Justice1 member speaks out.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 9:30 am
Justice must be done in the McKie case for all concerned
Margaret Mitchell MSP
On February 7, 2006 the Labour/Lib/Dem pact paid out £750,00 of taxpayers money to Shirley McKie a Detective Constable with Strathclyde Police following her acquittal for perjury by a jury in 1999.
Approximately 9 years earlier (January 8, 1997) Marion Ross had been found murdered in her home in Kilmarnock.
Shirley McKie was part of the investigation team but despite her left thumbprint having been identified on a bathroom doorframe at the scene of the crime, she denied ever having entered the house and gave evidence to that effect during the trial of David Ashbury who had been charged with the murder of Marion Ross.
Following David Ashbury’s trial, the then Lord Advocate Colin Boyd took the decision to prosecute Ms McKie on the basis that she had been in Marion Ross’s home during the course of the police investigation: The Mark was made by her and therefore she had lied on oath. Only a limited number of people had access to the immediate scene of the crime to avoid contamination of the evidence and for an unauthorised person to have been there was a serious matter.
Ms McKie’s acquittal then set in motion a series of investigations, reports, political campaigns and significant media attention.
At the heart of these events had been the disputed identification of Mark Y7 found at the scene and identified as hers by four experts from the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) who have, since the perjury trial, been the subject of intense media speculation, intolerable pressure and allegations of criminality.
Whilst those who supported Ms McKie in her allegations that the identification of Mark Y7 had been malicious were free to make these allegations to anyone prepared to listen, these officers remained gagged and unable to defend themselves and were cautioned they could not speak for legal reasons.
The Executive refused to hold a Public Inquiry but in an effort to restore public and professional confidence in the Scottish Fingerprints Service (SFS), the Justice 1 Committee in the Scottish Parliament was given the task of holding an inquiry which would examine the efficient running of SFS and SCRO taking into account the implications of the McKie case.
This involved taking evidence from all the key players.
As a member of the Justice 1 Committee who took evidence from the four SCRO experts, I could only marvel at the dignified, measure and professional manner in which they conducted themselves when they finally had the opportunity to tell their story.
There is little doubt in my mind these experts have not just been let down, but made scapegoats for the failures of others who in the full glare of a media frenzy surrounding the disputed Mark Y7, have run for cover when they should have been up-front and visible in their support.
The four experts have never wavered in their conviction that identification of Mark Y7 was correct and for this they have been pilloried.
Furthermore their work in other identifications has been 100 percent accurate.
Justice Minister, Cathy Jamieson’s, stated objective in agreeing, a staggering £750,000, out-of-court settlement (which absolved the Executive of any liability), was to end the affair. This has clearly not been achieved.
Ms McKie continues to make allegations that the experts acted maliciously. In these circumstances the Executive should not have settled.
It is to be hoped, now that Justice 1 report has been completed and published, the four experts will derive some comfort from its content and the details will enable them to do what they consider to be in their best interests.
Published, inter alia, in the East Kilbride News
February 21,2007
ends
A wee note on Scottish Politics
The Justice 1 Committee is composed of three women Labour MSPs, two male Scottish Nationalist MSPs, one woman Tory MSP and one male Lib/Dem MSP.
Although Labour and Lib/Dem form a coalition government, MSPs are not too constricted by party lines when serving on Committees.
Justice 1 took the decision to issue a unanimous Report. All members of the Committee, having heard a mountain of evidence, have agreed to the contents of Final Report. Had it not been for that decision we may have had a stronger line on ownership of the disputed Mark!
Margaret Mitchell MSP
On February 7, 2006 the Labour/Lib/Dem pact paid out £750,00 of taxpayers money to Shirley McKie a Detective Constable with Strathclyde Police following her acquittal for perjury by a jury in 1999.
Approximately 9 years earlier (January 8, 1997) Marion Ross had been found murdered in her home in Kilmarnock.
Shirley McKie was part of the investigation team but despite her left thumbprint having been identified on a bathroom doorframe at the scene of the crime, she denied ever having entered the house and gave evidence to that effect during the trial of David Ashbury who had been charged with the murder of Marion Ross.
Following David Ashbury’s trial, the then Lord Advocate Colin Boyd took the decision to prosecute Ms McKie on the basis that she had been in Marion Ross’s home during the course of the police investigation: The Mark was made by her and therefore she had lied on oath. Only a limited number of people had access to the immediate scene of the crime to avoid contamination of the evidence and for an unauthorised person to have been there was a serious matter.
Ms McKie’s acquittal then set in motion a series of investigations, reports, political campaigns and significant media attention.
At the heart of these events had been the disputed identification of Mark Y7 found at the scene and identified as hers by four experts from the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) who have, since the perjury trial, been the subject of intense media speculation, intolerable pressure and allegations of criminality.
Whilst those who supported Ms McKie in her allegations that the identification of Mark Y7 had been malicious were free to make these allegations to anyone prepared to listen, these officers remained gagged and unable to defend themselves and were cautioned they could not speak for legal reasons.
The Executive refused to hold a Public Inquiry but in an effort to restore public and professional confidence in the Scottish Fingerprints Service (SFS), the Justice 1 Committee in the Scottish Parliament was given the task of holding an inquiry which would examine the efficient running of SFS and SCRO taking into account the implications of the McKie case.
This involved taking evidence from all the key players.
As a member of the Justice 1 Committee who took evidence from the four SCRO experts, I could only marvel at the dignified, measure and professional manner in which they conducted themselves when they finally had the opportunity to tell their story.
There is little doubt in my mind these experts have not just been let down, but made scapegoats for the failures of others who in the full glare of a media frenzy surrounding the disputed Mark Y7, have run for cover when they should have been up-front and visible in their support.
The four experts have never wavered in their conviction that identification of Mark Y7 was correct and for this they have been pilloried.
Furthermore their work in other identifications has been 100 percent accurate.
Justice Minister, Cathy Jamieson’s, stated objective in agreeing, a staggering £750,000, out-of-court settlement (which absolved the Executive of any liability), was to end the affair. This has clearly not been achieved.
Ms McKie continues to make allegations that the experts acted maliciously. In these circumstances the Executive should not have settled.
It is to be hoped, now that Justice 1 report has been completed and published, the four experts will derive some comfort from its content and the details will enable them to do what they consider to be in their best interests.
Published, inter alia, in the East Kilbride News
February 21,2007
ends
A wee note on Scottish Politics
The Justice 1 Committee is composed of three women Labour MSPs, two male Scottish Nationalist MSPs, one woman Tory MSP and one male Lib/Dem MSP.
Although Labour and Lib/Dem form a coalition government, MSPs are not too constricted by party lines when serving on Committees.
Justice 1 took the decision to issue a unanimous Report. All members of the Committee, having heard a mountain of evidence, have agreed to the contents of Final Report. Had it not been for that decision we may have had a stronger line on ownership of the disputed Mark!