shirleymckie.myfastforum.org Forum Index shirleymckie.myfastforum.org
To allow readers to post comments on current issues related to the Shirley McKie case
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Buried forensic report?
Page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    shirleymckie.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Test Forum 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Iain McKie



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 939


Location: Ayr, Scotland.

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2014 9:01 am    Post subject: Buried forensic report?  Reply with quote

Just found out that a report I thought had been published two years ago has still not been released. Old habits die hard.

Quote:
POLICE are under pressure to release a report on a heavily-criticised forensic investigation into a notorious gangster's death.The review of evidence-gathering in the investigation of the death of Kevin "Gerbil" Carroll was ordered after a man charged with the murder - in a supermarket car park in Robroyston, Glasgow - was cleared and the trial judge branded a police raid on his home "horrendous".

Ross Monaghan walked free from court in 2012 because of a lack of evidence and amid claims the police had undue influence on the forensic scientists in the case. Lord Brailsford criticised the police raid on Mr Monaghan's home in Penilee, Glasgow, because of possible contamination of evidence.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/new...il&utm_campaign=email%2Balert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Wullie



Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125


Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2014 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I cannot read the full article above Iain because I am not subscribed to the Herald.

Speaking for myself here, I really would appreciate if people posting articles post the full thing so myself and perhaps others not subscribed can view the full article.

Regards
_________________
http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/

Dum spiro spero.
Militamus sub spe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
david



Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 502


Location: edinburgh

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2014 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Police face call to issue report on failed gang murder probe

POLICE are under pressure to release a report on a heavily-criticised forensic investigation into a notorious gangster's death.



The review of evidence-gathering in the investigation of the death of Kevin "Gerbil" Carroll was ordered after a man charged with the murder - in a supermarket car park in Robroyston, Glasgow - was cleared and the trial judge branded a police raid on his home "horrendous".

Ross Monaghan walked free from court in 2012 because of a lack of evidence and amid claims the police had undue influence on the forensic scientists in the case. Lord Brailsford criticised the police raid on Mr Monaghan's home in Penilee, Glasgow, because of possible contamination of evidence.

A report has now been completed on the investigation and the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) - which asked for the review - says it has been advised by the Crown Office to withhold publication as the Carroll case is ongoing.

But Brian McConnachie QC, chairman of the Faculty of Advocates Criminal Bar Association, says the decision makes no sense.

He said: "The report presumably is in relation to the defects in the original examination of these various items of forensic evidence, not a report in relation to finding evidence to prosecute someone now. I can't see how it would impact on any future case."

Mr McConnachie, a former prosecutor, added: "This was a very high-profile trial in which the evidence seems to have fallen woefully short. In the circumstances, the public, not least those with a particular interest in the murder of Kevin Carroll, deserve to know what the position is."

Solicitor advocate John Scott QC said there is an argument for at least a redacted version of the report by the Home Office Forensic Science Regulator to be released.

He argued: "If there's any risk publication could affect future proceedings, then not disclosing it would be the right thing to do.

"However, where a major High Court trial comes to the sort of conclusion that one did, with the judge making public comment on unsatisfactory aspects of the forensics, it's not good enough to leave it to some unclear future date before explaining what went wrong.

"The risk otherwise is that the same problems result in other trials ending in the same way, or worse than that, we end up with a miscarriage of justice."

Campaigner Iain McKie, whose police officer daughter Shirley was at the centre of a major scandal over fingerprint evidence, said it is in the interests of justice for the report to be released.

He said: "The Crown Office and the police need to take steps to ensure evidence is reliable and safe so miscarriages of justice don't happen and it's vital the public are kept informed so we can have confidence in our justice system. The report must be released."

Mr Monaghan was cleared of the killing of Mr Carroll on January 13, 2010, due to a lack of evidence.

Police investigating the murder are still hunting for suspect Billy Paterson, believed to be abroad.

The SPA say the regulator's report will be released when there are no legal impediments, but concerns have been raised that it might never happen if no-one is caught for the killing.

Scottish Conservative justice spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell said: "There is an issue of transparency here, because people need to know what went wrong."

Graeme Pearson, Scottish Labour's justice spokesman, added: "The public deserve answers. We need to know what steps have been taken regarding the regulator's investigation and what was the result."

Tom Nelson, director of SPA Forensic Services, said he was unable to comment on the report now due to the ongoing investigation into the murder.

He said: "I have had sight of the conclusions and recommendations made by the Regulator and have been reassured by them. It has always been my intention to publish the full report when there are no legal impediments to do so and that commitment remains."

The Crown Office refused to comment, and Police Scotland said it was a matter for the SPA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Iain McKie



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 939


Location: Ayr, Scotland.

PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2014 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
THE Crown office is facing fierce criticism after revealing it has not seen a report into botched forensics in the Kevin "Gerbil" Carroll case, despite blocking its release.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/new...-not-fully-seen-by-crown.24489864

So much for openness and accountability.

The real problem is that nothing changes no matter the promises.

I remember being told in 1999 after Shirley's trial that no enquiry was needed and that the public had nothing to fear from fingerprint and forensic experts. It took 12 years to establish how empty that assurance was.

Lack of openness and accountability in our justice system and an unwillingness to institute real and effective thought through change instead of knee jerk reactive change  is at the root of these problems. Unfortunately the current administration appears no more willing or capable in this respect.

With a few cosmetic changes the status quo rules.

Quote:
“Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time when the quo has lost its status.”
Dr. Laurence J. Peter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frank



Joined: 09 Mar 2015
Posts: 74



PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How can the scientific evidence be credible in this case:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-32753872



When considering what went on in the Ross Monaghan case:


http://www.heraldscotland.com/new...il&utm_campaign=email%2Balert
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Wullie



Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125


Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree Frank the DNA and Forensic evidence is a shambles.

It's disturbing they are saying it could be secondary transfer.

Quote:
Scientist Marie Campbell told the High Court in Glasgow she analysed the bag found in Coatbridge on 26 January 2010.

She said the probability of the DNA being anyone other than William Paterson's was one in a billion.


There is not a Billion people in the UK

A DNA profile matching the man accused of murdering Kevin "Gerbil" Carroll was found on a carrier bag in which a gun was discovered, a court has heard.

Scientist Marie Campbell told the High Court in Glasgow she analysed the bag found in Coatbridge on 26 January 2010.

She said the probability of the DNA being anyone other than William Paterson's was one in a billion.

Mr Paterson, 35, denies fatally shooting 29-year-old gangland figure Mr Carroll in Glasgow on 13 January 2010.

Mr Carroll was killed at the Asda car park in the city's Robroyston area.




The court heard that a bag containing guns, which had been wrapped in other bags, was found in shrubbery behind a library in Coatbridge by a council gardener in January 2010.

Guns find

Forensic scientist Mrs Campbell prepared a report after analysing the items and comparing them with a number of reference samples including former murder accused Ross Monaghan.

She told the jury that from a sample, taken from the grip plate on the handle of one of the guns, was analysed and a DNA match was found for the profile of Mr Monaghan.

She also told the jury that the DNA profile on a Tesco carrier bag, which contained a gun, had initially been called "male A".

Last year it was known that "male A" was Mr Paterson.

Advocate depute Iain McSporran, prosecuting, asked about one of the samples taken from a black handgun.

He asked what her findings were about that sample.

She said: "The DNA profile contained DNA from at least three people, the majority of the DNA matched the profile of Ross Monaghan."

Mrs Campbell said that "male A" and the other reference samples were eliminated.

The jury were told that she could not "categorically" say that it would be as a result of Mr Monaghan handling the gun and that it "could well be that it is secondary transfer".

DNA profiles

She also said that the probability of it being anyone other than Mr Monaghan is estimated as being more than one billion to one.

Mrs Campbell said items were analysed and a report was compiled last year using a DNA sample from Mr Paterson.

The expert witness told the court: "The taping from the handle of the Tesco carrier bag was analysed and the DNA profile obtained matched the DNA profile of William Paterson."

Defence lawyer Des Finnieston asked about a stab proof vest that was examined.

It was put to her that the DNA profiles of Mr Paterson and Mr Monaghan were eliminated and she said "That's correct."

In relation to the Tesco bag that was examined Mr Finnieston asked: "There's no way of telling the date and time or how long the DNA had been on it?"

Mrs Campbell said: "That's correct."

Mr Paterson denies the charges and incriminates six other people including Ross Monaghan.

He has lodged a special defence of alibi claiming he was at an address in Cumbernauld at the time of the shooting.

The trial before judge Lord Armstrong continues.
_________________
http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/

Dum spiro spero.
Militamus sub spe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Iain McKie



Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 939


Location: Ayr, Scotland.

PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I await the results of the Forensic Regulator's 2014 report into the forensic failures in  this case being revealed. Surely its contents must be disclosed to the defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
david



Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 502


Location: edinburgh

PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2015 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting Iain

It would arguably be non disclosure of material evidence if it wasn't divulged to the defence.

Two convictions were recently quashed by the appeal court regarding secondary transfer.

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/sear...9cca6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7


[8]By analogy with cases such as Slater v Vannett 1997 JC 226 and Campbell v HM Advocate [2008] HCJAC 50; 2008 SCCR 847, both of which involved reliance solely on the detection of an accused’s fingerprint on a similar movable article, namely a plastic bag, counsel submitted that the DNA evidence tendered against the appellant was likewise, on that account alone, insufficient to found a conviction.

[15]      As I have already stressed, there was no other evidence whatever before the jury capable of incriminating the appellant.  Had there been such other evidence, the scientific evidence regarding the matching of the DNA profile might have had some possible supportive probative value.  But, in my view, on its own, the particular DNA evidence led in this case was plainly insufficient to permit the conviction of the appellant.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
frank



Joined: 09 Mar 2015
Posts: 74



PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2015 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

William Paterson guilty of Kevin "Gerbil" Carroll murder


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-32920394
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Wullie



Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 5125


Location: Glasgow

PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2015 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

david wrote:
Interesting Iain

It would arguably be non disclosure of material evidence if it wasn't divulged to the defence.

Two convictions were recently quashed by the appeal court regarding secondary transfer.

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/sear...9cca6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7


[8]By analogy with cases such as Slater v Vannett 1997 JC 226 and Campbell v HM Advocate [2008] HCJAC 50; 2008 SCCR 847, both of which involved reliance solely on the detection of an accused’s fingerprint on a similar movable article, namely a plastic bag, counsel submitted that the DNA evidence tendered against the appellant was likewise, on that account alone, insufficient to found a conviction.

[15]      As I have already stressed, there was no other evidence whatever before the jury capable of incriminating the appellant.  Had there been such other evidence, the scientific evidence regarding the matching of the DNA profile might have had some possible supportive probative value.  But, in my view, on its own, the particular DNA evidence led in this case was plainly insufficient to permit the conviction of the appellant.


David I think the key word in this case is ALONE.

I do not accept that DNA found on a bag that a gun was found in, means the DNA belongs to the person placing the gun inside the bag.

We really only know what we have read in the press about the other evidence.


_________________
http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/

Dum spiro spero.
Militamus sub spe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    shirleymckie.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Test Forum 1 All times are GMT
Page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
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.