shirleymckie.myfastforum.org

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

Found the following on CLPEX:

Tribunal for McKie print expert
by charlton97 on Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:00 am

Tribunal for McKie print expert

Fiona McBride is claiming unfair dismissal.
One of the fingerprint experts at the heart of the Shirley McKie case, is due to begin her case at an employment tribunal in Glasgow later.

Fiona McBride is claiming unfair dismissal and demanding re-instatement.

Two years ago Ms McKie, a former detective, received a payment of £750,000 as compensation.

She had been wrongly being accused of entering a murder scene and perjury. The tribunal is scheduled to hear evidence over 10 days.

The case centred on a fingerprint which Scottish police experts said belonged to Ms McKie, but which many independent analysts said did not.

Fiona McBride and her colleagues maintained no mistake was made.

A report by MSPs said the officers involved had not acted maliciously.

Three of them accepted redundancy but Fiona McBride declined. She was eventually sacked.

Fiona McBride was the one who admitted to signing other workers "Initials" in Shirley's case.
And thank god she did as there would be no record of who had looked at it she said.

Scotsman Article:

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/McKie-case-expert-fights-.4485569.jp

Her videos are here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soMhwDueLUs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UmtgzFZJho

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

David Mulhearn is quoted in the Herald saying the following:

Following her dismissal she made "unreasonable" and "inappropriate" comments about the SCRO and Mr Mulhern to the Herald newspaper, he said.

Asked if he will consider re-employing Miss McBride at the SPSA, he said: "As a consequence of what's happened since, the very public statement Fiona has made, I can see no opportunity for that whatsoever."

Wonder if she also posted as Daktari on CLPEX

Pat A. Wertheim · Joined: 23 Apr 2007 Posts: 73 Location: USA

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

Hi Pat

Here is another quote from Mulhern in yesterdays Evening Times here:

He confirmed that he adopted the position there was a misidentification, as had the Scottish Government and the Association of Senior Police Officers and Her Majesty's Police Inspectors.

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.2445273.0.0.php

Strange he now admits there was a Misidentification after all these years eh ?

Wonder what our Fiona will make of that ?

Iain McKie · Joined: 08 May 2007 Posts: 263 Location: Ayr, Scotland.

Although interesting and indicative of the desperation of Fiona McBride, David Russell and others to avoid responsibility for the SCRO expert's criminality or total incompetence this tribunal is to a great extent a sideshow to the coming judicial enquiry where witnesses will be on oath.

In the coming week we can expect McBride and her associates to continue to use smoke and mirrors to try and avoid responsibility for anything. They have previous convictions for this when they claimed exoneration in the Black Report despite knowing that it was merely examining administrative and other processes and did not even look at the fingerprint evidence.

While we understand that the tribunal's main focus is examining whether employment law was breached we can still expect her to claim total vindication should she be fortunate enough to win

It is the judicial enquiry that will have the last word in this long running saga.

Hopefully we will all be on oath and at last the SCRO lies and innuendo will finally come home to roost.

Iain McKie · Joined: 08 May 2007 Posts: 263 Location: Ayr, Scotland.

Mr Colin McKerracher
Chief Constable
Grampian Police HQ
Queen Street.
Aberdeen.

24 September 2008

Dear Chief Constable,

After over 11 years of fighting for the truth to be revealed in my daughter’s case I thought I had lost the capacity to be shocked. You however have resurrected that ability by your comments at Fiona McBride’s employment tribunal reported in today’s ‘Herald’.

Big Wullie · Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 1149 Location: Glasgow

Despite McBride being sacked for her unwillingness to move to another part of fingerprinting she is still claiming it was because of Shirley McKie's case.

The poor demented woman just cannot accept she was no longer employable as Colin Boyd Stated to give evidence in court.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/other/display.var.2453592.0.0.php

The McLeod report should also be read to the tribunal where the conclusions like the following should be heard:

Scottish Executive
John Neil Macleod: Fingerprint Consultant:
I have successfully completed the Advanced Fingerprint Course at New
Scotland Yard.

He told MSPs on the parliament's Justice 1 Committee that just one clear difference in characteristics between two fingerprints was enough to rule out the possibility that they belonged to the same person.

"To start with, there were three or four and I stopped then to do my first report and came up to talk the Scottish Executive through it," he said.
"They asked me to go back and see how many faults there were, so I went back and did a second report which covers all the characteristics."
He said the total was initially put at 16 but the figure had been amended to 15 because there was one difference that was not clear.

Starting at the right hand side of the innermost re-curving ridge at the core
and crossing the next three ridges on the right at right angles, the next
characteristic is a clear ridge ending pointing up. (Marked 5 on Y7) There is
no such characteristic on Shirley McKIE's left thumb impression.

Crossing 2 ridges from characteristic 5 in Y7 towards 1 o'clock is a clear ridge
ending pointing up and slightly left. Crossing 2 from characteristic 5 on Shirley
McKIE's left thumb impression there is no such characteristic.

Moving towards 2 o'clock across 4 ridges from characteristic 14 on Y7 a clear
ridge ending (15) is found pointing up towards 11 o'clock. A similar
characteristic (15) is found on Shirley McKIE's left thumb impression.
immediately to the left of this characteristic is a ridge ending downwards (16)
on Shirley McKIE's left thumb impression. Immediately to the left of
characteristic 15 on Y7 a ridge can be seen clearly to go from one side of the
mark to the other in an arc.
7. This is a significant difference and from this point further comparison is
pointless. Shirley McKIE could not have made the mark in Y7.

Whether the fingerprint officers took reasonable care when identifying the
finger mark in the photograph referred to as Y7 is open to question.

Taking reasonable care would have shown that the mark Y7 had not been
made by Shirley McKIE.
17. In my opinion, given the quality of the mark, even if it had been made by
Shirley McKIE, and I do not believe that it was, it should not have been taken
to court.

18. It is my opinion that the differences between the characteristics in the mark Y7
and those in Shirley McKIE's left thumb can be clearly seen and that
reasonable care could not have been taken during the comparisons that
wrongly made this identification.
Fingerprint Consultant

15 Differences yet these idiots like McBride & Co want us to believe they Identified the right mark Y7.

McBride and the rest of them should all have been sacked without a single penny of our money for Gross Misconduct