R v Michael Neil Dyson No. SCCRM 96/357 Judgment No. 6053 Number of Pages 12 Criminal Law (1997) 68 Sasr 156

The appellant, Michael Neil Dyson, has appealed against his conviction for the abduction and rape of a 20-month-old child. Dyson's appeal was centred around the admissibility of certain evidence, which included DNA evidence obtained from fingernail scrapings and blood samples taken during a medical examination conducted while Dyson was in custody. The appellant contended that the evidence was obtained unlawfully and should not have been admitted. The Director of Public Prosecutions argued that the evidence was obtained lawfully and was admissible. The court was required to decide whether the taking of bodily samples under s81 of the Summary Offences Act 1953 (SA) was authorised and whether the evidence obtained should be excluded due to being obtained unlawfully. The court found that the evidence was admissible, even if it was obtained unlawfully, because the medical practitioner and police officers acted in good faith, relying on the decision of the Court in R v Franklin (1979) 22 SASR 101. The court held that the examination authorised by s81 of the Act extended beyond a visual examination and included the taking of samples or specimens from the body of the person being examined. The court rejected the argument that the examination should be limited to an external examination involving an examination by eye and by touch, as held in Fernando v Commissioner of Police (1995) 36 NSWLR 567. The appeal was dismissed.