jackson was left with the job of pointing out that the only evidence against his client was the DNA evidence, and that was what he focused on mostly as well.