Daktari,
I read the book and I've followed the chatter on this site, and it seems to me I read somewhere that Asbury had a legitimate alibi for the cash. Didn't he get it out of the bank, closing his account to clear out his life savings, to replace the car that broke down in front of Marien Ross's house? Did the police ever check with the bank to confirm or refute that excuse for having the money? If he did get it out of the bank, Daktari, you should know that, and if it's true he got it from the bank, are you deliverately trying to mislead us here?
Come on Taggart, Pat, Dick -- help me out here. I don't put a lot of stock in what Daktari says. He's tried to mislead us before and I distrust him. What's the story on the money?
Statistics and Misidentifications - The weeks Detail
-
H. B. James
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:02 am
- Location: US
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
Hank
Yes, you are right. I had actually tried to post a reply almost as you have, but the technology let me down.
The money was found in the tin in Asbury's house - by shirley no less - when he was reported as missing.
Asbury's mum said he had withdrawn the cash from the post office and the tin was hers. This was confirmed by Asbury's eight year old sister who kept pencils in the tin.
The police checked out the story with the bank, and it was correct. Fingerprints of the bank teller were found on some of the cash. Ms.Ross did not bank at that post office.
So, there would appear to be irrefutable evidence that the cash came from the post office and not from MsRoss. That much appears to have been accepted by the police and prosecution as he was not charged with theft of the cash.
He maintained that he had saved the cash for buying a new car. He had saved the money over time when he was working with his grandfather.
Daktari either knows all of this and is trying to mislead, or he is making wild allegations without evidence. Either way, he is not doing the SCROs he represents (or is one of) any good. Don't ya just love it?
Remember: Asbury had never been in trouble with the police in his life. The evidence against him was all circumstantial. But, there you go. Life according to Daktari is to ignore the evidence and assume guilt. Work back from that...... Sound familiar?
I really cannot wait until "Daktari" is cited to attend the judicial inquiry and is asked if he is Daktari. There are some people who know who he is, so will he lie on oath?
And where is Adroit these days? Having tea with Mackenzie no doubt, getting the story right.
DD
Yes, you are right. I had actually tried to post a reply almost as you have, but the technology let me down.
The money was found in the tin in Asbury's house - by shirley no less - when he was reported as missing.
Asbury's mum said he had withdrawn the cash from the post office and the tin was hers. This was confirmed by Asbury's eight year old sister who kept pencils in the tin.
The police checked out the story with the bank, and it was correct. Fingerprints of the bank teller were found on some of the cash. Ms.Ross did not bank at that post office.
So, there would appear to be irrefutable evidence that the cash came from the post office and not from MsRoss. That much appears to have been accepted by the police and prosecution as he was not charged with theft of the cash.
He maintained that he had saved the cash for buying a new car. He had saved the money over time when he was working with his grandfather.
Daktari either knows all of this and is trying to mislead, or he is making wild allegations without evidence. Either way, he is not doing the SCROs he represents (or is one of) any good. Don't ya just love it?
Remember: Asbury had never been in trouble with the police in his life. The evidence against him was all circumstantial. But, there you go. Life according to Daktari is to ignore the evidence and assume guilt. Work back from that...... Sound familiar?
I really cannot wait until "Daktari" is cited to attend the judicial inquiry and is asked if he is Daktari. There are some people who know who he is, so will he lie on oath?
And where is Adroit these days? Having tea with Mackenzie no doubt, getting the story right.
DD
-
H. B. James
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:02 am
- Location: US
Thank you, Dick.
What a sly fellow that Daktari is!
The term "reverse engineering" pops to mind, but I guess with Daktari we might call it "reverse investigations." You simply figure out who you WANT to be guilty, then "reverse engineer" the evidence to MAKE him guilty. I've thought all along that must be what they did to both Shirley McKie and David Asbury. The more Daktari spouts off, the more believable it becomes. Wonder how many others there have been, or even continue to be?
Some "criminal justice" system you have there in Scotland, what with all the news about the Lockerbie case on top of these others. Remind me not to attract the attention of the police next time I drop in for a visit.
What a sly fellow that Daktari is!
The term "reverse engineering" pops to mind, but I guess with Daktari we might call it "reverse investigations." You simply figure out who you WANT to be guilty, then "reverse engineer" the evidence to MAKE him guilty. I've thought all along that must be what they did to both Shirley McKie and David Asbury. The more Daktari spouts off, the more believable it becomes. Wonder how many others there have been, or even continue to be?
Some "criminal justice" system you have there in Scotland, what with all the news about the Lockerbie case on top of these others. Remind me not to attract the attention of the police next time I drop in for a visit.
H. B. "Hank" James
ID Unit Supervisor
ID Unit Supervisor
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
Henry
I hope you don't judge all of Scotland or indeed all of our justice system by the standards of Daktari and others like him! We have a system here that we are justifiably proud of that has a long tradition of respect. There have, like other systems, been problems with it. The difficulty is that those problems should be admitted, we should learn from them, and make sure that they do not happen again so far as is possible. The way the McKie fiasco should have been handled is the way the Mayfield problem was dealt with in the US.
There have been other miscarriages of justice in Scotland of course. Some are absolutely unforgivable. Lockerbie is yet another with apparently a great deal of reverse engineering going on. However, I should point out that the FBI and the CIA were significantly instrumental in the investigation. For all we know, IF there was some unacceptable conduct - and we will have to wait and see what comes out, but for example John Ashton's book on Lockerbie is interesting to say the least = then the extent of US involvment may be of as much relevance as what the Scottish agencies have done. I may have to consider not visiting the US then!!
Lets wait and see.....
I hope you don't judge all of Scotland or indeed all of our justice system by the standards of Daktari and others like him! We have a system here that we are justifiably proud of that has a long tradition of respect. There have, like other systems, been problems with it. The difficulty is that those problems should be admitted, we should learn from them, and make sure that they do not happen again so far as is possible. The way the McKie fiasco should have been handled is the way the Mayfield problem was dealt with in the US.
There have been other miscarriages of justice in Scotland of course. Some are absolutely unforgivable. Lockerbie is yet another with apparently a great deal of reverse engineering going on. However, I should point out that the FBI and the CIA were significantly instrumental in the investigation. For all we know, IF there was some unacceptable conduct - and we will have to wait and see what comes out, but for example John Ashton's book on Lockerbie is interesting to say the least = then the extent of US involvment may be of as much relevance as what the Scottish agencies have done. I may have to consider not visiting the US then!!
Lets wait and see.....
-
Outsider
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:15 am
- Location: Scotland
Evidence emerged to make it impossible for the FBI to continue to assert that Mayfield deposited the fingerprint. Can we be sure that the FBI would not have pressed ahead if that evidence had not appeared?Dick Dastardly wrote:The way the McKie fiasco should have been handled is the way the Mayfield problem was dealt with in the US.
I am sure that the SCRO would be a model of humility if someone had turned up with a better match to Y7 than Shirley McKie.
Steve Horn
Computer Programmer working in the field of statistics for industry
http://www.stevehornsc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pf.htm
Computer Programmer working in the field of statistics for industry
http://www.stevehornsc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pf.htm
-
H. B. James
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:02 am
- Location: US
Touché!
Dick & Steve, you both got me on that round. While I doubt the American agencies had anything to do with McKie or Asbury, if one is to believe the articles on the Lockerbie case, the Americans were smack in the middle of that one. And you have an excellent point, Steve. The FBI threw in the towel when the Spanish showed them the correct identification. One can only speculate what the FBI would have done had no correct identification been found for the print on the bomb materials in Spain. But the other speculation you suggest is even more interesting. Would the SCRO change their tune if correct identifications were found for the prints in Shirley McKie's or David Asbury's cases?
Dick & Steve, you both got me on that round. While I doubt the American agencies had anything to do with McKie or Asbury, if one is to believe the articles on the Lockerbie case, the Americans were smack in the middle of that one. And you have an excellent point, Steve. The FBI threw in the towel when the Spanish showed them the correct identification. One can only speculate what the FBI would have done had no correct identification been found for the print on the bomb materials in Spain. But the other speculation you suggest is even more interesting. Would the SCRO change their tune if correct identifications were found for the prints in Shirley McKie's or David Asbury's cases?
H. B. "Hank" James
ID Unit Supervisor
ID Unit Supervisor
-
Daktari
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:50 am
- Location: Glasgow
Gobsmacked is the word your looking for. But it just won't happen. Still it's comforting that you recognise that similarities existed, even if John MacLeod says he only found one..I am sure that the SCRO would be a model of humility if someone had turned up with a better match to Y7 than Shirley McKie.
Dastardly Dick writes
Oh well then we, and the Jury, must have got it wrong.Remember: Asbury had never been in trouble with the police in his life
No need to explain his grandfather becoming 'visibly upset' and pointing the police in his grandson's direction. let's not bother too much about Asbury's sudden disapearance, or the 'suicide note' he left for his mother, etc, etc..
Never been in trouble with the police What a defense!
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
Sorry, I should have added some more for Daktari's information.
Asbury had previously gone missing and had a history of depression. His Grandfather was upset because his grandson had left a suicide note.
I guess by the Daktari, SCRO, Strathclyde police standards that if you go missing and your grandfather is upset, you must be a prime suspect for murdering women in their homes.
And we are agreed now, Daktari, that the money came from Asbury's bank account? Or are you just ignoring the fact that you spouted lies about Asbury? You really must work for the SCRO with that kind of behaviour!!
Asbury had previously gone missing and had a history of depression. His Grandfather was upset because his grandson had left a suicide note.
I guess by the Daktari, SCRO, Strathclyde police standards that if you go missing and your grandfather is upset, you must be a prime suspect for murdering women in their homes.
And we are agreed now, Daktari, that the money came from Asbury's bank account? Or are you just ignoring the fact that you spouted lies about Asbury? You really must work for the SCRO with that kind of behaviour!!
-
Daktari
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:50 am
- Location: Glasgow
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
The Lord Advocate always opposes appeals unless it is accepted that there was a miscarriage of justice. His lack of opposition means he accepted the point. And this, as you well know, was after the Lord Advocate commissioned his own independent report on the matter.
So, since you are not incapable of dealing with responding to comments on this site, are you going to answer the other matters raised in my previous postings? Or will you just ignore them again?
What about the money? Agree it was Asbury's?
Come on out! Tell us what you say now? Scared are we? Or just a liar?
DD
So, since you are not incapable of dealing with responding to comments on this site, are you going to answer the other matters raised in my previous postings? Or will you just ignore them again?
What about the money? Agree it was Asbury's?
Come on out! Tell us what you say now? Scared are we? Or just a liar?
DD
-
Daktari
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:50 am
- Location: Glasgow
The evidence against Asbury was sufficient for the jury to find him guilty.
In spite of Iain McKie's many attempts to lay the blame for Marion Ross's brutal murder on another person. Strathclyde Police have stated consistently that they are not looking for anyone else in connection with Marion Ross's death.
Asbury, you will remember, appealed his conviction on the basis of 'dodgy' fingerprint evidence in the Shirley Cardwell aka McKie trial.
Two Danish experts original said that there had been a misidentification but later recanted, after Asbury had been freed. Colin Boyd resigned his position hours before he was due to hand over Asbury's watch for DNA testing. (Blood on his watch was tyhe same group as Marion's.)
Bayle, Mcleod and Dempster (More of him in a forthcoming post) all admitted to making false accusations against the SCRO. (Several in fact in Bayle's case)
Listen to the Police tapes of Asbury's interviews.
Re-read his 'suicide note'
Asbury's claim for compensation is still to heard. That will worth the watching. I'll keep you posted.
Have a nice weekend!
In spite of Iain McKie's many attempts to lay the blame for Marion Ross's brutal murder on another person. Strathclyde Police have stated consistently that they are not looking for anyone else in connection with Marion Ross's death.
Asbury, you will remember, appealed his conviction on the basis of 'dodgy' fingerprint evidence in the Shirley Cardwell aka McKie trial.
Two Danish experts original said that there had been a misidentification but later recanted, after Asbury had been freed. Colin Boyd resigned his position hours before he was due to hand over Asbury's watch for DNA testing. (Blood on his watch was tyhe same group as Marion's.)
Bayle, Mcleod and Dempster (More of him in a forthcoming post) all admitted to making false accusations against the SCRO. (Several in fact in Bayle's case)
Listen to the Police tapes of Asbury's interviews.
Re-read his 'suicide note'
Asbury's claim for compensation is still to heard. That will worth the watching. I'll keep you posted.
Have a nice weekend!
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
Here we go again.... I have responded to this rubbish at least three times on previous threads. I wonder when Daktari will realise that the fact you lie more than once, does not convert it in to truth. Each point again:
The evidence against Asbury was sufficient for the jury to find him guilty.
Well, no it was not. The evidence was wrong. See below. If the jury was misled, only SCRO supporters would think that it should still stand.
In spite of Iain McKie's many attempts to lay the blame for Marion Ross's brutal murder on another person. Strathclyde Police have stated consistently that they are not looking for anyone else in connection with Marion Ross's death.
True, Strathclyde's finest did say that. But they would, wouldn't they? They conducted an investigation; the conviction was quashed because of evidence that they had obtained being flawed, and they don't want to admit it. SCRO and SPolice worked hand in hand for years. Indeed a number of employees in SCRO were former police officers. EG Harry Bell. Yes, the Lockerbie man.... Is it any surprise that they "are not looking for anyone else"? And if they found the right man, how would that fit with Asbury's conviction at their instigation? Er....sorry David.
Asbury, you will remember, appealed his conviction on the basis of 'dodgy' fingerprint evidence in the Shirley Cardwell aka McKie trial.
Two Danish experts original said that there had been a misidentification but later recanted, after Asbury had been freed.
Please, Daktari. Read the postings before, and stick to the facts. The appeal was on the grounds that the print on the tin, alleged to be Ross's print, was wrong. The Danes were instructed by the prosecution and agreed that it was wrong. They have never retracted that view. They DID retract the opinion about a print on money, after it was disclosed that SCRO had given them the wrong information. So please don't pedal the lie that you just have. Again. I know that the SCRO have no desire for the detail, but this one is a bit important. If you would like, I am sure someone can draw you a picture that will help, as it seems that reading is a bit beyond you. Or, of course, can you produce the evidence that the Danes withdrew their agreement that the print on the tin was not marion ross's? Did not think so....
Colin Boyd resigned his position hours before he was due to hand over Asbury's watch for DNA testing. (Blood on his watch was tyhe same group as Marion's.)
Evidence please? So the watch did in fact exist did it? Where is it now then smart alec?
Bayle, Mcleod and Dempster (More of him in a forthcoming post) all admitted to making false accusations against the SCRO. (Several in fact in Bayle's case)
Bayle, Mcleod and Dempster did not give evidence in Asbury's trial. What is your point exactly?
I asked for evidence against Asbury. This is irrelevant even if it were true.
Listen to the Police tapes of Asbury's interviews.
Re-read his 'suicide note'
Are you going to let us see the transcripts? Let us make our own minds up from the primary evidence and not your version which has shown itself to be rather inaccurate.
Asbury's claim for compensation is still to heard. That will worth the watching. I'll keep you posted.
Lets have a deal. If Asbury is given any compensation for his imprisonment, will you on this forum agree that he was wrongfully convicted? After all, your point seems to be that he will not get compensation because something will come out. A deal?
Have a nice weekend!
I would have a much nicer weekend if you answered the question: do you agree you lied in suggesting that the money came from Marion Ross's house?
The evidence against Asbury was sufficient for the jury to find him guilty.
Well, no it was not. The evidence was wrong. See below. If the jury was misled, only SCRO supporters would think that it should still stand.
In spite of Iain McKie's many attempts to lay the blame for Marion Ross's brutal murder on another person. Strathclyde Police have stated consistently that they are not looking for anyone else in connection with Marion Ross's death.
True, Strathclyde's finest did say that. But they would, wouldn't they? They conducted an investigation; the conviction was quashed because of evidence that they had obtained being flawed, and they don't want to admit it. SCRO and SPolice worked hand in hand for years. Indeed a number of employees in SCRO were former police officers. EG Harry Bell. Yes, the Lockerbie man.... Is it any surprise that they "are not looking for anyone else"? And if they found the right man, how would that fit with Asbury's conviction at their instigation? Er....sorry David.
Asbury, you will remember, appealed his conviction on the basis of 'dodgy' fingerprint evidence in the Shirley Cardwell aka McKie trial.
Two Danish experts original said that there had been a misidentification but later recanted, after Asbury had been freed.
Please, Daktari. Read the postings before, and stick to the facts. The appeal was on the grounds that the print on the tin, alleged to be Ross's print, was wrong. The Danes were instructed by the prosecution and agreed that it was wrong. They have never retracted that view. They DID retract the opinion about a print on money, after it was disclosed that SCRO had given them the wrong information. So please don't pedal the lie that you just have. Again. I know that the SCRO have no desire for the detail, but this one is a bit important. If you would like, I am sure someone can draw you a picture that will help, as it seems that reading is a bit beyond you. Or, of course, can you produce the evidence that the Danes withdrew their agreement that the print on the tin was not marion ross's? Did not think so....
Colin Boyd resigned his position hours before he was due to hand over Asbury's watch for DNA testing. (Blood on his watch was tyhe same group as Marion's.)
Evidence please? So the watch did in fact exist did it? Where is it now then smart alec?
Bayle, Mcleod and Dempster (More of him in a forthcoming post) all admitted to making false accusations against the SCRO. (Several in fact in Bayle's case)
Bayle, Mcleod and Dempster did not give evidence in Asbury's trial. What is your point exactly?
I asked for evidence against Asbury. This is irrelevant even if it were true.
Listen to the Police tapes of Asbury's interviews.
Re-read his 'suicide note'
Are you going to let us see the transcripts? Let us make our own minds up from the primary evidence and not your version which has shown itself to be rather inaccurate.
Asbury's claim for compensation is still to heard. That will worth the watching. I'll keep you posted.
Lets have a deal. If Asbury is given any compensation for his imprisonment, will you on this forum agree that he was wrongfully convicted? After all, your point seems to be that he will not get compensation because something will come out. A deal?
Have a nice weekend!
I would have a much nicer weekend if you answered the question: do you agree you lied in suggesting that the money came from Marion Ross's house?
-
Daktari
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:50 am
- Location: Glasgow
-
Dick Dastardly
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:53 am
Daktari,
You have still not answered me when I ask: do you accept you lied when you suggested the money was Marion Ross's?
The matters were not aired at Asbury's trial. His defence team were provided a report from Malcolm Graham (yes, one of Peter Swann's only two friends) who said it was Ross's print on the tin. Needless to say, they did not lead him as a witness. So, in what way then was the issue of misidentification of the print on the tin aired in Asbury's trial? Is this just another lie?
You know, your attention to detail is worrying. As an advocate for the SCRO cause, this is hardly doing their position any good!!
Make my weekend better. Answer the first question.
You have still not answered me when I ask: do you accept you lied when you suggested the money was Marion Ross's?
The matters were not aired at Asbury's trial. His defence team were provided a report from Malcolm Graham (yes, one of Peter Swann's only two friends) who said it was Ross's print on the tin. Needless to say, they did not lead him as a witness. So, in what way then was the issue of misidentification of the print on the tin aired in Asbury's trial? Is this just another lie?
You know, your attention to detail is worrying. As an advocate for the SCRO cause, this is hardly doing their position any good!!
Make my weekend better. Answer the first question.