CLPEX Chat Board

Having looked at Peter Swann's CV at the following link: Pages 48-49.

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/busin ... wan_01.pdf

I see nothing in it to suggest he qualified nor indeed studied the art of fingerprinting.

Indeed at another part (page 2) of the link he even suggests he learned all of what he knows through the police.

Serious questions need to be asked about his competency.

Would he for example not have to attend college and keep attending courses to keep him updated of techniques etc etc ?

Anyone out there with any answers feel free to submit them here in confidence!

Could Peter Swann be another Gene Morrison ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b009nm9g?src=ip_ra

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ml?rss=yes

Hmmm...Mr. Wullie, maybe I am taking this wrong? I haven't got a college degree, but I do have 27 years experience comparing prints in law enforcement. The majority of the latent print classes I have taken were only for the so called "respect" one gets by mentioning the classes on a resume or in court.

We take in, on average, 25 new latent cases a day. I have gained far more skill actually doing latent comparisons, latent development, CAFIS entries, etc. on a daily basis. Have ALWAYS done the ACE-V long before there was an acronym for it, so personally I don't automaticly put value on a college education or hold it against them for not having one. Some people can take tests but not necessarily apply what they have been taught. Someone who does actually compare prints routinely and has his work verified and has been doing so for a long time is far more an expert than someone college educated in my book.

PCC

Dont misunderstand what I am questioning here,
Do fingerprint experts not have to pass exams ?
Peter Swann does not mention having passed any.

Because he rose to chief inspector in charge of the fingerprint bureau does not mean he is a qualified expert.

Because he attended major incidents and conferences does not mean he is qualified does it ?

Correct me if i am wrong but some of the managers at SCRO are not fingerprint experts ?

What exams do fingerprint experts have to pass ?

Peter Swann is probably the UK's most respected FP expert. A man of unblemished integrity. So much so that the McKie's drove some 400 miles to meet him and ask him to act as their defence expert. This was on the recommendation of their advisers. When Peter said that Mark Y7 was deposited by Shirley and he saw no reason to think the mark was fabricated or planted they tried to silence him.
Donald Findlay was sufficient impressed after meeting Peter that he altered his original approach to Shirley's defence. At her Trial Shirley denied under oath five times any knowledge of his views. She also pleaded a false averment regarding Peter on her civil claim.
Believing that a miscarriage of justice had taken place, and fearing for Asbury's release, Peter felt that his analysis should become public knowledge. A tribunal was set up to hear the McKie's beach of confidentiality claim but, as everyone (apart from you it seems) knows they failed to turn up at the Hearing.
Quite frankly it is outrageous for someone like you to try to cast aspersions.
It's time you took a wee holiday I think.

Wullie,

I think the key part here is perhaps not the training experts have had whilst in full time employment, but rather what still allows individuals to remain as “Expert” witnesses long after retiring from their full time posts. Peter Swann retired in 1987, some 21 years ago. John Berry retired in 1991, some 17 years ago.

We obviously have to assume once an expert always an expert. Nowadays membership of both the International association if Identification and the Council for the Registration for Forensic Practitioners count for nothing. Given both these organisations know the prints in the Marion Ross case were misidentifications they still hold Peter Swann as a member.

So what does allow an “expert” retired for 21 years to continue to practice? And to be accepted in Courts as an Expert? Does an Annual Competency test actually prove competence? Is all their work actually peer reviewed? I suspect the majority of work is simply confirming identifications already made. How many cases would Swann look at on an annual basis?

Would you be happy to accept a professional diagnosis from a doctor who had been out of routine practice for 21 years?

Perhaps this is something the profession could investigate, with a view to regulation? After all we know Swann is incorrect on TWO so called “identifications” but still is regarded as an Expert in the eyes of the courts in Britain. Perhaps this is something that needs to be addressed at a higher level, perhaps the Crown Office, or the Crown Prosecution Service.

Without regulation discredited experts such as Swann are still being allowed to give “Expert” testimony and potentially jeopardising legitimate cases in the UK, or indeed worldwide.

Now turning to daktari.

Peter Swann is probably the UK's most respected FP expert. A man of unblemished integrity.

Unblemished? Two misidentifications? But not to worry, hopefully you can support Swann by answering a couple of issues.

Swann in his evidence over mark Y7 has stated that the TOP of the print is as CLEAR as the rest of the print. In fact he said on more than one occasion there was NOT one single characteristic OUT of sequence.

This totally contradicts the evidence of the SCRO Experts who said there are characteristics in disagreement, and in fact McBride stated that only someone who was not an expert would look at the top of the print as there was something wrong with it.

Clearly the evidence of the SCRO Experts is at odds with the doyen who you claim is a man of unblemished integrity.

So do you respect his opinion over mark Y7? Is he correct to conclude the top of the print is as clear as the rest of the print and there is not a single characteristic in disagreement?

Let us turn now to the Appeal of Danny McNamee, and Swann’s evidence in that case. He concluded the fingerprint used to convict McNamee was insufficient.

However at the same Appeal Robert Mackenzie and Alan Dunbar of SCRO BOTH identified the fingerprint as belonging to McNamee.

Again totally contradictory evidence.

So do you respect Swann’s opinion over the McNamee fingerprint? Is he correct to conclude the print was insufficient?

Have a go my friend, after all you are the one who is asserting the doyen is so respected.

Answer both my questions and show us you believe he is indeed the respectable expert you claim…..

Daktari

What planet are you on ?

Shirley did not deny knowing anything about Peter Swann!

She said you would have to ask her defence team as she wasn't sure, A clear difference from what you are suggesting.

[Peter Swann is probably the UK's most respected FP expert. A man of unblemished integrity.]

Only in your mind Daktari

Are you trying to suggest he is a credible and reliable expert witness to give evidence in complex cases ?

Do you support his assertion then that it was a left thumb print ?

Even by his own admissions he was not qualified in certain aspects and learned all he knows from the police, Great independent expert eh ?

Exactly what did he learn though is the big question Daktari.

Even McBride claims he was not an expert by claiming only a non expert would have used the top part of Y7 yet Peter your much respected FP expert not only used the top part but found similarities within it, did he not ?

Martin Leadbetter claims that UK Experts are taught better than Americans do you agree with him on this issue too ?

[It's time you took a wee holiday I think.]

Is that a threat Daktari ?

Wullie,

Things will be a lot clearer for us when daktari answers my two earlier questions:

Do you respect Swann's opinion over mark Y7? Is he correct to conclude the top of the print is as clear as the rest of the print and there is not a single characteristic in disagreement?

Do you respect Swann’s opinion over the McNamee fingerprint? Is he correct to conclude the print was insufficient?

Obviously if daktari fails or tries to avoid the questions, their assertions over the Doyen will be seen as completely false, and they will be exposed YET again as lying.

Watch this space.....

Who said
“I was in NO WAY qualified to testify to fingerprint identifications when I was first accepted in court as an “expert” in the late 1970’s. I attended a two-week class in Henry classification which also touched on latent print development and latent print identification. Our comparison exercises were all inked to inked. After that, there was no OJT in my department and I had to teach myself. Within two years, I was testifying to identifications. I never had a senior examiner check my work and never had a single proficiency test. And don’t make the mistake of thinking I was the exception” ?
Answers on a postcard please.
And a big thanks Wullie for giving me a chance to post this again!

Daktari don't mention it I am always happy to have a good laugh at your rants!

Answer me this one Daktari:

Has your old buddy Peter Swann ever proven himself by passing a difficult test like the IAI Latent Print Certification Test ?

Simple Question this time Daktari

Oh while on the Subject has Martin Leadbetter passed the same exam or any exam for that matter ?

Can experts add their retirement years onto their CV and claim to be an expert for 48 years instead of 27 ?

Daktari,

Strange you are unwilling to answer my two questions!

Peter Swann is probably the UK's most respected FP expert. A man of unblemished integrity.

you forgot the next phrase, "when it suits".

I bet the doyen was rather pleased by your support, but I wonder how he feels know you can't support him?

With regard to the qualifications issue I wonder if anyone can help. After reading Malcolm Graham's Report again he states while employed by Lothian and Borders Police he was authorised to give expert evidence by the Secretary of State. The key word being "while".

Is he authorised AFTER he leaves the Service? Who gives that authoristaion? How long does that authorisation last for? Who authorises Experts in England? And does that authorisation remain with an expert AFTER they leave the Service. In other words is Graham's Expertise still authorised by the Secretary of State, and if not when would it have ceased?

Is Peter Swann still "authorised" to give Expert evidence, and if so my who?

Are there any full time fingerprint experts within the UK currently giving expert evidence without any kind of authorisation?

I would welcome any views or thoughts on this subject.

Taggart

I think we have actually stumbled upon a huge malfunction within our Government to properly govern these experts.
I don't think Daktari is actually capable of answering some of our questions for fear of bringing the profession into further disrepute.

I have heard through the grapevine that when it was suggested our experts be tested there was a huge outcry and nothing more was ever heard about the subject again.

Very damning of our country not to insist our experts sit exams and qualify as experts like our Forensic Scientists have to do to gain BSCs and the likes.

And they claim we have a better system than America with better training facilities ?

OK Daktari

We take it from your silence the questions are too hard for you to comprehend and that Taggart and myself are right when we assume Swann & Leadbetter have never sat the IAI tests.

Your silence speaks volumes just like the four SCRO incompetents did when questioned by Mckay.

No one will laugh if you cannot understand why such Lay People like myself have grave concerns over your conduct in the Shirley McKie affair and how Swann can make two very fatal mistakes like:
Left thumb print.
And using the top part that McBride claimed only a non expert would use.
Lord Advocate Resigned
First Minister admits a mistake while so called experts still deny any wrongdoing under instructions from Executive Lawyers.
£750.000 compensation paid out.
15 Jurors find Shirley Not Guilty.
Experts worldwide support Shirley.
Experts from L&B who supported Shirley lose their positions and jobs (apart from the one who never signed the sheet)
McBride admits she signed other workers "Initials" because she knew they had looked at it.
Mckay reports criminality.
Mckay reports "incompetents" from SCRO would not answer questions.

Lastly Daktari I am very concerned with this remark from Mckay:

During this enquiry, we were privy to suggestions and implied sinister
comment as to Shirley McKie's evidence and her being in the Ross
house. This is unfortunate and ill-conceived comment and (i) there is
no justifiable evidence to doubt Shirley McKie, and (ii) the entire Police
Service must now look objectively at fingerprint evidence and come to
terms that there have been two misidentifications by SCRO.

Two Misidents by SCRO is Mckays words Daktari, The entire Police Service must come to terms with, he suggests.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UmtgzFZJho[/youtube]

Any comments at-all Daktari ?

Daktari

Where art thou

I am very concerned you have not answered any comments for a long time.
Is this because you have went out and bought a new PC to try to hide your ID, it's not the PC Daktari but the IP you can never hide.
Well actually every e-mail ever sent is kept too so there will be no hiding place for you once the Enquiry gets going.

Just for your info

I have today written to CCRC pointing out that since Peter Swann has claimed to do work for them and has been discredited worldwide his work done for them should be checked and since he has been retired for 21 years is not a competent witness to give any opinions.

I enclosed all the videos from "you tube" including the one where Peter Swann claims it was a left thumb print and he doesn't know why SCRO never used the top part of the print as he found similarities on the top part despite it being smudged and cropped.

I hope Peter Swann will now retire and never be called upon again to give evidence in matters he is not qualified in.

Will keep all informed of the view of CCRC