Three News
May 12 2008; 13:54

Witness: 'Underwear DNA could be due to innocent transfer'
NZPA

Semen from her uncle found on the crotch of underwear worn by 10-year-old Charlene Nyasa Makaza could have been the result of "innocent transfer" in the wash, the defence contended at a High Court murder trial today.

Defence counsel Jonathan Eaton spent hours cross-examining scientist Susan Vintiner about the testing done by the ESR.

George Evans Gwaze, 54, a Zimbabwean man, denies that in January 2007 he sexually violated and murdered the girl, who was living as a member of his household in Christchurch.

Mrs Vintiner told Justice Lester Chisholm and the jury that it was "very unlikely" that sperm DNA recovered from the crotch of the pink underpants worn by Charlene Makaza on the night of the alleged attack, could have got there by innocent transfer in the laundry.

But she said she could not exclude innocent transfer as the explanation.

There was an elevated risk of transfer where people lived in the same household.

Samples - including those taken from Charlene Makaza's body - had been subjected to the most sensitive DNA profile testing available internationally, LCN testing.

All results were negative. Nothing matched the results found by testing the underwear.

Gwaze had also voluntarily submitted to a medical examination before Charlene's death, which took place about 24 hours after the alleged attack. That testing - including a penile swab - found no link to Charlene.

Mr Eaton pointed out that the total number of sperm heads in the sample on the underwear amounted to about 1000, compared to between 50 million and 500 million in a normal ejaculation.

The amount of DNA recovered in the sample amounted to about one hundred-thousandth of the weight of a grain of sugar.

Mrs Vintiner confirmed it would not be uncommon to find small amounts of DNA from other family members or flatmates on someone's clothing.

It had been shown that small numbers of sperm could transfer from semen-stained garments to other items when they were laundered.

Gwaze's wife had earlier told the trial that she had hand-washed underwear together from herself, her husband and Charlene, before it was taken for testing by ESR.

Mrs Vintiner said she would have expected that samples recovered from clothing, as a result of a couple having sex, would have had a mixture of cells from the woman as well as the man.

It had been shown that cotton garments retained about 43 percent of the semen that had been deposited on them before washing.

Rubbing garments together during hand washing could lead to the transfer of sperm between garments.

She was unable to say whether the DNA extracted from the crotch area of the underwear worn by Charlene had been on the inside or outside of the fabric.

The crown has contended at the three-week trial that Charlene's death was the result of suffocation during a brutal sexual violation, but the defence has said it was caused by a catastrophic collapse from an overwhelming infection and there had been no attack.