Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes

A forensic scientist who performed a CSI-style examination of her husband’s underpants to see if he was cheating has been fired from her job for misusing the police crime lab.
Ann Chamberlain, 33, testified at a divorce hearing that she ran the DNA test on the underwear of Charles Gordon Jr in September at the laboratory in Michigan where she had worked since 1999.
Asked by her lawyer what she found, she said: “Another female. It wasn’t me.” The couple, who have one child, were divorced in July.
The case has been dubbed “CSI: Laundry” in homage to the hit television show CSI: Miami, which stars David Caruso as a forensic analyst who heads a crime scene investigation unit.
The DNA test came to public attention when her husband’s lawyer sent a letter to Michigan State Police questioning improper DNA testing at the lab. He said that Mr Gordon — a former player in the Canadian Football League — disputed his wife’s claim that he acknowledged having sex with another woman after she found the female DNA on his briefs.
Ms Chamberlain has won numerous awards for her forensic work and given expert testimony in more than fifty cases, including a high-profile trial last year involving the death of 7-year-old Ricky Holland.
At a family court hearing in May, she said she ran the DNA test outside working hours with expired chemicals that were going to be thrown away. Court testimony revealed, however, that she had also conducted a paternity test for one of Mr Gordon’s friends and allowed her then-husband access to the lab while she was conducting the test.
Ms Chamberlain was suspended on full pay while Michigan State Police, which oversees the lab in Lansing, conducted a two-month internal investigation. On Tuesday, the police department announced that it had decided to dismiss her for violating a state policy that rules “department supplies, materials or equipment shall not be used for any non-duty or non-department purpose”.
Michael Maddaloni, Mr Gordon’s lawyer, said Ms Chamberlain had got off lightly because of her connections. “I think she should have been charged criminally for what she did, because she stole from the taxpayer,” he said. “She did not just test his underwear. She did numerous tests for a friend.” “Any other person would have been charged with a crime.” he said. “She has friends in high places.”
He added: “She has never produced the underwear at issue or the results of the test at issue”
Christopher Bommarito, president of Forensic Science Consultants, where Mrs Chamberlain also works, called her “an award-winning scientist with very high ethics and morals”.
“It is our understanding that she made an error in judgment at a time where she was under stress from both physical and emotional abuse,” Mr Bommarito, who is president-elect of the Midwestern Association of Forensic Scientists, said in a statement.
“We feel that the current situation in no way compromises her ability to function as a forensic scientist. While we hope that the state police will reconsider their decision, in the interim, Ms Chamberlain has taken on additional responsibilities in our company.”
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Unfortunately this happens all too often. Law enforcement personnel routinely do this sort of stuff, feeling they are above the law in some sort of way. I know based on first hand knowledge and the dismissal is justified. However, a thought remains, what about the others in the lab that also use equipment and supplies (other than the pens, etc.) for personal use and/or side businesses, which many of them have. There is way more to this story that has not and will probably not be disclosed.
Melissa, Livonia, Michigan
I feel that she is in the right for doing it, because she felt that her husband was cheating and she needed to be for sure so she would feel better. Maybe she needed to have proof that her husbaand was definetly doing something that was wrong. She was right, and she shoudn't be penalized for this. The chemicals were going to thrown away anyways, so why not allow her to use them so she could find out the truth about her cheating husband. I believe she should is an excellent scientist, and they can't afford to lose her in the lab. My Grandfather is a retired forensic scientist, he created the Kansas City Missouri Lab. I would defend him the same way, because he is the best they had. He still got calls all the way up to 90 yrs. old. She can keep that lab going with those brains, and solve many more cases.
Katherine Campbell, Kansas City, Kansas
This woman caught a cheating, lying spouse. She did what the rest of us would like to do! Her track record is excellent; the greater community will lose an advocate for victims in that she has been a careful forensic analyst if her dismissal remains permanent. I suggest she be compelled to pay for any materials she used and reinstated. She did not fabricate evidence of otherwise lie and she did not "bear false witness" and accuse someone falsely.
There are not enough facts presented concerning her
"running a paternity test for a friend" for me to consider the legality/morality of it.
Lilly, NYC,
Give'm a quick sniff? Once I had to test wife's garments for the presence of, well you know, as court proceedings were pending, but the supplies are available online. Why would the woman not avail herself to those?
Chris, Hope, Arkansas
Excellent, excellent point, R. Roe.
Jennifer Brown, Fort Walton Beach, Florida
Unfortunately she is in USA. If she is in China, surely there will be no chargres against her.
Eddie, Beijing,
Yes. I don't think it would have made a difference. I certainly don't think that this decision was gender related in any way.
Teri, St. Louis, MO
Excellent question, R. Roe.
Jennifer Brown, Fort Walton Beach, Florida
A case of 'sour grapes' by the husband's attorney, no doubt! The sanctity of life and the estate of marriage has been marginalized by society today. Adultery is among the most viscious breaches of civil law that one can commit, in its landscape is a carnage of innocent victims. Too bad for the Republic itself that adultery is so cavalierly regarded by pop culture and society in general! What the lady scientist did was to break a departmental regulation...big deal...but the effort established that her husband breached a civil contract that only a court of law may terminate; her efforts defended the ligitimate rights of the parties child to establish the truth surrounding the divorce action in a court of law; and, her efforts assisted a court of law in the essential process of 'truth' finding.
You go girl!
Matt Q. Bastian, Columbia, Tennessee
Would the same have happened if the scientist involved had been a man testing his wife's underwear?
R Roe, London,