1. There are drugs on every banknote, so the evidence is irrelevant / does not add any value to a case
It’s true that nearly all banknotes contain traces of cocaine and other drugs. However, our methods and equipment can tell the difference between ‘expected’ levels, such as traces on notes received from banks, and the levels of contamination found on banknotes associated with drug related activities.
We compare samples of ‘general circulation’ banknotes in our database to samples of banknotes seized within an exhibit. Our banknote samples come from the central banks of England and Scotland and bank branches.
We assess the pattern and quantity of banknotes that have high levels of drug contamination to determine how likely it is they’ve been involved in drug related activities. This means one or two highly contaminated banknotes in an exhibit won’t necessarily skew your results.
2. The minimum value required for submission is £10,000 worth of banknotes
The minimum number of banknotes we normally ask for is 20 irregardless of their denomination.
In some cases, fewer than 20 notes can still provide evidential value, but this depends on the drug tested for.
3. Banknotes can’t be counted prior to submission. If they have been counted, they can’t be submitted.
Counting an exhibit prior to submission is not recommended as the environment the cash is counted in may introduce significant contamination - use a sheet/foil and gloves and retain these for later analysis.
Furthermore, in very rare cases, the banknotes themselves could transfer significant amounts of contamination to each other when counted.
However, a particular pattern of contamination is expected if the counting process itself had an effect.
This cannot be assessed until after analysis and as such counting an exhibit prior to submission could be a risk.
4. Banknotes must be in bundles – not loose
It isn’t essential for exhibits to be submitted in bundles; however, bundles can help demonstrate a pattern of contamination throughout the exhibit. For example, some dealers distribute more than one drug. This is sometimes evident in the pattern of contamination throughout each bundle, which may result in one bundle displaying high levels of cannabis contamination, while another bundle may display high levels of heroin.
Always send in the exhibit in its entirety!
5. Items like phones and clothes or cars aren’t worth analysing because it only helps show the presence of drugs
We’ve conducted studies that demonstrate typical items and vehicles don’t tend to be contaminated with drugs if there is no known positive association.
We suggest swabbing and analysing several locations on the item/vehicle to put the contamination into context. The more areas that are contaminated, the more unusual the contamination detected is.
Why not ask us about our DIY mobile phone or car kits? We supply these so Police Forces can take their own swabs in situ, rather than submitting the whole item!
6. Mass Spec Analytical evidence is too expensive
In July 2018 we released a new, pricing strategy for our services.
Our new pricing structure is based on the weight of the exhibit. This proportionately relates to the number of banknotes so reflects the amount of work involved.
We waive any charges if your job is not contaminated.
7. Polymer banknotes cannot be analysed
This isn’t true. Polymer banknotes are more difficult to analyse as they are a different matrix to paper banknotes, but they can still be analysed
They are analysed using a slightly different ISO-17025 accredited process compared to paper banknotes - they are swabbed rather than directly analysed
Interestingly, the pattern of contamination albeit at lower levels detected on polymer banknotes is very similar to that detected on paper banknotes. This makes differences in contamination seen on ‘drug’ money even more striking.
8. Mass Spec Analytical cannot analyse Scottish banknotes and other currencies
We have heard this argument several times before, so we tested it out AGAIN!
We obtained several samples of banknotes from three distribution/cash centres throughout Scotland, making sure we analysed all three of the Scottish bank’s currencies (Clydesdale, Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland).
The results show that the contamination on Scottish banknotes is very comparable to the contamination seen on Bank of England banknotes. This supports the view taken in our previous peer-reviewed studies that contamination on Scottish banknotes is no different to English banknotes.
9. Geographical location makes a difference to the contamination on the money
We’d heard arguments that different geographical locations could indicate the amount of drug contamination to expect, so we put this theory to test.
In 2007 and 2017 we conducted large scale studies by collecting sample banknotes from different locations including urban and rural areas, areas of different socio-economic class and high and low crime areas. We also obtained banknotes from distribution centres across the UK as a fair representation of banknotes circulated throughout the UK banking system.
All these studies demonstrated that contamination levels didn’t vary significantly from one region to another. It was concluded that, geographical location doesn’t have a bearing on the evidence or contamination on the money.
This study is further reinforced by our Scottish Banknote study.