The often-overlooked link: How does forensic examination affect a verdict?

In drug-related cases, people tend to think that the substance itself is what matters most: whether it was found and how many grams were involved. Yet few pay attention to the fact that the entire foundation of the prosecution often rests on one document — the forensic chemical examination report. And it is precisely this document that most often goes unchallenged, simply because it appears “scientific” and, at first glance, indisputable.

The weight “at the scene” is not a verdict

When police seize a substance, the first weighing is carried out directly at the place of detention — often approximately, without specialised equipment. This is only a preliminary result. The final, legally significant net weight can be established only through forensic examination. It is this figure that determines the legal classification: whether the conduct constitutes an administrative offence or criminal liability, and, if criminal, under which part of the relevant article.

A difference of just a few tenths of a gram may mean the difference between a fine and an actual prison sentence. That difference depends not only on chemistry, but also on how the substance was packaged, stored, and transported to the laboratory.

When equipment is not proof of intent

The Supreme Court has repeatedly noted in its case law that the presence of scales, zip-lock bags, or other “typical” items does not, by itself, constitute conclusive evidence of intent to distribute. Such evidence may be important, but it is only one element among many. If the defence demonstrates that the rest of the evidentiary picture does not support the allegation, reclassification to an offence involving possession may be possible where the relevant grounds exist.

At the same time, the same case law reveals the other side: where the evidence has been gathered comprehensively and consistently, courts apply a stricter approach without leniency. Even sincere remorse or positive character references do not alter the assessment of the social danger of the conduct.

This means one thing: the outcome of a case is often determined not by general impressions, but by how rigorously each piece of evidence — including the forensic examination — has been reviewed for procedural reliability.

A right often overlooked

Few suspects know that the defence is entitled not merely to “accept” the prosecution’s expert report, but to commission its own independent examination or obtain a professional review of it. The European Court of Human Rights has consistently stressed that a fair trial requires equality of arms: neither party should be placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with the other, including in matters involving expert evidence.

There have even been cases in which the ECtHR found a violation of the right to a fair trial because an examination had been conducted by a departmental institution linked to the prosecution, while doubts about the expert’s impartiality were never resolved.

In practice, this gives the defence an opportunity that is rarely used: to challenge not only the conclusion itself, but also the expert’s qualifications, the methodology used, and the integrity of the substance’s packaging from seizure to laboratory examination.

Only part of the picture

The issue of forensic examination is only one of the procedural factors that may determine the outcome of a drug case. Other questions include when to engage an independent specialist, how to formulate a motion for a repeat examination so that the court does not dismiss it, and which procedural violations should be documented at the seizure stage.

These are details that depend on the specific circumstances of each case. This is precisely where the difference between a standard defence and a well-considered defence becomes apparent.

If an expert report is involved in your case, it is worth not treating it as a final fact, but examining whether it can withstand scrutiny. Sometimes, that review can determine the outcome of the case.

Contact WINNER — we will help assess the situation, develop a legal position, and select the best defence strategy for your particular case.

Author: Nazar Al-Mzirawi, Attorney-at-Law, WINNER Law Firm.