Shirley McKie has ‘had enough’ of inquiry
The father of former policewoman Shirley McKie admitted yesterday that she wanted nothing to do with the latest inquiry into her case.
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill announced his choice to chair the public judicial inquiry, senior Northern Ireland judge Lord Justice Campbell.
Iain McKie, 68, also a former police officer, said his daughter had been traumatised over the past 11 years since she was accused of perjury at a murder trial, and wanted to get on with her life.
However, she would give evidence to the inquiry and tell the truth "as she had always done".
Miss McKie, 45, had denied allegations, based on a disputed fingerprint, that while working as a detective constable she paid an unauthorised visit to a crime scene - the house in Kilmarnock where 51-year-old Marion Ross had been found stabbed to death in 1997.
Acquitted of perjury, she has fought to clear her name completely and received an apology from the Scottish Parliament and £750,000 in compensation.
Mr MacAskill said Lord Justice Campbell would investigate steps taken to identify the disputed fingerprint evidence and make recommendations as to what further measures might now be introduced to ensure shortcomings are avoided in the future.
Miss McKie did not join her father and Alex Neil, one of the MSPs who has championed her case, at a press conference in Glasgow to welcome the announcement.
"She has had enough of it," said Mr McKie. "She has appeared in court twice, she has appeared at a parliamentary inquiry, and she had tried to get on with her life.
"Every time it's mentioned, the trauma comes back again. A lot of very nasty lies have been spread about my daughter over the years."
He admitted the two had sometimes fallen out over his persistent pursuit of the case in the wider interests of justice. "She has complained that she wants a father, and what she has is a spokesman," he said.
"I have had to take her to places where she did not want to be but I think it has drawn the family closer together."
Mr MacAskill said the inquiry would have full powers relating to access to documents and witnesses, and the Scottish Government would volunteer any useful material that it held.
He said: "The Lord Advocate will make available any material the Crown Office holds and which might be useful to the inquiry, and ministers and officials from the Scottish Government and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service will, if asked, appear in person to provide an account of their knowledge of events. Nothing will be hidden from the inquiry."
Lord Justice Campbell led the 2000 inquiry into the handling of the Surjit Singh Chhokar murder case, and said he would begin preparatory work, with the inquiry starting in September.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: John J. Sheridan, Z'ha'dum on 1:02am Sat 15 Mar 08
Oh good.
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras.
Thank god.
Oh good.
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras.
Thank god.
Posted by: Thyme Kelpie on 1:22am Sat 15 Mar 08
I can appreciate that she is fed up with it all, but the whole thing smelt of something odd all the way through.
The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone. The finger print people have not had the confidence of many of the public for many years now as they came across as 'incompetent' over this matter.
What did happen? The truth this time please.
I can appreciate that she is fed up with it all, but the whole thing smelt of something odd all the way through.
The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone. The finger print people have not had the confidence of many of the public for many years now as they came across as 'incompetent' over this matter.
What did happen? The truth this time please.
Posted by: Big Wullie, Glasgow on 1:45am Sat 15 Mar 08
John J Sheridan
What a disgraceful statement.
Shirley McKie is backed by 171 fingerprint experts worldwide against this 6 incompetents from our SCRO.
Yes the mention of the £750.000 by your good self is also proof that she was framed, How else would this have been paid out.
You are obviously related in some way to those incompetents at SCRO why else would you be so derogatory.
Lets hope justice will finally be done and that the McKie' all get some respite.
Lets hope the Judicial system is shown up for its cultural ignorances of Injustice's in Scotland
John J Sheridan
What a disgraceful statement.
Shirley McKie is backed by 171 fingerprint experts worldwide against this 6 incompetents from our SCRO.
Yes the mention of the £750.000 by your good self is also proof that she was framed, How else would this have been paid out.
You are obviously related in some way to those incompetents at SCRO why else would you be so derogatory.
Lets hope justice will finally be done and that the McKie' all get some respite.
Lets hope the Judicial system is shown up for its cultural ignorances of Injustice's in Scotland
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 3:27am Sat 15 Mar 08
John Grump Sheridan[quote]She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.[/quote] Aye, we hear your life has been an absolute misery ever since her name was first mentioned on breakfast news. You days as an insomniac and an alcoholic are very distressing. Our heart bleeds for you.
John Grump Sheridan
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Aye, we hear your life has been an absolute misery ever since her name was first mentioned on breakfast news. You days as an insomniac and an alcoholic are very distressing. Our heart bleeds for you.
Posted by: isonomia, Lenzie on 7:52am Sat 15 Mar 08
We need this inquiry for the simple reason that Strathclyde police are still in denial about this case and are institutionally incapable of admitting even very serious mistakes where they have clearly broken the law. I am sure she is not the only person who has had her life ruined by criminal actions of this police force.
We need this inquiry for the simple reason that Strathclyde police are still in denial about this case and are institutionally incapable of admitting even very serious mistakes where they have clearly broken the law. I am sure she is not the only person who has had her life ruined by criminal actions of this police force.
Posted by: sociowoman, Dundee on 8:11am Sat 15 Mar 08
John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar.
So, if it was not hers, whose was it?
It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT.
This whole episode does NOT add up.
Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question.
John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar.
So, if it was not hers, whose was it?
It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT.
This whole episode does NOT add up.
Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question.
Posted by: Paul, Paisley on 8:24am Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote:
Oh good.
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras.
Thank god.[/quote] God help you if a miscarriage ever comes your way!
What's the 'J'? Hope it's not Judge!
John J. Sheridan wrote:
Oh good.
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras.
Thank god.
God help you if a miscarriage ever comes your way!
What's the 'J'? Hope it's not Judge!
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 9:04am Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote:
Oh good. She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace. Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras. Thank god.[/quote] JOHN SHERIDAN
You sir are a total buffoon.
Who the blazes wouldn't feel totally deflated after this 11-year long and mentally tiring episode to clear your name.........and if you Bigmouth, have any evidence whatever that Ms. McKie committed ANY offence in respect of this matter, I urge you to bring it to the attention of the authorities.........
...otherwise, we'll be entitled to regard you as nothing more than a blustering empty vessel, ................and gutless to boot !!
John J. Sheridan wrote:
Oh good. She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace. Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras. Thank god.
JOHN SHERIDAN
You sir are a total buffoon.
Who the blazes wouldn't feel totally deflated after this 11-year long and mentally tiring episode to clear your name.........and if you Bigmouth, have any evidence whatever that Ms. McKie committed ANY offence in respect of this matter, I urge you to bring it to the attention of the authorities.........
...otherwise, we'll be entitled to regard you as nothing more than a blustering empty vessel, ................and gutless to boot !!
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 9:11am Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]ColinE[/bold] wrote:
It wasn''t just the incompetence of the 6 SCRO fingerprint "experts" which was discgraceful; they were also dishonest and, if ALL the truth were to come out, their behavior would be seen to be[bold]bold[/bold] CRIMINAL[bold]bold[/bold] I guess John Grump Sheridan, like them, continue to live in denial of the damage the have done in bringing the Scottish Justice System into disrepute. [bold]bold[/bold] How many other cases did they lie in?[/quote] COLIN E
Well said Sir.................
and it is interesting to note that these SCRO cheats were promising for YEARS to provide us all with "evidence" that'd blow the McKie case out of the water,.......but what HAVE we seen...........NOTHI
NG.............(almo
st certainly because it was always empty rhetoric from a team of nasty incompetent liars,who falsely hid behind allegations that they'd been gagged.....well, they sure as h*ll ain't gagged now) ....and doubtless because they'll have been on an endless shopping whirl on THEIR often-overlooked public compensation money. If crime doesn't pay, then incompetence and lying surely does.
The new post-SCRO organisation and Scottish Justice is well rid of them.
ColinE wrote:
It wasn''t just the incompetence of the 6 SCRO fingerprint "experts" which was discgraceful; they were also dishonest and, if ALL the truth were to come out, their behavior would be seen to be CRIMINAL I guess John Grump Sheridan, like them, continue to live in denial of the damage the have done in bringing the Scottish Justice System into disrepute. How many other cases did they lie in?
COLIN E
Well said Sir.................
and it is interesting to note that these SCRO cheats were promising for YEARS to provide us all with "evidence" that'd blow the McKie case out of the water,.......but what HAVE we seen...........NOTHI
NG.............(almo
st certainly because it was always empty rhetoric from a team of nasty incompetent liars,who falsely hid behind allegations that they'd been gagged.....well, they sure as h*ll ain't gagged now) ....and doubtless because they'll have been on an endless shopping whirl on THEIR often-overlooked public compensation money. If crime doesn't pay, then incompetence and lying surely does.
The new post-SCRO organisation and Scottish Justice is well rid of them.
Posted by: Carnwarth, Carnwarth on 9:12am Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rab The Man[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote: Oh good. She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace. Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras. Thank god.[/quote] JOHN SHERIDAN You sir are a total buffoon. Who the blazes wouldn't feel totally deflated after this 11-year long and mentally tiring episode to clear your name.........and if you Bigmouth, have any evidence whatever that Ms. McKie committed ANY offence in respect of this matter, I urge you to bring it to the attention of the authorities......... ...otherwise, we'll be entitled to regard you as nothing more than a blustering empty vessel, ................and gutless to boot !![/quote] Retired - I wondered what had happened to you - you've died and joined the McKie fan club! This woman pocketed a huge amount of money from the taxpayer and was perfectly happy to work for the incompetent/corrupt whatever whatever organisation and see people go down for crimes they did not commit until the day the finger was pointed at her. What she wants in terms of an inquiry is of no account.
Rab The Man wrote:
John J. Sheridan wrote: Oh good. She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace. Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras. Thank god.
JOHN SHERIDAN You sir are a total buffoon. Who the blazes wouldn't feel totally deflated after this 11-year long and mentally tiring episode to clear your name.........and if you Bigmouth, have any evidence whatever that Ms. McKie committed ANY offence in respect of this matter, I urge you to bring it to the attention of the authorities......... ...otherwise, we'll be entitled to regard you as nothing more than a blustering empty vessel, ................and gutless to boot !!
Retired - I wondered what had happened to you - you've died and joined the McKie fan club! This woman pocketed a huge amount of money from the taxpayer and was perfectly happy to work for the incompetent/corrupt whatever whatever organisation and see people go down for crimes they did not commit until the day the finger was pointed at her. What she wants in terms of an inquiry is of no account.
Posted by: Iain McKie, Ayr on 9:15am Sat 15 Mar 08
The judicial inquiry renders all of the conjecture a bit redundant.
Finally the ex SCRO experts will be given what they claim to have always wanted - the opportunity to give evidence under oath.
The results should be illuminating and will hopefully signal an end to the lies, half truths and innuendo that have been so favoured by their supporters over the years.
The judicial inquiry renders all of the conjecture a bit redundant.
Finally the ex SCRO experts will be given what they claim to have always wanted - the opportunity to give evidence under oath.
The results should be illuminating and will hopefully signal an end to the lies, half truths and innuendo that have been so favoured by their supporters over the years.
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 9:22am Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]sociowoman[/bold] wrote:
John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar. So, if it was not hers, whose was it? It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT. This whole episode does NOT add up. Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question. [/quote] SOCIOWOMAN
How do YOU know that there were any similarities in the fingerprints? Are YOU a trained expert? Know all about ridge detail, loops and whorls do you??..and of WHAT RELEVANCE WHATEVER is the nature of the fingerprints of the father Iain McKie?? Are you suggesting that HE may have been at the locus??? The whole episode does not add up as you rightly say...simply because initially (I'm being generous here)there may heve been an error , that quickly became a FIT-UP into which these former SCRO officers allowed themselves to be drawn, and hence implicated.
As for your final question............
you know well you are being disingenuous here.........many young and inexperienced officers have made errors of the nature to which you allude (but are coy about being clear and open about) but your feeble attempt at smear and innuendo do you no credit whatever, and I hope you are thoroughly embarrassed as you read your comment back. You clearly know little of this matter, and demonstrate that most nobly in your nasty obsrvations against a person who has endured this matter for in excess of 11 years, was found "Not Guilty" in a duly constituted court of law by a jury of her peers, and yet has to face the ill-considered ramblings of a moron such as you.
sociowoman wrote:
John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar. So, if it was not hers, whose was it? It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT. This whole episode does NOT add up. Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question.
SOCIOWOMAN
How do YOU know that there were any similarities in the fingerprints? Are YOU a trained expert? Know all about ridge detail, loops and whorls do you??..and of WHAT RELEVANCE WHATEVER is the nature of the fingerprints of the father Iain McKie?? Are you suggesting that HE may have been at the locus??? The whole episode does not add up as you rightly say...simply because initially (I'm being generous here)there may heve been an error , that quickly became a FIT-UP into which these former SCRO officers allowed themselves to be drawn, and hence implicated.
As for your final question............
you know well you are being disingenuous here.........many young and inexperienced officers have made errors of the nature to which you allude (but are coy about being clear and open about) but your feeble attempt at smear and innuendo do you no credit whatever, and I hope you are thoroughly embarrassed as you read your comment back. You clearly know little of this matter, and demonstrate that most nobly in your nasty obsrvations against a person who has endured this matter for in excess of 11 years, was found "Not Guilty" in a duly constituted court of law by a jury of her peers, and yet has to face the ill-considered ramblings of a moron such as you.
Posted by: Carnwarth, Carnwarth on 9:31am Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rab The Man[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]sociowoman[/bold] wrote: John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar. So, if it was not hers, whose was it? It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT. This whole episode does NOT add up. Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question. [/quote] SOCIOWOMAN How do YOU know that there were any similarities in the fingerprints? Are YOU a trained expert? Know all about ridge detail, loops and whorls do you??..and of WHAT RELEVANCE WHATEVER is the nature of the fingerprints of the father Iain McKie?? Are you suggesting that HE may have been at the locus??? The whole episode does not add up as you rightly say...simply because initially (I'm being generous here)there may heve been an error , that quickly became a FIT-UP into which these former SCRO officers allowed themselves to be drawn, and hence implicated. As for your final question............ you know well you are being disingenuous here.........many young and inexperienced officers have made errors of the nature to which you allude (but are coy about being clear and open about) but your feeble attempt at smear and innuendo do you no credit whatever, and I hope you are thoroughly embarrassed as you read your comment back. You clearly know little of this matter, and demonstrate that most nobly in your nasty obsrvations against a person who has endured this matter for in excess of 11 years, was found "Not Guilty" in a duly constituted court of law by a jury of her peers, and yet has to face the ill-considered ramblings of a moron such as you.[/quote] Retired - What an abusive little man you are! And you use the word "locus" and boil over at the reference to McKie's old "former cop" dad - are you one and the same? Why were you and your daughter happy to take your salary from this terrible organisation for all those years but only got upset when the spotlight was turned on her? Did you lose your pension or are the poor old taxpayers funding your activities?
Rab The Man wrote:
sociowoman wrote: John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar. So, if it was not hers, whose was it? It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT. This whole episode does NOT add up. Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question.
SOCIOWOMAN How do YOU know that there were any similarities in the fingerprints? Are YOU a trained expert? Know all about ridge detail, loops and whorls do you??..and of WHAT RELEVANCE WHATEVER is the nature of the fingerprints of the father Iain McKie?? Are you suggesting that HE may have been at the locus??? The whole episode does not add up as you rightly say...simply because initially (I'm being generous here)there may heve been an error , that quickly became a FIT-UP into which these former SCRO officers allowed themselves to be drawn, and hence implicated. As for your final question............ you know well you are being disingenuous here.........many young and inexperienced officers have made errors of the nature to which you allude (but are coy about being clear and open about) but your feeble attempt at smear and innuendo do you no credit whatever, and I hope you are thoroughly embarrassed as you read your comment back. You clearly know little of this matter, and demonstrate that most nobly in your nasty obsrvations against a person who has endured this matter for in excess of 11 years, was found "Not Guilty" in a duly constituted court of law by a jury of her peers, and yet has to face the ill-considered ramblings of a moron such as you.
Retired - What an abusive little man you are! And you use the word "locus" and boil over at the reference to McKie's old "former cop" dad - are you one and the same? Why were you and your daughter happy to take your salary from this terrible organisation for all those years but only got upset when the spotlight was turned on her? Did you lose your pension or are the poor old taxpayers funding your activities?
Posted by: Vronsky, Scotland on 9:56am Sat 15 Mar 08
[bold]Thyme Kelpie says:
[/bold]
[quote]The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone.[/quote]
Yes, absolutely. It is criticallly important to discover what went wrong in this case and put it right. Until that happens there will be no public confidence in the SCRO and it would be a brave lawyer who would lead fingerprint evidence. As matters stand, fingerprint evidence is useless - it seems any opinion, even the unanimous judgement of four Scottish 'experts', can quickly be contradicted by a dozen other 'experts'. Forensic science? Not much science there.
But if fingerprinting is valid as a technology, then we are forced to the alternative explanation of the McKie case - criminal corruption in the police force and collusion by the SCRO. That's serious.
The fate of Ms McKie herself, while she has my sympathy, is vastly less important than a proper airing of what exactly happened in this case. One hopes that there is a better chance that the SNP government will see this through to some sort of conclusion than their Labour/LabDim predecessors, who are part of the grubby machinery.
The conviction of Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is a stain on the Scottish judicial system which might yet be removed. Likewise, it is essential that the SCRO is fully investigated and the McKie matter closed, however damaging to careers and reputations that might be in the short term.
Right now, I wouldn't like to find myself in as position where my liberty depended on the machinations of a Scottish court. We are living in the land of Kafka's Trial.
Thyme Kelpie says:
The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone.
Yes, absolutely. It is criticallly important to discover what went wrong in this case and put it right. Until that happens there will be no public confidence in the SCRO and it would be a brave lawyer who would lead fingerprint evidence. As matters stand, fingerprint evidence is useless - it seems any opinion, even the unanimous judgement of four Scottish 'experts', can quickly be contradicted by a dozen other 'experts'. Forensic science? Not much science there.
But if fingerprinting is valid as a technology, then we are forced to the alternative explanation of the McKie case - criminal corruption in the police force and collusion by the SCRO. That's serious.
The fate of Ms McKie herself, while she has my sympathy, is vastly less important than a proper airing of what exactly happened in this case. One hopes that there is a better chance that the SNP government will see this through to some sort of conclusion than their Labour/LabDim predecessors, who are part of the grubby machinery.
The conviction of Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is a stain on the Scottish judicial system which might yet be removed. Likewise, it is essential that the SCRO is fully investigated and the McKie matter closed, however damaging to careers and reputations that might be in the short term.
Right now, I wouldn't like to find myself in as position where my liberty depended on the machinations of a Scottish court. We are living in the land of Kafka's Trial.
Posted by: exile, far away on 10:22am Sat 15 Mar 08
That's another promise the SNP Government has failed to break. Eat your heart out Bendy.
That's another promise the SNP Government has failed to break. Eat your heart out Bendy.
Posted by: Corrupt EU, Fife on 10:29am Sat 15 Mar 08
oh yeah?
http://video.google.
co.uk/videoplay?doci
d=879579522339428991
0&q=bush+nazi&total=
1733&start=0&num=20&
so=0&type=search&pli
ndex=0
oh yeah?
http://video.google.
co.uk/videoplay?doci
d=879579522339428991
0&q=bush+nazi&total=
1733&start=0&num=20&
so=0&type=search&pli
ndex=0
Posted by: stonehaven on 10:43am Sat 15 Mar 08
What has always baffled me is why were Jack McConnell and Cathy Jamieson always so dead against a proper inquiry. I suspect they have full knowledge of what really happened and were afraid of it coming out.
I cannot think of any other reason.
What has always baffled me is why were Jack McConnell and Cathy Jamieson always so dead against a proper inquiry. I suspect they have full knowledge of what really happened and were afraid of it coming out.
I cannot think of any other reason.
Posted by: John J. Sheridan, Z'ha'dum on 12:01pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Los Angeles[/bold] wrote:
John Grump Sheridan[quote]She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.[/quote] Aye, we hear your life has been an absolute misery ever since her name was first mentioned on breakfast news. You days as an insomniac and an alcoholic are very distressing. Our heart bleeds for you.[/quote] You post that drivel at 03.27 and I am an alcoholic insomniac!
I see. Clarvoiance must be a useful trait, maybe Shirley should have hired you.
My heart bleeds for YOU, at least Ms McKie can console herself that this miscarriage has allowed her never to work a day in her life again.
Then she and you can stop greetin about it in public.
Rab the ' man'
Do stop the "You sir are..." stuff it is repetitive boring and makes YOU sound like the buffoon straight from the daily torygraph letters page.
Ps.
rab, I never got past the 'buffoon part' so I hope the rest of it was up to your usual silly ranting standards.
Los Angeles wrote:
John Grump SheridanShe can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Aye, we hear your life has been an absolute misery ever since her name was first mentioned on breakfast news. You days as an insomniac and an alcoholic are very distressing. Our heart bleeds for you.
You post that drivel at 03.27 and I am an alcoholic insomniac!
I see. Clarvoiance must be a useful trait, maybe Shirley should have hired you.
My heart bleeds for YOU, at least Ms McKie can console herself that this miscarriage has allowed her never to work a day in her life again.
Then she and you can stop greetin about it in public.
Rab the ' man'
Do stop the "You sir are..." stuff it is repetitive boring and makes YOU sound like the buffoon straight from the daily torygraph letters page.
Ps.
rab, I never got past the 'buffoon part' so I hope the rest of it was up to your usual silly ranting standards.
Posted by: John J. Sheridan, Z'ha'dum on 12:04pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Vronsky[/bold] wrote:
[bold]Thyme Kelpie says:
[/bold]
[quote]The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone.[/quote]
Yes, absolutely. It is criticallly important to discover what went wrong in this case and put it right. Until that happens there will be no public confidence in the SCRO and it would be a brave lawyer who would lead fingerprint evidence. As matters stand, fingerprint evidence is useless - it seems any opinion, even the unanimous judgement of four Scottish 'experts', can quickly be contradicted by a dozen other 'experts'. Forensic science? Not much science there.
But if fingerprinting is valid as a technology, then we are forced to the alternative explanation of the McKie case - criminal corruption in the police force and collusion by the SCRO. That's serious.
The fate of Ms McKie herself, while she has my sympathy, is vastly less important than a proper airing of what exactly happened in this case. One hopes that there is a better chance that the SNP government will see this through to some sort of conclusion than their Labour/LabDim predecessors, who are part of the grubby machinery.
The conviction of Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is a stain on the Scottish judicial system which might yet be removed. Likewise, it is essential that the SCRO is fully investigated and the McKie matter closed, however damaging to careers and reputations that might be in the short term.
Right now, I wouldn't like to find myself in as position where my liberty depended on the machinations of a Scottish court. We are living in the land of Kafka's Trial.
[/quote] Possibly the only sensible post in the whole thread.
Vronsky wrote:
Thyme Kelpie says:
The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone.
Yes, absolutely. It is criticallly important to discover what went wrong in this case and put it right. Until that happens there will be no public confidence in the SCRO and it would be a brave lawyer who would lead fingerprint evidence. As matters stand, fingerprint evidence is useless - it seems any opinion, even the unanimous judgement of four Scottish 'experts', can quickly be contradicted by a dozen other 'experts'. Forensic science? Not much science there.
But if fingerprinting is valid as a technology, then we are forced to the alternative explanation of the McKie case - criminal corruption in the police force and collusion by the SCRO. That's serious.
The fate of Ms McKie herself, while she has my sympathy, is vastly less important than a proper airing of what exactly happened in this case. One hopes that there is a better chance that the SNP government will see this through to some sort of conclusion than their Labour/LabDim predecessors, who are part of the grubby machinery.
The conviction of Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is a stain on the Scottish judicial system which might yet be removed. Likewise, it is essential that the SCRO is fully investigated and the McKie matter closed, however damaging to careers and reputations that might be in the short term.
Right now, I wouldn't like to find myself in as position where my liberty depended on the machinations of a Scottish court. We are living in the land of Kafka's Trial.
Possibly the only sensible post in the whole thread.
Posted by: John J. Sheridan, Z'ha'dum on 12:15pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Paul[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote:
Oh good.
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras.
Thank god.[/quote] God help you if a miscarriage ever comes your way!
What's the 'J'? Hope it's not Judge![/quote] If it does I will fight my corner as she has done.
Unlike her I will keep it as private as possible and refrain from endless plaintively expressive ' feel sorry for me' photo opportunities.
This woman may or may not have suffered a terrible injustice, I do not know who is in the right here and it seems to me that neither does anyone else as experts in the field fail to agree in large numbers.
Many more peoples reputations and lives ended up on the line than just Ms Mckies, only she however has come out of it with her life enhanced in any way.
Or am I to be told by "You sir are" and company that £750,000 (dished out by an executive who wanted the whole thing to disappear) is not adequate compensation for her travails?
So if an injustice comes my way I will take my chances and keep myself to myself.
Paul wrote:
John J. Sheridan wrote:
Oh good.
She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras.
Thank god.
God help you if a miscarriage ever comes your way!
What's the 'J'? Hope it's not Judge!
If it does I will fight my corner as she has done.
Unlike her I will keep it as private as possible and refrain from endless plaintively expressive ' feel sorry for me' photo opportunities.
This woman may or may not have suffered a terrible injustice, I do not know who is in the right here and it seems to me that neither does anyone else as experts in the field fail to agree in large numbers.
Many more peoples reputations and lives ended up on the line than just Ms Mckies, only she however has come out of it with her life enhanced in any way.
Or am I to be told by "You sir are" and company that £750,000 (dished out by an executive who wanted the whole thing to disappear) is not adequate compensation for her travails?
So if an injustice comes my way I will take my chances and keep myself to myself.
Posted by: JJF, Glasgow on 12:17pm Sat 15 Mar 08
Vronsky: well said.
Posted by: John J. Sheridan, Z'ha'dum on 12:39pm Sat 15 Mar 08
Carnwarth said:
[quote]What an abusive little man you are![/quote]
Very perceptive!
It usually takes at least two posts from Rab the ' man ' for people to spot that.
He is lost once he finds out you are a woman, he has to resort to 'moron' or 'idiot' since he is unable to blast you with his withering and world renowned (amongst the 30 people who post here) put down of............I hesitate to use it...it's power is awesome........." YOU SIR ARE A...."
Scary.
Carnwarth said:
What an abusive little man you are!
Very perceptive!
It usually takes at least two posts from Rab the ' man ' for people to spot that.
He is lost once he finds out you are a woman, he has to resort to 'moron' or 'idiot' since he is unable to blast you with his withering and world renowned (amongst the 30 people who post here) put down of............I hesitate to use it...it's power is awesome........." YOU SIR ARE A...."
Scary.
Posted by: John J. Sheridan, Z'ha'dum on 12:40pm Sat 15 Mar 08
Rugby beckons...have fun children, keep it clean.
Rugby beckons...have fun children, keep it clean.
Posted by: OHO, Glasgow on 1:09pm Sat 15 Mar 08
I can appreciate that Shirley McKie has had enough of this and wants to get on with her life - the whole episode was a disgrace. However, this case goes to the very heart of this Governments plans for DNA databases and identity cards - if a police officer can be framed over a mistaken fingerprint identity then God help any of us whose DNA finds its way to a crime scene! It took institutional cover up to ruin Shirley McKie's life. All of these things have to be brought to the public domain so that people can be aware of the risks involved when no detective work is required because some tiny bit of DNA has been uncovered.
I can appreciate that Shirley McKie has had enough of this and wants to get on with her life - the whole episode was a disgrace. However, this case goes to the very heart of this Governments plans for DNA databases and identity cards - if a police officer can be framed over a mistaken fingerprint identity then God help any of us whose DNA finds its way to a crime scene! It took institutional cover up to ruin Shirley McKie's life. All of these things have to be brought to the public domain so that people can be aware of the risks involved when no detective work is required because some tiny bit of DNA has been uncovered.
Posted by: Observer, Glasgow on 1:52pm Sat 15 Mar 08
Well I would like to know the truth because I don't think we have heard it, I would like to hear from the finerprint experts they have never been allowed to state their case in public. Why is that ?
Well I would like to know the truth because I don't think we have heard it, I would like to hear from the finerprint experts they have never been allowed to state their case in public. Why is that ?
Posted by: les brown, glasgow on 2:18pm Sat 15 Mar 08
as a retired Glasgow murder squad detective , I have, at the request of the SCRO 6 investigated the circumstances surrounding the murder of Marion Ross. What I have uncovered beggars belief
We applaud the formation of a Judicial Inquiry and hope that police officers who have the answers have the courage to come forward.
I am convinced that the Inquiry will uncover the truth and I will ensure that material witnesses, known to me as such, are cited.
as a retired Glasgow murder squad detective , I have, at the request of the SCRO 6 investigated the circumstances surrounding the murder of Marion Ross. What I have uncovered beggars belief
We applaud the formation of a Judicial Inquiry and hope that police officers who have the answers have the courage to come forward.
I am convinced that the Inquiry will uncover the truth and I will ensure that material witnesses, known to me as such, are cited.
Posted by: mt on 2:42pm Sat 15 Mar 08
Anyone who has been unable to tell the truth before, then it is their opportunity. Anyone who has told the truth before then telling it again will bring this situation to its final conclusion
Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done.
Anyone who has been unable to tell the truth before, then it is their opportunity. Anyone who has told the truth before then telling it again will bring this situation to its final conclusion
Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done.
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 3:45pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Carnwarth[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Rab The Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote: Oh good. She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace. Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras. Thank god.[/quote] JOHN SHERIDAN You sir are a total buffoon. Who the blazes wouldn't feel totally deflated after this 11-year long and mentally tiring episode to clear your name.........and if you Bigmouth, have any evidence whatever that Ms. McKie committed ANY offence in respect of this matter, I urge you to bring it to the attention of the authorities......... ...otherwise, we'll be entitled to regard you as nothing more than a blustering empty vessel, ................and gutless to boot !![/quote] Retired - I wondered what had happened to you - you've died and joined the McKie fan club! This woman pocketed a huge amount of money from the taxpayer and was perfectly happy to work for the incompetent/corrupt whatever whatever organisation and see people go down for crimes they did not commit until the day the finger was pointed at her. What she wants in terms of an inquiry is of no account.[/quote] CARNWATH.........Car
nwarth???
A very confused posting....what ARE you on about?
What woman pocketed the money...SMcK or Fiona whatsername?? What incompetent/corrupt organisation??
have you been on the sauce???
Carnwarth wrote:
Rab The Man wrote: John J. Sheridan wrote: Oh good. She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace. Maybe she will keep her hands off things she should keep her hands off for the rest of her life, and never again have to stare plaintively through a fingerprint film for the cameras. Thank god.
JOHN SHERIDAN You sir are a total buffoon. Who the blazes wouldn't feel totally deflated after this 11-year long and mentally tiring episode to clear your name.........and if you Bigmouth, have any evidence whatever that Ms. McKie committed ANY offence in respect of this matter, I urge you to bring it to the attention of the authorities......... ...otherwise, we'll be entitled to regard you as nothing more than a blustering empty vessel, ................and gutless to boot !!
Retired - I wondered what had happened to you - you've died and joined the McKie fan club! This woman pocketed a huge amount of money from the taxpayer and was perfectly happy to work for the incompetent/corrupt whatever whatever organisation and see people go down for crimes they did not commit until the day the finger was pointed at her. What she wants in terms of an inquiry is of no account.
CARNWATH.........Car
nwarth???
A very confused posting....what ARE you on about?
What woman pocketed the money...SMcK or Fiona whatsername?? What incompetent/corrupt organisation??
have you been on the sauce???
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 3:51pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Observer[/bold] wrote:
Well I would like to know the truth because I don't think we have heard it, I would like to hear from the finerprint experts they have never been allowed to state their case in public. Why is that ?[/quote] OBSERVER
What a total misrepresentation of the facts. The SCRO team claimed (falsely that they'd been gagged. However, false though that was, they have been unable to maintain that farce for more than a year now, but STILL they maintained a deafening silence , having used their spokespeople to threaten to "blow the lid off" the McKie case. Have we heard it?...Have we blazes.....has anything been stopping them...beyond spending time enjoying their own ill-gotten public reward..............
......No Sir !!
It's called "All Bluster, And NO Substance". No wonder therir former employers wouldn't stand by them while the matter was going on, and got rid of them as soon as was convenient thereafter !!
Observer wrote:
Well I would like to know the truth because I don't think we have heard it, I would like to hear from the finerprint experts they have never been allowed to state their case in public. Why is that ?
OBSERVER
What a total misrepresentation of the facts. The SCRO team claimed (falsely that they'd been gagged. However, false though that was, they have been unable to maintain that farce for more than a year now, but STILL they maintained a deafening silence , having used their spokespeople to threaten to "blow the lid off" the McKie case. Have we heard it?...Have we blazes.....has anything been stopping them...beyond spending time enjoying their own ill-gotten public reward..............
......No Sir !!
It's called "All Bluster, And NO Substance". No wonder therir former employers wouldn't stand by them while the matter was going on, and got rid of them as soon as was convenient thereafter !!
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 3:52pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]OHO[/bold] wrote:
I can appreciate that Shirley McKie has had enough of this and wants to get on with her life - the whole episode was a disgrace. However, this case goes to the very heart of this Governments plans for DNA databases and identity cards - if a police officer can be framed over a mistaken fingerprint identity then God help any of us whose DNA finds its way to a crime scene! It took institutional cover up to ruin Shirley McKie's life. All of these things have to be brought to the public domain so that people can be aware of the risks involved when no detective work is required because some tiny bit of DNA has been uncovered. [/quote] OHO
Precisely Sir/Madam !!
OHO wrote:
I can appreciate that Shirley McKie has had enough of this and wants to get on with her life - the whole episode was a disgrace. However, this case goes to the very heart of this Governments plans for DNA databases and identity cards - if a police officer can be framed over a mistaken fingerprint identity then God help any of us whose DNA finds its way to a crime scene! It took institutional cover up to ruin Shirley McKie's life. All of these things have to be brought to the public domain so that people can be aware of the risks involved when no detective work is required because some tiny bit of DNA has been uncovered.
OHO
Precisely Sir/Madam !!
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 3:57pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Carnwarth[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Rab The Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]sociowoman[/bold] wrote: John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar. So, if it was not hers, whose was it? It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT. This whole episode does NOT add up. Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question. [/quote] SOCIOWOMAN How do YOU know that there were any similarities in the fingerprints? Are YOU a trained expert? Know all about ridge detail, loops and whorls do you??..and of WHAT RELEVANCE WHATEVER is the nature of the fingerprints of the father Iain McKie?? Are you suggesting that HE may have been at the locus??? The whole episode does not add up as you rightly say...simply because initially (I'm being generous here)there may heve been an error , that quickly became a FIT-UP into which these former SCRO officers allowed themselves to be drawn, and hence implicated. As for your final question............ you know well you are being disingenuous here.........many young and inexperienced officers have made errors of the nature to which you allude (but are coy about being clear and open about) but your feeble attempt at smear and innuendo do you no credit whatever, and I hope you are thoroughly embarrassed as you read your comment back. You clearly know little of this matter, and demonstrate that most nobly in your nasty obsrvations against a person who has endured this matter for in excess of 11 years, was found "Not Guilty" in a duly constituted court of law by a jury of her peers, and yet has to face the ill-considered ramblings of a moron such as you.[/quote] Retired - What an abusive little man you are! And you use the word "locus" and boil over at the reference to McKie's old "former cop" dad - are you one and the same? Why were you and your daughter happy to take your salary from this terrible organisation for all those years but only got upset when the spotlight was turned on her? Did you lose your pension or are the poor old taxpayers funding your activities?[/quote] CARNWARTH
The more I read, the more confused is your position.
Firstly, I am not retired (altho' its significance escapes me)
I am not Iain McKie...Don't know Mr. McKie.Never met him.
I am not in the police nor have I ever been...(or any other of the public services, including the courts, for that matter).
It follows therefore that the rest of your post becomes utterly stupid and superfluous. For that I feel no need to apologise as anyone troubling to read the passage of this dialogue will confirm.
Carnwarth wrote:
Rab The Man wrote: sociowoman wrote: John J Sheridan, it is claimed the finger print people got it all wrong. BUT surely the finger print WAS very similar. So, if it was not hers, whose was it? It is fact that a father and daughters fingerprints will be very similar. That is FACT. This whole episode does NOT add up. Also, did Miss McKie ever get reprimanded in the past for tampering with evidence? Its a simple question.
SOCIOWOMAN How do YOU know that there were any similarities in the fingerprints? Are YOU a trained expert? Know all about ridge detail, loops and whorls do you??..and of WHAT RELEVANCE WHATEVER is the nature of the fingerprints of the father Iain McKie?? Are you suggesting that HE may have been at the locus??? The whole episode does not add up as you rightly say...simply because initially (I'm being generous here)there may heve been an error , that quickly became a FIT-UP into which these former SCRO officers allowed themselves to be drawn, and hence implicated. As for your final question............ you know well you are being disingenuous here.........many young and inexperienced officers have made errors of the nature to which you allude (but are coy about being clear and open about) but your feeble attempt at smear and innuendo do you no credit whatever, and I hope you are thoroughly embarrassed as you read your comment back. You clearly know little of this matter, and demonstrate that most nobly in your nasty obsrvations against a person who has endured this matter for in excess of 11 years, was found "Not Guilty" in a duly constituted court of law by a jury of her peers, and yet has to face the ill-considered ramblings of a moron such as you.
Retired - What an abusive little man you are! And you use the word "locus" and boil over at the reference to McKie's old "former cop" dad - are you one and the same? Why were you and your daughter happy to take your salary from this terrible organisation for all those years but only got upset when the spotlight was turned on her? Did you lose your pension or are the poor old taxpayers funding your activities?
CARNWARTH
The more I read, the more confused is your position.
Firstly, I am not retired (altho' its significance escapes me)
I am not Iain McKie...Don't know Mr. McKie.Never met him.
I am not in the police nor have I ever been...(or any other of the public services, including the courts, for that matter).
It follows therefore that the rest of your post becomes utterly stupid and superfluous. For that I feel no need to apologise as anyone troubling to read the passage of this dialogue will confirm.
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 4:06pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Los Angeles[/bold] wrote: John Grump Sheridan[quote]She can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.[/quote] Aye, we hear your life has been an absolute misery ever since her name was first mentioned on breakfast news. You days as an insomniac and an alcoholic are very distressing. Our heart bleeds for you.[/quote] You post that drivel at 03.27 and I am an alcoholic insomniac! I see. Clarvoiance must be a useful trait, maybe Shirley should have hired you. My heart bleeds for YOU, at least Ms McKie can console herself that this miscarriage has allowed her never to work a day in her life again. Then she and you can stop greetin about it in public. Rab the ' man' Do stop the "You sir are..." stuff it is repetitive boring and makes YOU sound like the buffoon straight from the daily torygraph letters page. Ps. rab, I never got past the 'buffoon part' so I hope the rest of it was up to your usual silly ranting standards.[/quote] JOHN SHERIDAN
Sir (for that you are according to the precepts which were instilled in me by my parents, but should you deny yourself sic status, then that sir, will be a matter for you).
Also, are you able to identify any other previous post to you or others where I have either used this description??. Firstly , it is relatively rare for me to write on these postings (although not unknown) and as for "silly ranting standards" , you may wish to highlight to us all in which respect I am "guilty"..........an
d indeed of what I am Guilty in the strange world of John J Sheridan.
I therefore confirm Sir, that you are indeed a buffoon !!
John J. Sheridan wrote:
Los Angeles wrote: John Grump SheridanShe can spend her £750,000 quid and give the rest of us peace.
Aye, we hear your life has been an absolute misery ever since her name was first mentioned on breakfast news. You days as an insomniac and an alcoholic are very distressing. Our heart bleeds for you.
You post that drivel at 03.27 and I am an alcoholic insomniac! I see. Clarvoiance must be a useful trait, maybe Shirley should have hired you. My heart bleeds for YOU, at least Ms McKie can console herself that this miscarriage has allowed her never to work a day in her life again. Then she and you can stop greetin about it in public. Rab the ' man' Do stop the "You sir are..." stuff it is repetitive boring and makes YOU sound like the buffoon straight from the daily torygraph letters page. Ps. rab, I never got past the 'buffoon part' so I hope the rest of it was up to your usual silly ranting standards.
JOHN SHERIDAN
Sir (for that you are according to the precepts which were instilled in me by my parents, but should you deny yourself sic status, then that sir, will be a matter for you).
Also, are you able to identify any other previous post to you or others where I have either used this description??. Firstly , it is relatively rare for me to write on these postings (although not unknown) and as for "silly ranting standards" , you may wish to highlight to us all in which respect I am "guilty"..........an
d indeed of what I am Guilty in the strange world of John J Sheridan.
I therefore confirm Sir, that you are indeed a buffoon !!
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 4:08pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Vronsky[/bold] wrote:
[bold]Thyme Kelpie says: [/bold] [quote]The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone.[/quote] Yes, absolutely. It is criticallly important to discover what went wrong in this case and put it right. Until that happens there will be no public confidence in the SCRO and it would be a brave lawyer who would lead fingerprint evidence. As matters stand, fingerprint evidence is useless - it seems any opinion, even the unanimous judgement of four Scottish 'experts', can quickly be contradicted by a dozen other 'experts'. Forensic science? Not much science there. But if fingerprinting is valid as a technology, then we are forced to the alternative explanation of the McKie case - criminal corruption in the police force and collusion by the SCRO. That's serious. The fate of Ms McKie herself, while she has my sympathy, is vastly less important than a proper airing of what exactly happened in this case. One hopes that there is a better chance that the SNP government will see this through to some sort of conclusion than their Labour/LabDim predecessors, who are part of the grubby machinery. The conviction of Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is a stain on the Scottish judicial system which might yet be removed. Likewise, it is essential that the SCRO is fully investigated and the McKie matter closed, however damaging to careers and reputations that might be in the short term. Right now, I wouldn't like to find myself in as position where my liberty depended on the machinations of a Scottish court. We are living in the land of Kafka's Trial. [/quote] VRONSKY
beautifully put Sir.....Thank you!!
Vronsky wrote:
Thyme Kelpie says: The whole thing needs to reach closure for everyone.
Yes, absolutely. It is criticallly important to discover what went wrong in this case and put it right. Until that happens there will be no public confidence in the SCRO and it would be a brave lawyer who would lead fingerprint evidence. As matters stand, fingerprint evidence is useless - it seems any opinion, even the unanimous judgement of four Scottish 'experts', can quickly be contradicted by a dozen other 'experts'. Forensic science? Not much science there. But if fingerprinting is valid as a technology, then we are forced to the alternative explanation of the McKie case - criminal corruption in the police force and collusion by the SCRO. That's serious. The fate of Ms McKie herself, while she has my sympathy, is vastly less important than a proper airing of what exactly happened in this case. One hopes that there is a better chance that the SNP government will see this through to some sort of conclusion than their Labour/LabDim predecessors, who are part of the grubby machinery. The conviction of Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is a stain on the Scottish judicial system which might yet be removed. Likewise, it is essential that the SCRO is fully investigated and the McKie matter closed, however damaging to careers and reputations that might be in the short term. Right now, I wouldn't like to find myself in as position where my liberty depended on the machinations of a Scottish court. We are living in the land of Kafka's Trial.
VRONSKY
beautifully put Sir.....Thank you!!
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 4:14pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]les brown[/bold] wrote:
as a retired Glasgow murder squad detective , I have, at the request of the SCRO 6 investigated the circumstances surrounding the murder of Marion Ross. What I have uncovered beggars belief We applaud the formation of a Judicial Inquiry and hope that police officers who have the answers have the courage to come forward. I am convinced that the Inquiry will uncover the truth and I will ensure that material witnesses, known to me as such, are cited. [/quote] LES BROWN
Are you therefore Sir presenting yourself as a formal (or even informal) spokesperson for "the 6", or are youperhaps in the business of highlighting your own interest (possibly even pecuniary in nature) in respect of this matter???.
If indeed you DO have such material as you claim, why then have you avoided putting it into the publc domain already,before a jury of public opinion...but perhaps we've already covered that......pecuniary interest Eh??.
Perhaps we could be forgiven for seeing you as something less than even-handed in this matter then Sir??
les brown wrote:
as a retired Glasgow murder squad detective , I have, at the request of the SCRO 6 investigated the circumstances surrounding the murder of Marion Ross. What I have uncovered beggars belief We applaud the formation of a Judicial Inquiry and hope that police officers who have the answers have the courage to come forward. I am convinced that the Inquiry will uncover the truth and I will ensure that material witnesses, known to me as such, are cited.
LES BROWN
Are you therefore Sir presenting yourself as a formal (or even informal) spokesperson for "the 6", or are youperhaps in the business of highlighting your own interest (possibly even pecuniary in nature) in respect of this matter???.
If indeed you DO have such material as you claim, why then have you avoided putting it into the publc domain already,before a jury of public opinion...but perhaps we've already covered that......pecuniary interest Eh??.
Perhaps we could be forgiven for seeing you as something less than even-handed in this matter then Sir??
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 4:19pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]John J. Sheridan[/bold] wrote:
Carnwarth said: [quote]What an abusive little man you are![/quote] Very perceptive! It usually takes at least two posts from Rab the ' man ' for people to spot that. He is lost once he finds out you are a woman, he has to resort to 'moron' or 'idiot' since he is unable to blast you with his withering and world renowned (amongst the 30 people who post here) put down of............I hesitate to use it...it's power is awesome........." YOU SIR ARE A...." Scary.[/quote] JOHN CHARLATAN
Sir....your postings are becoming increasingly obtuse. Debate with you I truly welcome, but perhaps you could take the trouble to tell us EXACTLY what it is that you are complaining about. Is it the SUBJECT of my opinion, or the fact that I appear to have called you "Sir". It is not clear to me if you see this as being either disrespectful or merely quaint, but it does occur to me that perhaps you'd be more comfortable engaging in perhaps more vernacular language perhaps???
Please enlighten us at you convenience Sir.
John J. Sheridan wrote:
Carnwarth said: What an abusive little man you are!
Very perceptive! It usually takes at least two posts from Rab the ' man ' for people to spot that. He is lost once he finds out you are a woman, he has to resort to 'moron' or 'idiot' since he is unable to blast you with his withering and world renowned (amongst the 30 people who post here) put down of............I hesitate to use it...it's power is awesome........." YOU SIR ARE A...." Scary.
JOHN CHARLATAN
Sir....your postings are becoming increasingly obtuse. Debate with you I truly welcome, but perhaps you could take the trouble to tell us EXACTLY what it is that you are complaining about. Is it the SUBJECT of my opinion, or the fact that I appear to have called you "Sir". It is not clear to me if you see this as being either disrespectful or merely quaint, but it does occur to me that perhaps you'd be more comfortable engaging in perhaps more vernacular language perhaps???
Please enlighten us at you convenience Sir.
Posted by: Observer, Glasgow on 4:30pm Sat 15 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rab The Man[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Observer[/bold] wrote: Well I would like to know the truth because I don't think we have heard it, I would like to hear from the finerprint experts they have never been allowed to state their case in public. Why is that ?[/quote] OBSERVER What a total misrepresentation of the facts. The SCRO team claimed (falsely that they'd been gagged. However, false though that was, they have been unable to maintain that farce for more than a year now, but STILL they maintained a deafening silence , having used their spokespeople to threaten to "blow the lid off" the McKie case. Have we heard it?...Have we blazes.....has anything been stopping them...beyond spending time enjoying their own ill-gotten public reward.............. ......No Sir !! It's called "All Bluster, And NO Substance". No wonder therir former employers wouldn't stand by them while the matter was going on, and got rid of them as soon as was convenient thereafter !![/quote] Rubbish they have been gagged as anyone with an interest in this case knows. They have also been blackmailed. We all need to make a living you know, even them. I hope this enquiry will allow them to state their case we have heard so much from the McKie's a bit of balance would be nice.
Rab The Man wrote:
Observer wrote: Well I would like to know the truth because I don't think we ha
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (69)
