CLPEX Chat Board

Can I ask for clarification on the last post please Raul?

Martin Leadbetter is the current Chairman of the Society: Viv Galloway is the President.

Which one is to resign/not stand for re-election at the AGM?

Martin Leadbetter me thinks judging by Raul's post?

Does anyone think Leadbetter will be missed by SCRO and Peter Swann ????

Read On:

I am sure Mr Leadbetter will not be missed by Swann The SCRO and Robert McKenzie.
He was able like no other expert in the history of fingerprints to Identify Y7 as Shirley McKie’s from a Different part of the print from everyone else.

This has never been done before but can be seen by looking at the following:
SCRO Chart FI_0167.
AZ_0061 slide 79.
TS-0005

And compare them to what Leadbetter said below :

His find was so important that he was even prepared to sacrifice his friendship with Swann as his evidence shows.

Remember I told of how when he came out of the witness box, Swann Turned away from him in disgust and never uttered a word to him.

Please do not accept my word for this and view these charts yourselves and compare with this:

"7 Q. To that extent do you disagree with Mr Swann's evidence?
8 A. Well, I can't do anything but, can I, in that extent
9 but, as I said, there is always a subjectivity aspect in
10 fingerprint identification.
11 Q. I think that answer is a yes, you do disagree with him?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. The extent of the distortion and movement such as to
14 obliterate some nine or ten ridges, intervening ridges,
15 I take it is a severe distortion of some kind?
16 A. I would say so, yes.
17 Q. Accordingly, if anyone was to use the bottom portion of
18 that print in an analysis it would be something that
19 would be highly questionable, wouldn't it?
20 A. Well, it depends if it's done in isolation. If it's
21 done in isolation without relation to the rest of the
22 print, I don't think so.
23 Q. Sorry, it would be acceptable if it was done in
24 isolation, just on its own; are you saying that, are
25 you?
page 34
1 A. If you're using those characteristics in the area
2 without proceeding to the other area, yes, I think it's
3 okay.
4 Q. Mr Leadbetter, you are telling us that you can see, on
5 what we are looking at on the screen just now,







evidence
6 of distortion or twisting of some kind?
7 A. It's my impression, yes.
8 Q. What is your evidence about it? You say it's your
9 impression. Are you saying you can see that there is
10 evidence of some kind of distortion or twisting.
11 Are you saying you can see it?
12 A. I don't know what more I can say other than that the
13 appearance of the ridges to me and the way the
14 characteristics fell I did not like so I decided I would
15 avoid it.
16 Q. What I am asking you, Mr Leadbetter, is this, as I am
17 sure you are well aware: would any expert be able to see
18 what you are telling you can see, evidence of distortion
19 or twisting in the lower part of the print?
20 A. I don't know. You would have to ask them.
21 Q. If another expert fails to see it, do you have any
22 question mark over their competency?
23 A. Sorry?
24 Q. If any other expert, someone professing to be an expert
25 in fingerprints, fails to see that evidence of twisting
page 35
1 and distortion in the lower part of the print, do you
2 have any question marks relating to their competency?
3 A. Probably not, no.
4 Q. Why not?
5 A. Because it's a subjectivity exercise, isn't it?
6 Q. You won't agree with that proposition, Mr Leadbetter,
7 because you know that SCRO relied on the lower part of
8 the print. That's why you are having difficulty with
9 this, isn't it?
10 A. No.
11 Q. How can you explain the position that a number of
12 experts from SCRO relied upon an area of a print that
13 you say you can see evidence of distortion of some
14 kind sufficient to obliterate nine or ten lines? How do
15 you explain that?
16 A. Well, it's very difficult, isn't it?
17 Q. Well, either they are wrong or you are wrong, isn't it?
18 A. Well, I may be wrong about that area but I'm not wrong
19 about the rest of it.
20 Q. Are you accepted that there may be no evidence of
21 twisting or distortion in that area of the print?
22 A. There may be no evidence but I still had to go by my
23 impression of it when I examined it.
24 Q. If there is no evidence of it how do you justify the
25 ridge count difference?
page 36
1 A. I can't add anything to what I've said."

This all for the sake of science, what a brave man. He surely will be missed !

While not a member of the Fingerprint Society I have, as a representative of someone who has suffered at the hands of incompetent experts, a vested interest in a strong and vibrant Society capable of balancing the needs of the members it represents against the legitimate interests of those who might fall foul to incompetent or dishonest experts.

Unlike the IAI which embraces development and change and seeks to advance the science in every way it can the Fingerprint Society has lost its way and is seen by many as serving the interests of a small number of experts who use it as a cover for the two horrendous identification mistakes made following the murder of Marion Ross.

The power wielded by Martin Ledbetter, Peter Swann, Fiona McBride and Robert Mackenzie is clear for all to see as is the self serving behaviour that has brought fingerprinting into disrepute across the world.

As it is looking increasingly unlikely that the report of the Fingerprint Inquiry Scotland will be published before the April AGM the Society members are left with the stark choice of excising the cancer lying at the heart of the Society or allowing the downward spiral of self interest to continue for yet another year.

I remain hopeful that the vast majority of competent and honest experts will make their voices heard and ensure that the Society regains its once enviable position as a standard bearer for excellence and integrity within the fingerprint profession.

So Iain McKie claims to be

a representative of someone who has suffered at the hands of incompetent experts,

Isn't it a pity therefore that he he did not pursue his action against Peter Swann.
Only the most cynical of us would believe that if he had done so it would have undermined his daughter's claim, made under oath, that she did not know of anyone(apart from the SCRO) who had attributed ownership of Y7 to her.

Daktari

If my recent post is read in full you will see that Martin Leadbetter actually tore apart the evidence of Swann, SCRO and dare I say it McKenzie.

But then again this is a serious issue I do not expect you to fully grasp given your limited Intelligence.

After all you lot cannot properly identify a fingerprint correctly can you ?

Are you talking about the same Swann who Identified Y7 from a "Cropped Photocopy" with SCRO markings on it ?

The same Swann who took it for granted that the Daily Mail had printed Shirley McKie's print which he then used for his comparison ?

Are we talking about the same Swann who originally told the McKies he was an expert in fingerprint planting or forgery to later claim at the Inquiry no such expert exists ?

My recollection of the evidence at the Inquiry was she did know of Swann but was told to revert any questions of this nature to her defence Lawyers or QC.

Shirley was only answering the question the way her QC instructed.

What part of this can you not get your head around.

Anyway I would suppose if her father had took to do with most of her defence preparation she would not have remembered everyone involved nor at what stages they were involved, why would she.

It came as no surprise to me her defence did not use him having heard his evidence being torn apart by the Inquiry and particular by Andrew Smith QC.

You are obviously unaware of the legal system in Scotland judging by your posts, Defence teams are under no obligation to tell crown office of anyone apart from those they intend calling as witnesses.

By Peter Swann's own admission he was using the wrong material and it was materially flawed:

http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotlan ... 040-02.pdf

Iain McKie wrote:Unlike the IAI which embraces development and change and seeks to advance the science in every way it can . . .

I haven't really seen the IAI "embrace" development and change. While I wouldn't put the IAI in the same category as the Fingerprint Society, I would avoid holding up the IAI as a role model of professional organizations.

Dear 16 points,

Point taken! I know that over the years some members of the IAI as well as the Fingerprint Society have expressed frustration at failures to timeously or adequately address important professional issues.

I hope you will agree however that as an organisation the IAI is light years ahead of the Fingerprint Society.

You have only to view the IAI website http://www.theiai.org/ or their programme for this year’s educational conference in Spokane http://www.mydigitalpublication.com/pub ... n/?i=35050 to appreciate the contribution to the future of their science. The IAI’s extensive certification and training programmes, SWGFAST and the other working groups and its various publications and contributions to inquiries, research and reports is testimony to the fact that while not perfect the will is there to further the interests of its members and the wider public they serve.

The IAI for instance, although based in another country, addressed the issue of the erroneous identification of print ‘Y7’ made by SCRO. The Fingerprint Society however continued to support the vested interests of its then chairperson Martin Leadbetter and ‘Fellows’ like Peter Swann and Robert Mackenzie who along with their SCRO colleagues were responsible for two of the most appalling ‘mistakes’ in fingerprint history.

The sad truth is that in re-electing Fiona McBride, one of the notorious ‘SCRO Six’, as editor of ‘Fingerprint Whorld’ at their recent AGM the Society missed an important opportunity to show the wider fingerprint community that the lessons of the past had been learned and that they were at last willing to re-join the world community of fingerprinting.

That said however I still hope that the new President Karen Stow and new Chair Robert Doak will be able to deliver the strong and vibrant Fingerprint Society that is needed if the science of fingerprinting is to regain its credibility in the UK and become an even more valuable crime prevention and detection tool.

Is it too much to hope that , like myself, these Society leaders will publicly state that they will accept the coming findings of the ‘Fingerprint Inquiry Scotland’ and do what has to be done to rid themselves of experts who shame the profession they represent, put personal gain before their science and cast a shadow over the vast majority of honest experts performing a vital justice task.

Best wishes,

Iain

Until she finally decides to tell the truth about her unsanctioned visit to 43 Irvine Road, Shirley will find no peace in that deep, gloomy place, the abyss, like a dungeon of torment and suffering, that she has come to reside
within. A Tartarus of her own, and her father's, making.
As for her father, well I suppose there's a special place in Hell for people like him.

The readers of this forum know more of the truth than you would like them to, daktari. They also know a bit about Iain McKie's character, and that of his anonymous critics.

A closer reading of last years’ Fingerprint Society AGM (2009) shows how it has actually supported and rewarded the SCRO experts, and in turn brings further shame on the Society.

http://www.fpsociety.org.uk/files/AGM%20Mins%202009.pdf

http://www.fpsociety.org.uk/

"New Life Members
Robert McKenzie (Retired)
Proposed: KK Seconded: Monica Callaghan (W Yorks)"

Alarmingly, I understand ‘KK’ is Kevin Kershaw who is Head of Forensic Identification Services at Greater Manchester Police.

In 2009 Robert Mackenzie, who misidentified Y7, and has been discredited on numerous occasions, was rewarded by the Fingerprint Society!
Shambolic does not even begin to describe this farce!!

As for her father, well I suppose there's a special place in Hell for people like him.

Daktari, nice to see the desparation and out and out lunacy return to your posts, you really just cannot help yourself can you ?

I have always thought hell is what we live in, and heaven is what we make of it, You must be having a really bad time of it judging by your posts.

You are right with the special place though "The History Books" for single handedly bringing down the whole fingerprint world of SCRO in Glasgow.

Well Done Iain.

Unfortunately Daktari you will be remembered as a stark raving Loony

Anyone care to second this ?

Hi Big Wullie,

Yeah I will second that, the Dakas has done the use by date.

We all must remember the Fingerprint Society was set up as a forum for social interaction between UK experts. As such they became socially loyal bretheren who stick by their mates not matter what. If a new society were to be formed in the UK aspiring for scientific credibility they would need to formulate a governance built upon professional standing, just an idea. Cheers from oz. Les