Lord Johnston

[Daktari]

Perhaps I can help.
There is all the difference in the whorld between trying to influence someone and someone being influenced.
Or, as your colleague, [term deleted by admin] Dror, famously put it, "I will show you this and you will see....."
Smart mouthed lawyers try to influence juries all the time but it doesn't always work.
Just ask [term changed by admin] Wullie Beck!
Trouble is that a well presented attractive woman can sometimes influence an older gentleman.
If the older gentleman happens to be judge?
Consider the fragrant one, Mary Archer, or even our ain Gail Sheridan.
Not that I'm suggesting Lord Johnson fell into this category when he told the Jury that if they found Shirley guilty he would send them to jail.

[Pat A. Wertheim]

You never cease to amaze me, Daktari. Even I never thought you would sink to this new low. You're amazing -- but not in a good way.

[sharon cook]

Re: Daktari's last post.....
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

[charlton97]

Daktari,

in my agency if I showed such disregard for issues of diversity including respect for race, creed, religion and gender...not to mention comments that may offend, what would have resulted would be disciplinary action and almost certainly dismissal. I am appalled frankly that the debate has descended to a point where name calling and attacking the dead come before firm scientific debate.

[Big Wullie]

Under duress I have removed this posting, some think it,s OK for Daktari and others to attack peoples characters like Daktari calling me Big Wally but when I reply with something sarcastic back I am being asked to edit my comments.

I have decided Daktari and the likes are not worth any more of my time and will not be posting any more comments on this forum.

William Beck (Real Name not alias)

[Daktari]

I am appalled frankly that the debate has descended to a point where name calling and attacking the dead come before firm scientific debate.

Dave, where have you been all this time?
Maybe you have not been paying attention, or were tired, or were emotionally influenced or under pressure.
Descended? This debate started off with name calling and deeply personal attacks on people who, unlike you and I, could not defend themselves. I'm told Iain McKie's book even makes an attack on the dead. Never having read it myself I take this on trust and my knowledge of Iain McKie.
No, I think Lord Johnson's summing up, in this case, was disgrace.
I thought that when he still alive.
However I'm quite prepared to mock the Brain-Dead.

[charlton97]

Daktari,

have just finished presenting my research at a very high profile UK forensics conference. I should point out that I was personally invited because it is considered a high profile and topical subject matter. Clearly Daktari you are not in sync with the general accepted wisdom in the UK forensic community then? Not only was it well received but it was also considered a great asset to have someone like me who is prepared to challenge and to not accept the status quo as well as to explore the unknown. I did not meet anyone who was opposed to what I was doing.

While at this conference I was reliably informed by a senior member of the fingerprint society committee that there was growing concern within the committee at the ongoing correspondence of Martin Leadbetter, his continued attacks on legitimate academic pursuits and most importantly, the use of his office within the society in making such assertions...he tends to state he is Chair of Fingerprint Society or a founder member etc when making public comment. This is not going down too well with his own committee. Clearly there is some unease with the actions being taken by the current Chairman.

Sorry Daktari, I and others are right, you are wrong. This research is important. I will thank you to refrain from such terms as 'Bottom Dror', show some respect please, and keep unprofessional comments away from this forum. There are many on this forum who believe they know your true identity. If they are right then you will no doubt see from the above that all is not well. You are out on a limb here. There is always a place for legitimate research. If you disagree with the conclusions then run your own research to counter the claims made......or are you afraid of finding out what I have?

[Daktari]

As a mater of fact I am doing some research at the moment. Maybe you will in a position to help or comment. Evett and Williams wrote, circa 1989, that in eighty years of fingerprint evidence being used in UK courts not one ‘known misidentification’ had ever been recorded. Let’s assume that is correct. Do you, or any other of my readers, know of any case in the UK since then that involved a ‘known misidentification'?
Also, and relating to Lord Johnson, do you think that if he had allowed Shirley's 'previous' to have been admitted in evidence that outcome may have been different?

[Taggart]

Neville Lee was arrested in 1991 in Nottinghamshire, England, for the rape of an eleven-year-old girl on the basis of a supposed fingerprint match. It is not known how many corresponding ridge characteristics were identified, but at that time a minimum requirement of sixteen matching ridge characteristics was in force in the United Kingdom. Lee's home was wrecked by vigilantes, and he was assaulted in jail. Another individual subsequently confessed to the crime, and Lee was released. The authorities admitted that the fingerprint match was erroneous.

For clarity it should be noted that the palm print in question WAS subsequently identified as belonging to the second male despite having been positively identified to the first male. Lee subsequently was given compensation and an alias by the Police as a direct result of this misidentification.

Andrew Chiory was charged in 1996 for the burglary of the home of Miriam Stoppard, a writer and broadcaster who also happened to be the ex wife of the well-known playwright Tom Stoppard, in London, England. Two separate latent prints from the crime scene were attributed to Chiory. Both matches were "allegedly triple-checked," and both were conducted under the requirement for sixteen corresponding ridge characteristics in force in the United Kingdom at that time. Chiory served two months in prison before the match was exposed as erroneous. Despite an extensive external investigation of this miscarriage of justice, no explanation for the misidentification has ever been made public.

TWO misidentifications in ONE case.

Journalists' investigation of two disputed identifications in Manchester, England turned up an erroneous identification that occurred in 2000. This attribution had been "triple-checked." The suspect had a convincing alibi and did not fit the witness's description. It was eventually discarded as an erroneous identification. It is not known how many corresponding ridge characteristics were testified to in these two misidentifications, but the sixteen-point minimum standard was in place in the United Kingdom at that time.

“ As a resident of the fair city of Manchester I well remember that the Manchester Evening News carried stories regarding the erroneous identification of Stephen Wallace and another. In both cases GMP readily admitted the mistakes and apologised to those involved. Following such mistakes it is not unusual for an organisation to review procedures and for heads to roll. This I assume will have been the case in Manchester's Fingerprint Department..…….. The two mistaken identifications were quite simply that. Extremely unfortunate mistakes.”

From what little information is available it appears that there were TWO separate misidentifications in Greater Manchester Police.

Add to these 5 (?) misidentifications we also have TWO in the same case by SCRO with regards to the misidentification of Shirley Mckie and Marion Ross.

What I would draw the readers’ attention to is this. On the first THREE cases, the misidentifications were ACCEPTED and the relevant Bureau APOLOGISED for their errors and have learnt from their experiences.

In fact I am aware that the Head of Bureau at Manchester stood up at a Fingerprint Conference and PUBLICLY APOLOGISED for his Bureau’s errors. He received a standing ovation for his obvious honesty and integrity.

SCRO could have learnt much from those Bureaus. But they are the odd ones out. DESPITE their management KNOWING misidentifications had occurred they spectacularly failed where others had the courage to accept the truth.

Will be interesting to hear David Mulhern apologise at the Public Enquiry to Miss McKie for the failings of the Fingerprint Service in Scotland. Eleven years late, but better late than never.

I hope this helps you daktari in seeing that mistakes have been made and how individual bureaus to their credit have apologised and moved on.

In the meantime you failed to let me know the names of those who have never had the chance to defend themselves were? Is the question clear enough for you???

[charlton97]

Daktari, nice try. Taggart has already answered that direct question with much detail.

Placing a different slant on your question...how would we ever know the error rate was zero as you assert?? Based on my research with Dr Dror and my own beliefs, it is entirely possible that there are other erroneous matches in the system that will never come to light. I am not saying for one minute that wholesale errors are being made every day...far from it. What I am saying is that the assertion that fingerprint examination is infallible and beyond error is ludicrous...and I say that as a fingerprint expert myself...it is just not realistic to assume that every comparison ever made has resulted in a correct conclusion. You cannot even trust verification for reasons too numerous to mention, some of which are highlighted within the research of myself and Dr Dror.

[Daktari]

how would we ever know the error rate was zero as you assert??

Can you show me where I asserted that?
I only asked if anybody knew of any misidentifications, not that there were none.
My mind was open to the possibility.
I think that by reading things into what I say you may be showing some symptoms of mindset here. Maybe it’s your temper getting then better of you.

I’m will be checking out Taggart’s information and will get back to you on that.

[charlton97]

Daktari,

again..nice try..you seem to want to paint a picture of me sitting at my keyboard steaming with anger and hate at every work written by you and others. That is fantastically funny and I thank you for the laugh. For sure..you have got me..and I concede you never directly asserted a zero error rate...you were in fact quoting Evett Williams..thank you for pointing out my lapse into bias there ;.)) You see how easy it can be??

Talking of error though Daktari....how would you think we could minimise error...seriously....any ideas? Would technical accreditation help in this regard...and if so...how would such a test be administered? I know there are some companies in the UK trying to get UK Forces to sign up to said options but my personal view is that they need to be properly evaluated first by independent academic bodies before they can be accepted. Since I suspect that you are involved in this area yourslef..I just wondered what your views might be?

Anyway, must be going now to practice my angry face ;.)) One thing to remember Daktari is that there is a whole Universe of difference between correct scientific debate and some of the bile that substitutes for debate on this forum occassionally. Even if I met you face to face (and I am certain I have many times), there is no way I am ever going to let my professional guard down and lapse into some feverish dialogue. Once I lose my temper, I lose the argument!!
I do not intend to lose the argument on biasing issues in forensic science. I hope you will come aboard with me and look to find ways to mitigate such influences.

[sharon cook]

Re: Taggart's posting of Jul 05--so many misidentifications in the UK and even more here in the USA--and all of them were verified MULTIPLE TIMES! You should well ask how these kinds of mistakes can be reduced. I just think anything that involves human beings is subject to error. Training is good, yes, but still you're dealing with human beings with all sorts of motives for their actions. In a perfect world, everyone would always do everything with integrity and to the best of their ability. The best we can hope for is to find the bad ones and weed them out.

[Pat A. Wertheim]

In a perfect world, everyone would always do everything with integrity and to the best of their ability. The best we can hope for is to find the bad ones and weed them out.

The worst we can do is keep the bad ones and reward them when we find them, and weed out the ones with ability who demonstrate integrity. It's a real tragedy how that is sometimes what happens.

[Big Wullie]

Danny McNamee was convicted in England in 1987 of conspiracy to cause explosions. (145) He was dubbed the "Hyde Park Bomber" for his alleged role in a 1982 Irish Republican Army bombing that killed four soldiers and seven horses. (146) McNamee was implicated in the crime by three latent prints: two from tape found with explosive-making equipment, and one from a battery recovered from debris after a controlled explosion in London. (147) The latent print from the battery was the most incriminating. At McNamee's trial, Metropolitan Police latent print" examiners offered evidence that McNamee was the source of the latent print on the battery. (148)

As McNamee appealed his conviction, controversy emerged over the battery print. At least fourteen different examiners analyzed the evidence. (149) Two Glasgow examiners found eleven corresponding characteristics between the latent print and McNamee's inked prints, but they were not the same eleven characteristics. (150) At least two Dorset examiners also attributed the print to McNamee, but did not agree with some of the corresponding ridge characteristics identified by the original examiners. (151) Other experts, including Peter Swann and Martin Leadbetter, found the latent print insufficient for identification. (152) The appeals court quashed the fingerprint evidence, the case collapsed, and McNamee was released in 1998 after serving eleven years in prison. (153)

Clearly Leadbetter knew of this in 1998 possibly pre 1998, only he will be able to tell when he looked at it ?

Strange it also involved two Glasgow Experts ?