Archive for shirleymckie.myfastforum.org To allow readers to post comments on current issues related to the Shirley McKie case
 


       shirleymckie.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Test Forum 1
Karen

The Case of Caroline Igoe

This is a website which is still in the very early stages. More information will be added to it.

http://carolineigoe.webs.com/


On 17 January 2009 in Hazelwood Grove, Edinburgh, Martyn Barclay was shot with one bullet to the side of the head.  Sadly Martyn Barclay died later that day.

Caroline Igoe was the girlfriend of Martyn Barclay.

The gun used in the shooting belonged to Martyn Barclay.

Caroline was subsequently charged and convicted of the murder. She received a life sentence,  with a minimum of 20 years before she can apply for parole.  Lord Bracadale stated, " It means that after that period has expired your case can be considered by the Parole Board and they will decide whether, and if so, when you might be released.

The Crown case against Caroline Igoe was a circumstantial case.

Caroline Igoe has maintained that she is innocent of this murder from the start.
Her family paid for a lie detector test, which Caroline passed. Although they know that this is not admissable in a court of law.

Caroline Igoe has not had an appeal against her conviction.
Big Wullie

I must say how many more cases are there out there complaining about James Douglas Keegan QC.

How long will it be before someone investigates this character.
Karen

As far as I am aware there are at least a few more cases who are willing to complain about this QC.

Will keep you updated.
david

"Caroline's lawyers presented NO DEFENCE at all. No experts either and the jury were never told by the defence that there was no gun residue found on Caroline Igoe."

Its no coincidence that Mr Keegan is again mentioned. He didn't call any defence experts in my case.

Another coincidence is that there are three cases on this forum where the cases were investigated by officers from the same Police Station. St. Leonards Police Station. One only has to look at the proximity of these cases in Edinburgh.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?sa...rds+Police+Station,+Saint+Leonard's+Lane,+Edinburgh&hl=en&ll=55.912273,-3.111877&spn=0.872806,2.705383&sll=55.929202,-3.088531&sspn=0.054527,0.169086&geocode=FcqoVAMd9ILR_ynzRbR1HryHSDE7MbYiLTKORg%3BFd0kVQMdzzzQ_yn9lHmixLiHSDHO2BAXEzVLMA%3BFa9MVQMdD8PP_ynt1nyVmbiHSDF8ZTm9GzVy7w%3BFfWeVQMduH3P_yFg8H4MQMMPfCnJayTegMeHSDFg8H4MQMMPfA&oq=St.+Leonards+Police+Station,+Saint+LeonLane,+Edinburgh&mra=ls&t=m&z=9
Big Wullie

It looks to me as if her defence were negligent for not consulting a forensic scientist at the time of trial to counteract what the crown were suggesting.

The fact there is no residue and no witnesses to say they saw her shooting this guy defies belief.

Exactly what evidence did they rely upon ? is that a stupid question ?

Besides this I do not see any motive.

I understand there has now been forensic tests carried out which contradict the Crown case and these should be submitted to the appeal court using section 111 (2) as I see no evidence she has had an appeal.

Her reason for asking the brother to remove the gun was so he did not get into any trouble for having it, was this presented to the jury as part of her defence ?

Perhaps she should also be complaining to the SLCC regarding Mr Keegan who we all know does not like presenting any defence.

It defies belief that he would not try and challenge the forensic evidence particularly if there was no discharge residue found on her or any of her clothing.
Big Wullie

From what I have seen the guy was unstable taking illegal drugs and mixing them with alcohol.

Was it suggested to the jury he might have killed himself ?

My reason for thinking this is the drugs and alcohol and the actions of him after ending the relationship with the mother of his Son.

Perhaps with the mixture of drugs and alcohol and the fact Caroline was not answering him might just have sent him over the edge thinking another relationship had failed.

It is well documented that suicides occur on a regular basis because of relationships ending.

I feel very strongly that if he was carrying this gun and was so mixed up with drugs and alcohol it is possible he might have committed suicide outside her house or might even have been fooling about but the gun had a hairline trigger or something.
Big Wullie

Am I correct in saying the gun was so unstable the police could not test it Karen ?
david

Prosecutor Alex Prentice QC said his death was an "act of cold-blooded murder executed with chilling military precision"


Doesn't bare the hallmarks of a female model.

I know it took the police a very long time before charging Caroline Igoe so that in itself intimates a circumstancial case.

Did the police pursue any other suspects, like the people that were threatening his life?

It seems they have approached this case with tunnel vision and built a murder case on nothing. As usual, they will let the jury decide. The big problem with that in this case is Caroline Igoe was represented in the High Court by a defence counsel that has a habit of not calling any expert witnesses for the defence.

I'm wondering why Jim Keegan didn't call any expert witnesses in her defence.

Lothian & Borders Police were desperate and under pressure with this alleged murder. There had been previous shootings related to the area in question.
Karen

Big Wullie wrote:
From what I have seen the guy was unstable taking illegal drugs and mixing them with alcohol.

Was it suggested to the jury he might have killed himself ?

My reason for thinking this is the drugs and alcohol and the actions of him after ending the relationship with the mother of his Son.

Perhaps with the mixture of drugs and alcohol and the fact Caroline was not answering him might just have sent him over the edge thinking another relationship had failed.

It is well documented that suicides occur on a regular basis because of relationships ending.



I feel very strongly that if he was carrying this gun and was so mixed up with drugs and alcohol it is possible he might have committed suicide outside her house or might even have been fooling about but the gun had a hairline trigger or something.



There was a suggestion that this could have been an accidental suicide.  Caroline's mother told the court she thought he had perhaps been larking about when she discovered he had been shot.

During some conversations I have had with the family, I was told there was a doctor who spoke about suicide  at the court.  I need to get the information on this.

Quote:
BAFFLED cops probing the shooting of a drug runner now think he may have committed suicide.They are examining claims that dad-of one Martyn Barclay used a modified weapon to shoot himself in the side of the head.
The bizarre theory has been prompted by a wall of silence surrounding the inquiry.


Quote:
A source close to the investigation said last night: "Forensic evidence shows Barclay was shot at very close range which would fit the suicide theory.

"Experts are advising police. They believe Barclay had access to a firearm.


Quote:
"The victim has no defensive wounds and it's thought Barclay and his girlfriend had had an argument before the shooting took place

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news...dealer-may-have-committed-1012530
Karen

Big Wullie wrote:
Am I correct in saying the gun was so unstable the police could not test it Karen ?


Yes Wullie. It had been modified and was not safe.
Karen

Big Wullie wrote:
It looks to me as if her defence were negligent for not consulting a forensic scientist at the time of trial to counteract what the crown were suggesting.

The fact there is no residue and no witnesses to say they saw her shooting this guy defies belief.

Exactly what evidence did they rely upon ? is that a stupid question ?

Besides this I do not see any motive.

I understand there has now been forensic tests carried out which contradict the Crown case and these should be submitted to the appeal court using section 111 (2) as I see no evidence she has had an appeal.

Her reason for asking the brother to remove the gun was so he did not get into any trouble for having it, was this presented to the jury as part of her defence ?

Perhaps she should also be complaining to the SLCC regarding Mr Keegan who we all know does not like presenting any defence.

It defies belief that he would not try and challenge the forensic evidence particularly if there was no discharge residue found on her or any of her clothing.


After 6 months they decided that Caroline Igoe had been so angry at her boyfriend for going out when she did not want him to that she shot him.


Mr Keegan asked her if she killed Mr Barclay or was involved in his death. She said no.
The trial heard when Ms Igoe was first in the relationship with Mr Barclay he had warned her there were people after him.
She said: “He told me there had been turf wars against different parts of Edinburgh.
Mr Keegan asked if Mr Barclay had a gun. She said: “Martyn done a robbery of a bookmakers and I found out afterwards.
“He showed me it, he came to my mum’s house with it

The court heard when she went outside she saw Paul Igoe who picked a gun up and brought it to the door, but she admitted she did not tell police about this because she didn't want to get her brother in trouble.


the evidence against her was:

The gun used to shoot the deceased belonged to him.

There was evidence that Caroline Igoe knew that he had a gun.
There was evidence that some days prior to the shooting she had made a remark indicating that he had shown her how to use it. That evidence was of significance in the light of evidence from one of the ballistics experts that there was a difficulty with the operation of the safety catch which meant that knowledge of how to use this particular gun was necessary. From other remarks which Caroline Igoe had made in the days before the shooting it could be inferred that the gun was stored in the house at Hazelwood Grove. She made reference to her parents' anger if they found out about it.

There was a chapter of evidence relating to a pillowcase and two socks which were recovered in the street outside the house and in a nearby lane. There was firearms residue on the exterior and interior surfaces of the pillowcase and on one of the socks.
There was evidence that the gun had been wrapped in the pillowcase and the socks.

DNA from skin cells was found on the pillowcase and one of the socks in amounts which were more consistent with handling rather than secondary contact.

This DNA matched the DNA profile of Caroline Igoe.

While other items lying in the street were damp as a result of earlier rain, the pillowcase and socks were dry, giving rise to an inference that they had been taken from the house shortly before the shooting.

There was forensic evidence as to blood spatter on the lower legs of the trousers which Caroline Igoe was wearing on the night of the murder. The pattern of spatter was consistent with her having been present when Martyn Barclay was shot.

There was evidence of Caroline Igoe's name being used before and after the bang heard by witnesses.

There was evidence that shortly after the shooting Paul Igoe attended and removed the gun which was still lying beside Martyn Barclay.

He went to the door of the house and had a meeting with Caroline Igoe. In addition, there were certain other adminicles of evidence on which the Crown relied.

On the basis of the circumstantial evidence the Crown invited the jury to draw the inference that Caroline Igoe had shot Martyn Barclay
Karen

david wrote:
Prosecutor Alex Prentice QC said his death was an "act of cold-blooded murder executed with chilling military precision"


Doesn't bare the hallmarks of a female model.

I know it took the police a very long time before charging Caroline Igoe so that in itself intimates a circumstancial case.

Did the police pursue any other suspects, like the people that were threatening his life?

It seems they have approached this case with tunnel vision and built a murder case on nothing. As usual, they will let the jury decide. The big problem with that in this case is Caroline Igoe was represented in the High Court by a defence counsel that has a habit of not calling any expert witnesses for the defence.

I'm wondering why Jim Keegan didn't call any expert witnesses in her defence.

Lothian & Borders Police were desperate and under pressure with this alleged murder. There had been previous shootings related to the area in question.



The court wanted the jury to believe and they clearly did, that Caroline Igoe left the house to get the gun, which was supposedly hidden somewhere by Martyn. She then walked up to Martyn shot him point blank in the head. Left the gun at the scene and walked back to the house calmly and went back on her laptop.  They worked out there was an 8 minute lapse of use in the computer so this is when the murder must have happened.  So in 8 minutes she is meant to have done all the above then casually went back to the laptop.

Jim Keegan told her she must go on the stand and she was to answer yes or no to questions and not go into detail.

It seems no other suspects were looked at David. Except for a guy called Kenny Carruthers, who had charges dropped.

Quote:
A third accused, Kenneth Carruthers, has denied possessing a gun on January 17 last year. He also pled not guilty to attempting to defeat the ends of justice.

He is accused of taking possession of the gun used in the killing at a property at Walter Scott Avenue, before transporting it to Craigmillar Castle Park and burying it.

Carruthers is also accused of committing the charges whilst on bail.

http://www.stv.tv/weather/168124-...go-on-trial-for-edinburgh-murder/

Quote:
Mr Carruthers was formerly a co-accused of Paul and Caroline Igoe, after denying firearms charges and attempting to pervert the course of justice, but the Crown withdrew the charges.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/8618576.stm
I do know that even after the gun was found, the police continued to search the Igoe home. They would do this randomly.

They arrested the mother of Caroline Igoe and took her to the police station where she was questioned for days.  One of the officers asked her why she was looking at him. she replied, "because I am answering your questions"  he told her not to look at him but to look at the wall when he speaks to her.
Karen

Quote:
Paul Igoe, 37, has been charged with the murder of Mr Barclay (pictured).

Mr Igoe is also accused of attempting to pervert the course of justice and a charge under the Firearms Act.

Caroline Igoe, 31, and her mother Margaret Igoe, 61, have also been charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice, while Kenneth Carruthers, 36, faces charges under the Firearms Act and attempting to pervert the course of justice.


http://news.stv.tv/scotland/10127...-over-murder-of-edinburgh-father/
Karen

There was also a taxi driver who stopped in his taxi, got out, saw Martyn and drove off. He phoned his wife to call 999.



Quote:
Barclay had gone out with friends and, when he phoned, they argued as he was drunk and had spent all his money.

He returned to the house at about 5.30am and neighbour James Wilson, 78, told the court he was awoken by a "bang" which he initially thought was a car door slamming shut.

Igoe maintained she heard what sounded like a stone being thrown at a window and when she looked out Barclay was lying on the ground and she thought he was drunk.

She claimed she rang her brother Paul, who lived nearby, and waited until he arrived before going outside.

He picked up Barclay's gun from the pavement and took it away, she said.

Igoe told the jury: "I panicked ... I was frightened and scared and I didn't know what to do.

Barclay was rushed to Edinburgh Royal Infirmary where a rmed police surrounded the department for fear of further violence. But the real killer was inside pretending to grieve with his family.

Initially, the police investigation drew a blank and in court the Igoes' mother Margaret, 61, was accused of creating "a wall of silence" around her family.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news...-turned-assassin-to-shoot-1057741
Karen

Mother of Martyn Barclay murder accused gives evidence

The mother of a brother and sister accused of murder has told a jury that police told her the alleged victim had shot himself.

Margaret Igoe, 61, was giving evidence at the trial of her children Paul Igoe, or Hunter, 37, and Caroline Igoe.

The siblings are accused of shooting Martyn Barclay, 26, in the head in the Inch area of Edinburgh last January. He died of his injuries in hospital.

Mr Igoe and his 32-year-old sister - Mr Barclay's girlfriend - deny murder.

Margaret Igoe told the court she had been woken up in the early hours of 17 January last year by telephone calls to her daughter.

She said Ms Igoe told her that Mr Barclay had been shouting up at her window, had thrown a stone and was lying drunk in the street.

Ms Igoe said: "She (Caroline) said she was going back to bed and I said no you better go and get him or he'll end up getting lifted and she said she would get Paul to go and get him up.

"Caroline was at the window and said here's Paul coming up the street now."

Ms Igoe, a retired post officer worker, said her daughter went downstairs to help her brother and she was called down shortly afterwards.

Advocate depute Alex Prentice QC asked her what she saw when she got there.

She replied: "Martyn Barclay was lying in the street, his head facing outwards into the street.

"He was on the back of his head as if he had fallen and cracked the back of his head.

"He had told us there was people after him and there was a price on his head and Caroline said 'has he been shot?' or words to that effect, and I said no, it looks like he has fallen on a piece of glass."

'Save my son'

Ms Igoe said when she got outside her son had already left.

The court heard she later found out Mr Igoe had removed a gun from the scene and admitted she did not tell police.

Mr Prentice asked her: "Why didn't you take some steps to ensure the recovery of this gun?"

Ms Igoe replied: "I don't know, probably to save my son from getting put in prison."

When asked why she failed to tell police that Mr Igoe had removed the gun, she said it was because police told her Mr Barclay had shot himself and she did not want to get her son into trouble.

The brother and sister both deny murder and firearms charges, involving possession of a gun, and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

The trial, before Lord Bracadale, continues.


- See more at: http://www.edinburghwired.co.uk/n...ves-evidence#sthash.dSY3WKhq.dpuf
Big Wullie

Am I correct in saying that a taxi driver spotted the victim and called his wife to call an ambulance ?

Next Question.

Why did he not just phone an ambulance himself ?

Next Question.

What did he tell his wife that would make her call an ambulance ?

Then we come to Ms Igoe entering the street from her house.

What time did she call an ambulance.

I am interested in the time frames here.

I am also interested in knowing WHY the taxi driver thought he needed an ambulance.

I think this could be proof he was already shot before Caroline Igoe even left her house.
Karen

Big Wullie wrote:
Am I correct in saying that a taxi driver spotted the victim and called his wife to call an ambulance ?

Next Question.

Why did he not just phone an ambulance himself ?

Next Question.

What did he tell his wife that would make her call an ambulance ?

Then we come to Ms Igoe entering the street from her house.

What time did she call an ambulance.

I am interested in the time frames here.

I am also interested in knowing WHY the taxi driver thought he needed an ambulance.

I think this could be proof he was already shot before Caroline Igoe even left her house.


yes there was a taxi driver who called his wife. He told her there was a guy lying in the street and he had a hire or was on the way to a hire.

Caroline did not call the ambulance, her mother did.  Caroline went out in the street when her brother came to the door showing her the gun. Caroline had seen him coming along the street, then he tried to get Martyn up. She saw him pick something up which turned out to be the gun.  This is when Caroline told him to get rid of it as Martyn would get the jail.
Martyn was discovered around 6am.
Caroline went out to try get Martyn up after this. That was when her mother called the ambulance.

Someone else must have saw the taxi driver because it was said the taxi driver got out the car then got back in and drove off.
Perhaps it was the neighbour who said this.

There are lots of questions that need answers and I will try to get the answers.

It would be interesting to see the phone records of calls made to 999.
Karen

I have been wondering about this.

Quote:
Found lying unconscious in Hazelwood Grove at 6am by a passer-by, the 26-year-old was later transferred from the ERI to the neurology unit at the Western General Hospital, where surgeons battled to save him.


http://www.scotsman.com/news/100-...martyn-barclay-s-killer-1-1204703


If Martyn was found by a passer by, and seen by the taxi driver, and her brother Paul came along after Caroline called him then how come Caroline Igoe has been named as the first person on the scene?
Karen

More references to the passer by

Quote:
Martyn Barclay, 26, was found unconscious by a member of the public in Hazelwood Grove at 0600 GMT on Saturday, but later died.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7844291.stm

Quote:
Although Mr Barclay was alive when he was discovered by a passer by, he died in the capital's Western General Hospital later that evening from a gunshot wound to the head.


http://www.journal-online.co.uk/a...lowing-alleged-drugs-feud-killing
Karen

This is from the day after the shooting.

Quote:
A man is in a serious condition after being shot in the head in the south side of Edinburgh.
Police said the 26-year-old was discovered unconscious in Hazelwood Grove at about 0600 GMT on Saturday by a member of the public.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7835423.stm

Wonder if the police got these people?

Quote:

He said that detectives were particularly keen to speak to a man and woman in their early 20s who visited the petrol station near to the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary in the early hours of Saturday morning.
They were both described as being about 5ft 6in, with the man wearing a brown leather jacket and jeans.
The woman, who had long blonde hair, was wearing a grey woollen crocheted hat and a short black leather jacket.
Ch Insp MacKinnon added: "They both came from the direction of the high flats at Mordeun, and we would like them to come forward as soon as possible.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7838011.stm
david

Quote:

"They both came from the direction of the high flats at Mordeun, and we would like them to come forward as soon as possible.



There is approximately 50- 75 CCTV cameras surrounding Moredun flats so surely these people would have been seen on the very least one. Even if they never went into the flats they would still be seen on the many exterior cameras.
Karen

Wonder if they police checked out those camera's or if the people came forward?  Will see if I can find out.
Karen

Caroline Igoe was told by her defence to say yes or No to questions put to her and not to go into any detail.

This must have made her look bad to the jury.

Has this happened in any other case?

I still cannot get over the fact that the jury did not get told about Caroline Igoe being negative for residue.
david

Was there an expert called for the defence in relation to the blood splatter evidence?

Or did Jim Keegan just try his luck as usual by contradicting this evidence without the back up of an expert?
Karen

There was no expert for the defence for anything David.
david

I'm wondering where all the Legal Aid went in this case.

A murder trial without any defence witnesses. Her solicitors should be ashamed of themselves.

These solicitors were quick at assembling a protest outside Parliament when they thought their money was being cut. I'm beginning to wonder if defence teams are making more money by not calling expert witnesses.

I say this because 3 solicitors firms never called one expert out of three defences in my case. Where did our allocation of legal aid go to?

I now hear that Crown evidence conveyed to the court has now been alarmingly contradicted in Caroline's case. It is beyond belief that this expert wasn't contacted before the trial by the defence. Sounds like an Anderson ground to me. Was this lack of professional judgementt a strategic approach by the defence  - absolutely laughable.
Karen

david wrote:
I'm wondering where all the Legal Aid went in this case.

A murder trial without any defence witnesses. Her solicitors should be ashamed of themselves.

These solicitors were quick at assembling a protest outside Parliament when they thought their money was being cut. I'm beginning to wonder if defence teams are making more money by not calling expert witnesses.

I say this because 3 solicitors firms never called one expert out of three defences in my case. Where did our allocation of legal aid go to?

I now hear that Crown evidence conveyed to the court has now been alarmingly contradicted in Caroline's case. It is beyond belief that this expert wasn't contacted before the trial by the defence. Sounds like an Anderson ground to me. Was this lack of professional judgementt a strategic approach by the defence  - absolutely laughable.



she has been told there is no money in the pot.  The family had to scrape together £1500 for a forensic report. they also managed to get the money for the lie detector test. She passed on every single question. The woman who did the lie detector test has done many tests in Texas and USA as a whole.
Big Wullie

I wonder what this Mr Barclay was doing carrying a gun in the first place.

Does anyone know if he ever used it for an illegal purpose ?
david

There was intimation from Caroline herself that Mr Barclay tried to rob a bookmakers by using a gun 2 miles from where he was found shot.

http://www.deadlinenews.co.uk/2009/01/14/468/
david

Does anyone know if there was any complaints made against the Crown and Police regarding this case?
Big Wullie

As far as I know David nothing has been lodged.
david

wullie

Do you know if a DCI Deas was involved with this case?

I faintly remember his name being mentioned in the press in relation to the discovery of the gun at Edinburgh Council tip on dalkeith road.


David
Big Wullie

david wrote:
wullie

Do you know if a DCI Deas was involved with this case?

I faintly remember his name being mentioned in the press in relation to the discovery of the gun at Edinburgh Council tip on dalkeith road.


David


Maybe a Google Search might throw something up.
david

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/n...nds-police-chief-may-face-1288967

Reed previously served as a DCI at Lothian and Borders in Edinburgh.
While there, he led the investigation into the 2009 gun murder of labourer Martin Barclay by his girlfriend Caroline Igoe. "


I wonder what happened with this?
Karen

Liz this is the topic for Caroline here.
Big Wullie

From a facebook comment here:

https://www.facebook.com/CarolineIgoeCase?fref=ts

Three sets of prints on murder weapon, None Caroline Igoe's

One was in prison one could not be named and the other was never charged.

No residue on clothes.

How many times do we see the courts relying on facts like these to convict people yet they are all missing in this case.
W.Roughead

No residue on clothes and no fingerprints found to be hers on gun.

I'm just thinking aloud here but if she was involved it is so very possible that she wore gloves and that she changed her clothes, and washed any residue from her hands.

But, equally more than likely if the lassie is innocent none of this applies.
Karen

I have just spoken to Caroline's dad.

I asked him "Was the gun that shot Martyn Barclay proven to be the one belonging to him?"

He replied, "The Crown had one expert who said it was. And there was another who said it wasn't"  So basically no one is yet sure of what the answer to that question is.

Caroline and her parents and brother Paul all tried helping Martyn at the scene. Mrs Igoe called 999 and Mr Igoe Snr who has a bad back, asked Caroline to help him move Martyn because he sounded like he was choking. Mrs Igoe shouted from the door while on the phone to emergency services not to move him because blood was coming from his head.

Caroline's father was not called by the prosecution to give evidence but was told he would be called by the defence. He attended court every day for over three weeks and was never called to give evidence by the defence.

He also tells me that Martyn was indeed found by a passerby.

There were so many witnesses not called in this case by the defence.

Tests on the gun show no fingerprints of Caroline Igoe on it.

There was no residue on her. The defence did not tell the jury those details.

People who were waiting to give evidence were sitting in another room while people who were attending the trial were coming into tell them what was being said.

One of the other co accused had his case dropped yet his fingerprints were on the gun.
Karen

W.Roughead wrote:
No residue on clothes and no fingerprints found to be hers on gun.

I'm just thinking aloud here but if she was involved it is so very possible that she wore gloves and that she changed her clothes, and washed any residue from her hands.

But, equally more than likely if the lassie is innocent none of this applies.


She had jammies on but changed her slippers to shoes when she was going to the hospital with paramedics.
She had grabbed a hoodie top to wear over the jammies.

Its an awful case and yet another one I hope the truth comes out in.
W.Roughead

I always have to keep an open mind.  Suffice it to say, that whatever the case, I think it must be truly awful to be in prison for a crime you didn't commit if you know in your own heart you truly did not commit - it must be awful.

I don't like to assume anything until I'm very familiar with a case.

I truly wish that half the murderers who have never been brought to book will one day be discovered.

Ever the optimist of course, I remain convinced that in all cases, the perpetrator will be unearthed.
Karen

I know what you mean W Roughead.

Trying to get all the info I can about this case and will post whatever I find out.

I too am optimistic that  the correct people will be brought to justice also.
Big Wullie

W.Roughead wrote:
No residue on clothes and no fingerprints found to be hers on gun.

I'm just thinking aloud here but if she was involved it is so very possible that she wore gloves and that she changed her clothes, and washed any residue from her hands.

But, equally more than likely if the lassie is innocent none of this applies.


There is absolutely no insinuation anyone at the scene was wearing gloves.

So how would you explain the passing of the lie detector ?
W.Roughead

Big Wullie wrote:
W.Roughead wrote:
No residue on clothes and no fingerprints found to be hers on gun.

I'm just thinking aloud here but if she was involved it is so very possible that she wore gloves and that she changed her clothes, and washed any residue from her hands.

But, equally more than likely if the lassie is innocent none of this applies.


There is absolutely no insinuation anyone at the scene was wearing gloves.

So how would you explain the passing of the lie detector ?


No, I don't think anyone made an insinuation that she was wearing gloves, but you have to consider everything - remember none of us were there, so we can't backup anything we might have running through our minds.  So, I speak in general terms.

As for the lie detector - sorry, I can't explain that one, then again I don't know how reliable these are deemed to be.

Hopefully, in the fullness of time the real killer will turn up.
Big Wullie

Quote:
As for the lie detector - sorry, I can't explain that one, then again I don't know how reliable these are deemed to be.


I am alive to all angles and particular the ways people can cover things up believe me.

We need only look at the Simon hall case for evidence that people can be taken in and fooled or even the Adrian Prout case.

In Adrian Prout he only confessed after he failed a lie detector test so in this case it was correct would you not agree ?

What about 96% accurate would you accept that as credible and reliable ?

Sorry for the edits:

Quote:
Hopefully, in the fullness of time the real killer will turn up.


Do you think he might just turn himself or herself into the police then ?
W.Roughead

Adrian Prout advised the police that the test was 'not wrong', that is perfectly true.   I don't actually have any interest in that case, and know very little about it.

As for the Simon Hall case - I have no comments.

As for your comment about the murderer just turning up and handing himself or herself into the police - this is sarcastic in tone.  I think like minded people will know exactly what I mean.
Karen

This is a comment from Caroline's mother on her website


Quote:
I know for a fact that none of my family shot Martyn Barclay. for a start there was no motive for it.  Martyn got on all right with all of my family and he enjoyed being part of our family.  we never did anything to hurt martyn if anything we only helped him by giving him a roof over his head and i can swear this by almighty god and if the person who stopped his car and got out and seen martyn lying there called the police instead of getting back in his car and driving off he could have proved that caroline and paul came on he scene after martyn had been shot and i think that somebody out there knows what happened and i dont know how they can sleep at night knowing someone is doing time for a crime they did not commit
Big Wullie

W.Roughead wrote:
Adrian Prout advised the police that the test was 'not wrong', that is perfectly true.   I don't actually have any interest in that case, and know very little about it.

As for the Simon Hall case - I have no comments.

As for your comment about the murderer just turning up and handing himself or herself into the police - this is sarcastic in tone.  I think like minded people will know exactly what I mean.


I can assure you my comment was not meant in a sarcastic way rather it was in answer to the way you had phrased your comment.

How many cases have you ever heard of turning up after someone else is convicted

You failed to answer the most important point though: 96% accurate, do you not agree this is pretty high and would be convincing for a jury ?
W.Roughead

Wullie - make no mistake about it.  I didn't and, I don't 'fail to answer' any questions.    I choose to answer in my own way and, in my own time, and not when you or anyone else on this forum, insists that I answer just because you tell me to answer - that goes for anyone else on this forum.

96% is excellent 4% is not.    I think 100% which can be proved to be cast iron would be terrific.

I think you and I will never agree on many subjects, but I think you would like it if everyone who posts in these forums agreed totally with you.

One of the things this forum needs which most other forums have is a Moderator, apart from Admin coming in from time to time to moderate, when I'm sure he has more to do in a given day, this is the norm elsewhere.  Indeed, I have been a moderator for 12 years on another forum, where personal attacks of the kind I've seen on here recently would never have got that far.

I respect your right to have opinions Wullie, and often respect some of those opinions you hold.

But, I will answer when I choose to answer and when I have time to answer - no sooner.

Incidentally, just for the record.  I am very clued up on Scots Law, particularly Criminal Law and Scotland is my interest.   I have no particular interest in cases in the USA or in England and Wales, whether there is justice or injustice - those places have a large enough population to deal with those cases than Scotland does.
Big Wullie

W.Roughead wrote:
Wullie - make no mistake about it.  I didn't and, I don't 'fail to answer' any questions.    I choose to answer in my own way and, in my own time, and not when you or anyone else on this forum, insists that I answer just because you tell me to answer - that goes for anyone else on this forum.

96% is excellent 4% is not.    I think 100% which can be proved to be cast iron would be terrific.

I think you and I will never agree on many subjects, but I think you would like it if everyone who posts in these forums agreed totally with you.

One of the things this forum needs which most other forums have is a Moderator, apart from Admin coming in from time to time to moderate, when I'm sure he has more to do in a given day, this is the norm elsewhere.  Indeed, I have been a moderator for 12 years on another forum, where personal attacks of the kind I've seen on here recently would never have got that far.

I respect your right to have opinions Wullie, and often respect some of those opinions you hold.

But, I will answer when I choose to answer and when I have time to answer - no sooner.

Incidentally, just for the record.  I am very clued up on Scots Law, particularly Criminal Law and Scotland is my interest.   I have no particular interest in cases in the USA or in England and Wales, whether there is justice or injustice - those places have a large enough population to deal with those cases than Scotland does.


Just for clarity I see nothing in any of my comments demanding you answer any particular question at any particular time.

There is a difference from saying someone failed to answer a question and demanding they answer it right now or on any given time.

If we all agreed with each other it would be a terrible place but just to clear matters up, the point I was coming to was this:

If Lie Detectors are 96% accurate and not allowed in any UK courts why are our courts accepting identification evidence on a regular basis when it is well documented that it causes 75% of Miscarriages.

Hence the reason I was asking you again about Lie Detectors.

What evidence will ever be 100% accurate ?

Surely you will agree we can all ask each other questions ?

Did Lord Carloway not say he wanted Scotland to be like England and that other European jurisdictions had abolished corroboration so Scotland should follow suit.

For these reason I see other jurisdictions as being very relevant to Scottish Law.

Indeed our Scottish courts if you have any interest mention even American cases when coming to conclusions along with others in England & Wales
W.Roughead

There is nothing richer in life than being able to debate in a coherent and intelligent way, which is one of the reasons I enjoy debates on many subjects.  You will never get two people to agree on certain subjects, regardless, we are all entitled to our perceptions.

I hope there is a good, just and fair outcome in this case and that Miss Igoe wins.

As far as Scots Law is concerned, I happen to believe we have the finest legal system in the world, but I also agree that there are areas that need to be updated, which I hope will be the case in the fullness of time.  Our law has both English and Northern Ireland elements within it, but it also has its own unique aspects, most of which I hope we never lose.   There are parts which need to be brought up-to-date with modern times.

I have certainly made my feelings known in various places when it comes to eye-witness evidence, as I think there are difficulties with it.  I think the best eye-witness accounts are those taken within a very short space of the time of the particular sighting.   I think an awful lot gets lost in the months ahead.

You can put this another way, I think that if a man or a woman were attacked in a very horrible way, and lives to tell the tale, then I think that person will never forget the face of their attacker - assuming the face was visible.  I would say this was good eye-witness recall.

We can all postulate about cases, but at the end of the day it is very difficult to know what someone is going through unless the rest of us have been there, it is well nigh impossible.
Big Wullie

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news...ms-family-outrage-web-bid-2176334

Outrage of victim's family over web bid to free killer model whom they say is a 'nutjob' and is 'guilty as hell'

17 Aug 2013 08:02 CAROLINE Igoe is serving 20 years for shooting and killing her boyfriend Martyn Barclay outside her family home in Edinburgh.

SUPPORTERS of a wannabe model who murdered her boyfriend have sparked outrage by calling for an appeal.

Caroline Igoe is serving at least 20 years for blasting Martyn Barclay to death with his own
gun outside her family home in Edinburgh.

The 34-year-old was jailed for life in 2010 for shooting Martyn, 26, in the head after he turned up drunk at the house in the Inch area.

Now friends and family are trying to drum up public support for an appeal for the convicted killer through a Facebook page, an online poll and another internet site, claiming she was never allowed to tell her full story in court.

Igoe’s parents Margaret and Joseph have posted on the pages, claiming their daughter is
innocent. But there’s been an angry backlash from bloggers, including one of Martyn’s relatives.

One post said: “I am related to Martyn and was in court every day.

“Get your facts right. She is guilty as hell. She is a nutjob and deserves to be locked up. In fact that is too good for her.”

Facebook page The Case of Caroline Igoe claims she was convicted on circumstantial evidence and wasn’t given a proper defence case.

It says: “Caroline deserves to have her full case heard in the courts. She is not asking that she is simply freed. She is asking that people really look at her case and that the courts
will do the same thing.”

An account of the night of the murder from “Caroline’s side” has also been posted, claiming Martyn had already been shot when she went out to find him lying in the street.

Connected website The Caroline Igoe Case offers the public the chance to vote on whether the mum should be given an appeal – a decision which lies with the courts. The results show 69 per cent so far agree she should.

But another blogger wrote: “I find it hilarious how the comments I have made, factual ones, have all been deleted by the deluded, silly, simple-minded people who set this stupid, worthless page up. Get on with your own lives.”

Igoe’s trial at the High Court in Edinburgh heard that she grabbed Martyn’s 9mm pistol and gunned him down in cold blood in January 2009, furious that he had gone out drinking with his mates.

Her brother Paul, 40, got six years for trying to cover up her crime.

Igoe screamed at him as they were taken to the cells after sentencing in April 2010, telling him he should have taken the blame for the murder.

The Barclay and Igoe families hurled abuse at each other across the courtroom and police moved in to stop a fight breaking out.
Tom Shielding

Ah, once again we have the Daily Record using sensational headlines in an attempt to turn public opinion against any appeal.
Iain McKie

On the positive side the social media allow the innocent to argue their cases when the system seeks to silence them.

On the negative side some of the debate does little to clarify the arguments or present the 'facts' in a balanced and thoughtful way.

The internet presents a rich harvest for lazy journalism where one inanity can be set against another and the truth only gets in the way.

On balance I would rather have the ability to argue my case as many have done effectively on this forum.  Unfortunately there are relatively few opportunities for those fighting miscarriages of justice to have their arguments fairly represented and opposed without the input of the little minds with little else to occupy them but seek pleasure in insult, diversion, pointless speculation and lies.
david

It is alarming if the defence at a murder trial didn't call any expert witnesses.

This seems to be a big problem in small Scotland.

The whole system stinks.

I wish I hadn't supported Lawyers strike over pay because a majority of them are at it. Try getting one of them to raise a Devolution Minute and you will see where their obligations lie. I get the impression that lawyers are scared of judges.

Why are solicitors not challenging Crown evidence by way of defence experts.

Perhaps if lawyers had to chase their own fees from clients it would make them perform better and thus provide a better defence. That would include actually using expert testimony in defence cases.


David
Karen

CAROLINE IGOE PASSED A LIE DETECTOR TEST IN FEBRUARY  2012

Caroline's answers of NO, when she was asked if she had shot Mr Barclay or was present when he was shot were assessed as true. you will need to rotate this PDF document to see it.
it is on www.carolineigoe.webs.com
Karen



This is the PDF of the Mail on Sunday Article from 30th March 2014.   Bob Smyth scanned it since it is not online.

http://carolineigoe.webs.com/Caroline_Igoe_-_Mail_on_Sunday.pdf

This are 3  photos of the article. which might be easier for some to read.
http://carolineigoe.webs.com/apps/photos/album?albumid=15489717


http://carolineigoe.webs.com/



EDIT: I have corrected the links. Sorry about that. The PDF takes a while to load but it will work.
Karen

Iain McKie

Yet another case where there is a question mark over  forensic evidence.

If you ignore the Record type headlines  it appears that more enquiry should have been undertaken by the defence in respect of the gunshot residue and other forensic aspects of the case.

I still have little faith in our justice system, from the experts via the lawyers to the court, to effectively assess cases where expert evidence is crucial.

It is to be hoped that Ms Igoe’s representatives are ensuring that all the relevant evidence is subjected to scrutiny by truly independent experts. Unfortunately funds made available by SLAB are likely to be extremely limited and in a case like this the defence have one hand tied behind their back.

http://www.shirleymckie.com/docum...ExpertEvidencefinaldraft15812.pdf
david

No coincidence that this girl was represented by the same legal counsel that is probably responsible for several Miscarriages of justice due to defective representation.

This man is well protected within the legal village.
Big Wullie

david wrote:
No coincidence that this girl was represented by the same legal counsel that is probably responsible for several Miscarriages of justice due to defective representation.

This man is well protected within the legal village.


We are of course talking about Jim Keegan QC that conducted this trial David and who's names must pop up at the SCCRC more often than others.

I know my MSP Bill Kidd asked them how many times and they refused to answer.

The Information Commissioner agreed SCCRC could keep this secret:

http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/UploadedFiles/Decision134-2008.pdf
david

Wullie,

If somebody is formulating a defective rep ground against Legal Counsel then surely you should be permitted to this kind of information.

One argument is that it shows a pattern of inadequate defences and that would obviously bolster the ground being formulated.

       shirleymckie.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Test Forum 1
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Sincere thanks to all those who have supported Shirley and challenged miscarriages of justice on this forum.