However, the detainee?s latest version to the police points to another inmate who had been asked to do DNA tests but had refused. ?We have finally shed some light on this case. We believe the mystery around Nadine Dantier?s murder has been unveiled because what Jugmohunsingh revealed yesterday goes in the same direction as the investigation we have been carrying out for months. There are two suspects in this case,? commented a source close to the MCIT.

How can the MCIT be so sure about Jugmohunsingh?s version, as he has changed it between his letter and his face-to-face questioning? In fact, the detainee revealed that he knew the name of the suspect from the very beginning but he didn?t want to reveal it in the letter to prevent the suspect from being informed. The letter may have been a way for Jugmohunsingh to attract the MCIT?s attention but he wanted to take the suspect on a false lead as he knew that the letter would be opened in prison.

But this is not the only reason that warrants the MCIT?s acceptance of his final version. Not only did he give precise and detailed information about the circumstances of the murder but these details also match the MCIT?s suspicions. The investigators said they had circumstantial evidence against the suspect, a habitual criminal living in Albion.

According to witnesses, who have remained anonymous so far, the person they saw around the scene of crime, when the 21-year old university student was raped and killed on 25th June 2003 in Albion, was well-built, thus matching the conclusions of the forensic scientist. In view of the marks on her body, the medical officer thought the crime had been perpetrated either by a strong man or by more than one person.

As the suspect lives in Albion and has a criminal record ? the police had already reached the conclusion that he could be Nadine Dantier?s murderer. They had searched his house on the day her body was found but he was not there. As the police were not satisfied with his alibi, they had asked him to take DNA tests so that they could prove his presence or absence on the scene on that fateful day. But the suspect had refused the tests and nothing could be done to force him.

This is probably why the MCIT informed government house as soon as they got Jugmohunsing?s version. They might want the government to review the legislation around DNA tests and make it compulsory for any suspect ? and apply it ex post facto if the case proves it necessary. Information shows that the government is indeed working on a review of the law on DNA tests.

Such tests are becoming essential to shed light on certain crimes. Many developed countries have already adopted such a law and there is no doubt that it proves an effective aid to arresting criminals. It leaves no room for doubt: if the test is positive, the police know the suspect was on the scene of the crime.

However, if such legislation were indeed voted in Parliament, there would also be a need to review the mechanism of the tests. Even though Mauritius has had a local laboratory for seven years, the latter can?t really deliver the goods. The Forensic Science Laboratory has no international accreditation and can?t reach its own conclusions, which have to be sent to South Africa for confirmation. This takes a lot of time and prevents the enquiry from moving ahead. More than just legislation, there should be an overall review of the way in which enquiries are carried out?