Prosecution barrister Terence Mooney told Antrim Crown Court on Tuesday: "It is admissible on the basis that it is derived from scientific evidence which is reliable, proven and advanced by an expert in the field.  "It is therefore evidence upon which the court can place confidence and give weight."

However, the academic's "True Allele" method of analysing mixed genetic samples and deriving a likelihood ratio is relatively new and has never been admitted as evidence in a UK or Irish court, and only on a few occasions in the United States.

The defence believes the computer-based assessment of US expert Dr Mark Perlin has not been properly recognised by other scientists.

Defence counsel said Dr Perlin had a vested financial interest in gaining approval for his method, had failed to obtain widespread scientific acceptance and was overly secretive.

"Barry MacDonald, who represents Colin, said the court would be "reckless" to allow the evidence to stand. He added the reception from other scientists had been "lukewarm if not positively hostile" with only five to 10 laboratories using it.  "How that can be seriously described by anyone as commanding widespread acceptance in any scientific community is quite frankly beyond me," he said.

The court will sit again on Thursday.