❓ A parliamentary question regarding forensic evidence (hairs and fingerprints) in the Arthur Greer trial, specifically concerning the analysis of hairs found on the victim's underwear and a fingerprint found on tape around the victim's body. The response indicates hairs were retained but not analysed due to insufficient material, and disputes the circumstances of the fingerprint evidence.
AnsweredQoN 413Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to my question of 23 October regarding forensic evidence in the trial of Arthur Greer. (1) Evidence given by the forensic pathologist was that hairs were found in the knickers - I think the minister should read that as “underwear” - on the lower part of the body. (a) Have those hairs been retained; and (b) have they been analysed for mitochondrial DNA to determine whether they were hairs from the victim or from another person? (2) Evidence was also given that a fingerprint was found on the sticky side of the sealing tape around the body identified as that of Sharon Mason. (a) Has that fingerprint been retained; (b) was it matched with the fingerprints of Greer; and (c) did it match? (3) Was the fingerprint found on the sticky side of the sealing tape around the body of Sharon Mason matched with the fingerprint of any other persons to eliminate them as possible suspects? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
(1) Evidence given by the forensic pathologist was that hairs were found in the knickers - I think the minister should read that as “underwear” - on the lower part of the body. (a) Have those hairs been retained; and (b) have they been analysed for mitochondrial DNA to determine whether they were hairs from the victim or from another person? (2) Evidence was also given that a fingerprint was found on the sticky side of the sealing tape around the body identified as that of Sharon Mason. (a) Has that fingerprint been retained; (b) was it matched with the fingerprints of Greer; and (c) did it match? (3) Was the fingerprint found on the sticky side of the sealing tape around the body of Sharon Mason matched with the fingerprint of any other persons to eliminate them as possible suspects? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
(b) have they been analysed for mitochondrial DNA to determine whether they were hairs from the victim or from another person?
(b) was it matched with the fingerprints of Greer; and (c) did it match?
(c) did it match?
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
(b) No. (c) Not applicable.
(c) Not applicable.
(1) Evidence given by the forensic pathologist was that hairs were found in the knickers - I think the minister should read that as “underwear” - on the lower part of the body. (a) Have those hairs been retained; and (b) have they been analysed for mitochondrial DNA to determine whether they were hairs from the victim or from another person? (2) Evidence was also given that a fingerprint was found on the sticky side of the sealing tape around the body identified as that of Sharon Mason. (a) Has that fingerprint been retained; (b) was it matched with the fingerprints of Greer; and (c) did it match? (3) Was the fingerprint found on the sticky side of the sealing tape around the body of Sharon Mason matched with the fingerprint of any other persons to eliminate them as possible suspects? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
(b) have they been analysed for mitochondrial DNA to determine whether they were hairs from the victim or from another person?
(b) was it matched with the fingerprints of Greer; and (c) did it match?
(c) did it match?
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
The Minister for Police and Emergency Services has provided the following response - (1) (a) Yes. (b) No. The exhibit hairs in question did not contain sufficient material to enable this test to be conducted. (2) This question is not a true representation of the facts. Although a fingerprint exhibit was recovered during the investigation, it was not recovered in the circumstances outlined. (a) A photograph of the fingerprint on the tape is retained. (b) No. (c) Not applicable. (3) No.
(b) No. (c) Not applicable.
(c) Not applicable.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.