Posted by Sharon Cook on February 01, 2000 at 17:26:52:
In Reply to: Re: update posted by Iain McKie on January 24, 2000 at 05:56:31:
I suspect some of the problem with the SCRO lies in your comment about re-examining their previous work. This is a BIG can of worms that no agency wants to undertake. The probability that previous erroneous identifications will be found, opening up the agency to lawsuits, etc. is, no doubt, a MAJOR motivating factor in insisting that this "bum ident" is valid. There is also the human factor. Every time they hear about another expert verifying the fact that THIS IS NOT AN IDENTIFICATION, they dig in their heels a little deeper. What do you suppose is the bottom line, here? When every other fingerprint expert in the world has called this an erroneous identification, and they,(the SCRO experts), are five forlorn, vilified, lonely souls banding together in their incompetence wandering the world in search of validation?
My personal opinion is that the court chart used by the SCRO was a disgrace! If a TRAINEE presented me with something that bad, I would throw it in the trash and make them do it again, until they got something usable in a court of law. I want to give the benefit of the doubt to the SCRO and not accuse them of some massive conspiracy. I'm afraid I do have to accuse them of incompetence, at the very least.
I'm sorry for the pain Shirley McKie has gone through, and continues to go through. My heart is with her.