Posted by Pat A. Wertheim on February 24, 2000 at 19:40:55:
In Reply to: SCRO Identification posted by MALCOLM GRAHAM on February 23, 2000 at 15:34:10:
I would preface my comments by pointing out, for those not familiar with Scottish courts, that there are fifteen jurors in a criminal case in High Court. The jurors have three verdicts from which to chose: 1) Guilty, 2) Not Guilty, and 3) Not Proved. The verdict goes to a majority vote.
In Shirley McKie's case, the jury was only out for an hour. Actual deliberations obviously took less than that. The verdict was a unanimous "Not Guilty!" Following the reading of that verdict, the Lord Johnston commended Shirley McKie from the bench for her fortitude in standing up for herself through such trying times.
To suggest that the judge and jury were only looking for a crack in the door through and that Dave Grieve and I simply "gave the jury a way out" is a terrible insult to the fifteen jurors and especially to Lord Johnston. To suggest that those sixteen people had no more integrity than that is slanderous.
By reading the comments of all of the other fingerprint experts from around the world who have posted comments on this page, it becomes obvious that perhaps the jurors and Lord Johnston did, in fact, understand the fingerprint evidence. The crime scene mark on the doorframe, which I examined and photographed in situ, was very simply NOT made by Shirley McKie, whom I personally fingerprinted. Even a beginner examining complete, untouched photographs of those prints can easily reach that conclusion.
The jury was correct in their verdict. The Lord Johnston clearly understood what was going on when he commended Ms McKie.
Mr. Graham needs to carefully reexamine both this case and his opinion of the Scottish judges and juries.