"IN ANOTHER CASE MARK DALLAGHER, 30, SPENT NEARLY SEVEN YEARS IN JAIL PROTESTING HIS INNOCENCE AFTER AN OLD BAILEY JURY WAS TOLD BY AN EXPERT, A DUTCH POLICE INSPECTOR, THAT EARPRINTS FOUND AT A MURDER CRIME SCENE MATCHED HIS EXACTLY."
REPORTER CHRISTOPHER HOPE: THE TELEGRAPH; PHOTO: MARK DALLAGHER'S SO-CALLED "DISTINCTIVE" EARPRINT;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In his report on the release of the British Law Commission report earlier this week reporter Christopher Hope refers to the Dallagher case - in which then 30-year-old Mark Dallagher was wrongfully convicted after a jury was told by an "expert" that earprints found at a murder crime scene matched his exactly.
The Dallagher case is a classical example of judges abandoning their gatekeeper function in the face of non-scientifically proven evidence as demonstrated by Drs. West and Hayne in the U.S.A. with their ludicrous "bitemark" theories, Dr.Louise Robbins (also U.S.A.) and her destructive footprint evidence, and Dr. Charles Smith in Canada who saw things during an autopsy on a child that no-one else could see.
Hope's story ran under the the following heading (fully reflective of the government's spin): "Criminals could have been wrongly freed by the courts because of unreliable evidence from expert witnesses, the Government's law advisers say today."
"The Law Commission is recommending a new "quality test" which expert witnesses will have to pass before giving evidence in criminal trials, Hope's story, published on April 6, 2009, begins;
"The crackdown comes after a series of miscarriages of justice arising from unsafe evidence from expert witnesses," the story continues;
"Jeremy Horder, the Commissioner leading the project, added that some guilty criminals had been wrongly freed.
Prof Horder said: "There have been miscarriages of justice in recent years where prosecution expert evidence of doubtful reliability has been placed before Crown Court juries.
"There may also have been unwarranted acquittals attributable to such evidence.
"We want to ensure that the criminal courts have the means to authenticate expert evidence and be satisfied that the information before them is sound."
The Law Commission will propose at the start of a three-month consultation that judges adopt a new "statutory test for determining the admissability of an expert witness in criminal proceedings".
If an expert witness does not pass the test, then his or her evidence cannot be heard in court.
Prof Horder added: "We want to ensure that the criminal courts have the means to authenticate expert evidence
and be satisfied that the information before them is sound."
The Commission also recommends new guidelines for Crown Court judges and magistrates' courts to help them determine whether expert evidence is sufficiently reliable to be admitted.
One of the most high profile miscarriages of justice was in 1999, when Sally Clark was jailed for killing her 11-week-old son Christopher in December 1996, and eight-week-old Harry in January 1998.
An appeal in 2000 failed, but she was freed in 2003 after a fresh appeal. She was found dead in 2007.
The jury at her trial was told by an expert witness, Professor Sir Roy Meadow, that the probability of two natural unexplained cot deaths in a family was 73 million to one. Other experts said the odds were about 200 to one.
In another case Mark Dallagher, 30, spent nearly seven years in jail protesting his innocence after an Old Bailey jury was told by an expert, a Dutch police inspector, that earprints found at a murder crime scene matched his exactly.
After the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial, a DNA sample from the earprint proved it was not Mr Dallagher's.
In December 2007 the biggest criminal investigation in the history of British sport collapsed after a series of police and Crown Prosecution Service blunders which led to the inquiry being branded "incompetent''.
The error which finally sank the case was the prosecution's reliance on an Australian racing steward as their expert witness. He was ridiculed in court when he admitted he did not know the rules of UK horse racing."
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
