A shocking paternity fraud case in the UK has ended in jail time for a DNA lab worker and a father who conspired to fake a paternity test, evading nearly £94,000 in child maintenance payments — until the child’s mother took matters into her own hands.
Robert Patel, 38, a lab technician, and Sheldon Brown, 26, an HGV driver from Hampton, southwest London, were both sentenced at Guildford Crown Court after admitting to conspiracy to defraud, following a complex attempt to falsify DNA test results to deny paternity.
The plot was uncovered by Chelsea Miller, 31, who gave birth to her son Louie in March 2022. Brown reportedly left her just three days after the child was born, later denying he was the father. The two had submitted to a paternity test arranged by the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) — but the result claimed Brown was not the biological parent.
Miller, who described the experience as emotionally destabilizing, told The Sun UK, “I always knew who the father of my child was, but I was left questioning everything.”
DNA Fraud Scheme Unraveled
The court heard that Brown’s aunt approached Patel, who then supplied a saliva sample, forged a doctor’s signature, and used an official stamp to submit fraudulent materials to the testing service. If the lie had gone undetected, Brown stood to avoid an estimated £94,000 in child support payments over the child’s upbringing.
But Miller’s persistence led her to arrange a private DNA test with Brown’s mother, Katie, who agreed to participate. That test confirmed Louie was her biological grandson, prompting a further investigation that matched the original sample — not to Brown — but to Patel.
Patel, already convicted in 2017 for stealing £1,600 from a disabled individual, was traced as the fraudulent donor. Although no evidence was found that he received payment for his role, both he and Brown ultimately pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud.
Sentencing and Reaction
Brown was sentenced to 50 weeks in prison, while Patel received 33 weeks. The judge condemned the breach of trust, particularly on the part of Patel, whose role required a high degree of professional integrity.
In a statement following the case, Miller expressed her disgust and disappointment:
“The level of unprofessionalism and violation of trust in this case is beyond unacceptable. Patients deserve to feel safe and respected when receiving care, especially in situations as sensitive as this.”
She also called on authorities to ensure tighter oversight and accountability in DNA testing and child support proceedings:
“I sincerely hope this review encourages others to proceed with caution and prompts the relevant authorities to ensure such behaviour is never repeated.”
Legal Implications
This case raises serious concerns about safeguards in paternity testing and the potential for fraudulent manipulation in family law matters, particularly when child maintenance obligations are involved.
Legal experts say it may prompt new calls for tighter regulations on lab protocols and chain-of-custody procedures in civil paternity disputes.
