Judge to head fingerprint inquiry

[Daktari]

My first greatest hope? That justice will eventually find the killer of Marion Ross and that Miss Ross herself may finally rest in peace

Justice, in the form of Strathclyde Police at any rate, knows who killed Mation Ross. That is precisely why they have issued statement after statement saying that they are not seeking anyone for her murder and have no intention of re-opening their investigation.
My greatest hope? That if David Asbury gets one penny in compensation that will be enough to open those mouths that so far have remained closed, to their eternal shame.

[Taggart]

Justice, in the form of Strathclyde Police at any rate, knows who killed Mation Ross.

I love your general sweeping assumption. What you are saying is when Sir William Rae gives evidence under oath at the Public Inquiry he will be able to show you are telling the truth. Fascinating! For anyone not familiar with Sir William Rae he is the ex Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police. Previously he was Chair of ACPOS and met with the McKie’s and apologised in person to them for what they had been put through.

And now daktari is suggesting this man will be able to tell the Inquiry WHO killed Marion Ross!

The former Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd, gave the following statement in 2006:

“…officially the murder of Marion Ross is unsolved and the police do not have any new lines of inquiry at this stage. However, any new lines of inquiry will, where appropriate, be pursued.”

Out of curiosity and to see if you believe what you say daktari, I challenge you to name the person Strathclyde Police know killed Marion Ross.
Post the name daktari. After all you must know? Or are you going on rumour?
I think your assumption that Strathclyde Police are “Justice” in Scotland is incredible! The same arrogance as shown by SCRO.
Are you saying The Lord Advocate lied when he said the murder is officially unsolved?

My greatest hope? That if David Asbury gets one penny in compensation that will be enough to open those mouths that so far have remained closed, to their eternal shame.

Thanks also for this insight. The same hopeful, desperate comments as those of Les Brown. So to date no one has opened their mouths? Why is that daktari? Maybe because they have already told the truth under oath at Shirley’s Trial?
Or are you hoping that someone who has already given evidence to the High Court, is going to come forward and admit perjury? And with it an arrest and a few years imprisonment?
Given the amount of time complaints have been lodged with the Crown Office regarding your belief that Shirley McKie committed perjury at her trial, then if you KNEW or had evidence that a police officer lied, then trust me a complaint of Perjury would also have been submitted to the Lord Advocate. So thanks for giving us an insight that Les Brown has been unable to get anyone to open their mouths.
I am also glad you are going along this line, because this truly does smack of utter desperation.
To try and prove somehow that Shirley WAS in the House, and that would take some heat off the misidentification.
Find a scenario that would excuse errors. But there is no excuse daktari.
Even if it was shown that Shirley WAS in the house, you fail to see the obvious. No matter what, the print is still NOT Shirley’s. Full stop.
Incredible to think that your best chance at clearing names is not even related to the fingerprint evidence!
Now that truly is desperation!

[Pat A. Wertheim]

Justice, in the form of Strathclyde Police

Surely, you jest!?!?!?

If the various police services in Scotland didn't have a reputation for stubborn insistence that they are correct, and refusal to reopen investigations even when absolutely proven to have been wrong, your blind support of everything Strathclyde Police and SCRO say would still be unbelievable.

Let's put something else on the table here, although I think I've already put it on the table. It is my belief that the finger mark on the gift tag bears characteristics of fabrication. Could it be that the plain impression of David Asbury's thumb print from a fingerprint form was copied onto acetate, or lifted with tape, and placed over the gift tag and then photographed to make it appear the print was on the gift tag? Could it be that during a police interrogation, David was shown such a fabricated photograph, which led him to "confess" to being at Marion Ross' house a few days before her murder, when in fact he was never there after completion of the building project six months earlier? Could that explain why the gift tag mysteriously disappeared from the vaults at the PF's office years ago when I went armed with a court order to allow me to examine ALL of the evidence? Might that explain why the only gift tag in evidence when I was allowed to view supposedly all the evidence was a gift tag with only a passing resemblance to the one in the photograph, but clearly not it, with no explanation at all and no record of a second gift tag having ever been seized in evidence? What happened to that original gift tag? Was David's fingerprint ever on it at all? I doubt it. That tag is gone.

But in spite of all of that, when it was proven that SCRO got it wrong with Marion Ross' fingerprint on David's sweets tin, which he had owned for three years previous to her murder, we are to trust Strathclyde's claim that there is no need to reopen the investigation because they never get it wrong?

I hope the coming inquiry looks into the gift tag. I hope they look into David's innocence. And I hope they look into everything surrounding that botched and fabricated murder investigation. Take some sleep aids tonight, Dak. Snore it off for at least twelve hours. Then have a good strong pot of coffee when you get up in the morning. If you regain your senses, think about it.

[RL Tavernaro]

Have you recently changed your medication by any chance? Seems whatever you are on at present is affecting your rationale!
....
Maybe I am doing you a disservice daktari, maybe it’s not medication that is scrambling your brains, maybe it is pre Inquiry nerves!

It's certainly not pre-Inquiry nerves.

Interesting. Is this an admission that medication may be responsible for repeated posts that appear to be incompatible with known facts?

[Daktari]

David Asbury was convicted of killing Marion Ross.
He appealed his conviction on the basis of 'dodgy' fingerprint evidence. Some of which, at least, was later found not to be 'dodgy'.
The Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd, did not challenge his Appeal and Asbury
walked free.
I reiterate Strathclyde Police have issued numerous statements saying they are not looking for anyone else in connection with this brutal killing.
It should be perfect clear to anyone ~ David Asbury murdered Marion Ross. It's to the McKie's eternal shame that in an effort to save Shirley's her job and pension (she had been in trouble before for a similar 'offence')they actively allowed this to happen. Shirley went to Leslie Dowdalls, Asbury's solicitor, and told her that her fingerprints been planted at 43 Irvine Road, presumably by, or at the behest of, Stephen Heath.
For Iain McKie to peddle the myth that someone else killed Marion Ross is beyond contempt. But that's pretty much par for the course for him.

[Pat A. Wertheim]

Daktari,

In spite of the fact that David Asbury is officially and legally Not Guilty of the murder of Marion Ross, you maintain adamantly that

David Asbury was convicted of killing Marion Ross. . . . David Asbury murdered Marion Ross.

I should think that Mr. Asbury's solicitors would find that statement interesting. I should also think that the Lord Judge Campbell would be impressed.

Are you saying that because Strathclyde Police still believe Asbury guilty and have refused to reopen the investigation, that the Lord Judge Campbell should accept that pronouncement and disregard any second look at whether it is, in fact, true?

I personally do not believe David Asbury is guilty. But let's hypothesize here for a minute. If Strathclyde Police truly believe that, why have they NOT reopened the investigation to see if there is more evidence, and why was the Lord Advocate so quick to let him off?

[Daktari]

If Strathclyde Police truly believe that, why have they NOT reopened the investigation to see if there is more evidence, and why was the Lord Advocate so quick to let him off?

First, since Asbury was convicted, the police will clearly believe they have enough evidence against him. Also if the McKie issue is finally resolved there will be absolutely no doubt.

From the very start, including some might the say the decision to proceed with the Perjury charge, Colin Boyd has made a mess of this. Perhaps he thought that if he did not challenge Asbury's Appeal the whole thing would just go away with Asbury unable to believe his luck! However he did not account of Iain McKie’s vicious and vindictive vendetta against the SCRO and senior Police Officers in ‘U’ Division whom McKie could not stand. The SNP were making mincemeat of the Labour front bench over this issue and Boyd would not wish to give them any more ammunition. The way out, so the Scottish Executive thought, would be to ‘accept’ that Y7 was a misidentification and the whole thing would blow over. Again they had not reckoned on Iain McKie’s near evangelical enthusiasm.

In spite of the fact that David Asbury is officially and legally Not Guilty of the murder of Marion Ross,……..

Pat, you and I have been around this world long enough to know that just because someone is acquitted of an Offence does not mean that they did not do it. Equally the fact that someone is found guilty is no certainty of their culpability!

[Outsider]

From the very start, including some might the say the decision to proceed with the Perjury charge, Colin Boyd has made a mess of this.

Err... isn't that my point.

[Pat A. Wertheim]

Right you are on both counts, Daktari. First, I have seen guilty people found "not guilty," either at trial or on appeal. Second, I have seen innocent people convicted and their convictions upheld against appeal. Beyond that, in this case, we disagree. Y-7 was not made by Shirley McKie and QI-2 was not made by Marion Ross. The gift tag had some very suspicious elements in the image, and it seems to have gone missing. Those three facts are included in my belief that both Shirley McKie and David Asbury are innocent of the charges made against them, but those three reasons are not the only ones. I hope the inquiry goes beyond Y-7 and QI-2 and looks into those broader issues, and I believe that is a third thing you and I can agree on.

[Taggart]

He appealed his conviction on the basis of 'dodgy' fingerprint evidence. Some of which, at least, was later found not to be 'dodgy'.

SOME of which? Finally we are getting somewhere! SOME of it was later found NOT to be DODGY, so obviously some of it WAS found to be dodgy! So I have to congratulate you on FINALLY seeing things for what they are! Even you now clearly see SOME of the evidence WAS dodgy!

But you further show us you may well believe this as you said:

Also if the McKie issue is finally resolved there will be absolutely no doubt.

To be honest there is NO doubt NOW! But so be it. If it takes the Inquiry for it to get through to you well and good. But you already accept that some of the evidence WAS dodgy.

It should be perfect clear to anyone ~ David Asbury murdered Marion Ross.

Really? Perfectly clear because? Convince me daktari. What is perfectly clear to me is David Asbury was convicted on a vital fingerprint which was MISIDENTIFIED. A WRONG IDENTIFICATION. You have OTHER evidence?

But no matter what you and your colleagues can NEVER accept that. Why? Because as in the print Y7, you are RIGHT and the whole WORLD is WRONG!

However he did not account of Iain McKie’s vicious and vindictive vendetta against the SCRO

Oh poor SCRO! My heart bleeds for them. Didn’t their self appointed spokeswoman give an interview to The Herald telling them she had turned down £70,000 so she could speak out and get the truth out? Why would she not fight back if there was a one man vendetta againt SCRO? I think we all no why.

So where is her story? Anyone? Why did she make this statement of intention and then say nothing? Why did she not take the chance BEFORE the Public Inquiry was announced to tell her story?

I do find it mildly amusing that you criticise Colin Boyd when the Crown Office were the ones who decided not to act on the Mackay Report? And “saved” the Experts.

Thankfully Boyd has said he has a Report evidencing WHY the Crown Office did NOT proceed with charges. Strange he refused to release it, but that Report will be handed over to the Public Inquiry!

[Taggart]

Shirley went to Leslie Dowdalls, Asbury's solicitor, and told her that her fingerprints been planted at 43 Irvine Road, presumably by, or at the behest of, Stephen Heath.

And of course you will be able to evidence what is yet ANOTHER lie?

Truly unbelievable! Unsubstantiated lie after lie after lie. Which in my book makes you nothing but a LIAR!

What however IS interesting is the clues you are leaving for the readers to tell us who you are!

Why is this? Do you want everyone to know who you are? Truly astounding given the position you are in.

In case anyone hasn’t picked up on the clues let me help them out.

Daktari is someone who attended Justice 1 when Shirley McKie gave evidence.

Daktari is someone who attended the “disastrous” (in their words) book launch.

Daktari is someone who knows Les Brown, the ex Strathclyde Detective, who was desperately trying to get some evidence to support the SCRO Experts (but in a recent posting daktari themselves said no one had opened their mouths!). They are able to quote this individual at the event.

Daktari is a close “associate” of Peter Swann, and their loyalty is such they can’t expose his lies, because to do so would expose their very own position.

Daktari believes 100% the SCRO experts are correct, so therefore everyone else is WRONG.

Daktari will NEVER accept the truth.

Daktari has continually repeated misinformation, and lies, that has been heard previously by persons connected with this case.

It is futile naming this person publicly at present, as with all the lies being spouted, they would only deny it!

Other questions our readers may wish to consider:

Is Daktari a Fingerprint Expert

Is Daktari one of the six SCRO Experts

Did Daktari accept a payment complete with gagging order, or did they turn the money down to speak out

Has Daktari any legal actions pending

Will Daktari be a vital witness at the Public Inquiry

Is Daktari a man or a woman

Has Daktari any association with the Fingerprint Society

Has Daktari been given immunity from ever being prosecuted

So many questions readers.

BUT only ONE answer.

It’s okay Daktari your identity is safe with me. For now in any case……

[H. B. James]

Daktari is someone who attended Justice 1 when Shirley McKie gave evidence.

Daktari is someone who attended the “disastrous” (in their words) book launch.

Daktari is someone who knows Les Brown, the ex Strathclyde Detective, who was desperately trying to get some evidence to support the SCRO Experts (but in a recent posting daktari themselves said no one had opened their mouths!). They are able to quote this individual at the event.

Daktari is a close “associate” of Peter Swann, and their loyalty is such they can’t expose his lies, because to do so would expose their very own position.

Daktari believes 100% the SCRO experts are correct, so therefore everyone else is WRONG.

Is Daktari a Fingerprint Expert

Is Daktari one of the six SCRO Experts

Did Daktari accept a payment complete with gagging order, or did they turn the money down to speak out

Has Daktari any legal actions pending

Will Daktari be a vital witness at the Public Inquiry

Is Daktari a man or a woman

Has Daktari any association with the Fingerprint Society

Has Daktari been given immunity from ever being prosecuted

Okay, Taggart, I'll play your game. Daktari is intimately involved. Daktari is not under a gag order but has testified and will do so again. We cannot assume Daktari is a male, ergo, he must be a she. Daktari must have a position of some authority in the Fingerprint Society.

Does that about sum it up? Hmmm . . . . . narrows the field significantly, I'd say.

Say, I get it! Daktari is neither balding, nor has he/she gray nor dark hair. That's the answer!

[Taggart]

HB,

I can't confirm or deny your observations, (at present), but all I'll say it won't be over till the fat lady sings.......

Taggart

[Taggart]

I just wonder if it will be a Swann Song?

[Daktari]

Less of the fat, please!