“Scientists split over fibres that prosecution says links jailed office worker to home of widow killed during break-in.”
The Guardian, 9th December 2010
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A lack of accreditation of expert witnesses means that anyone with a scientific background and sufficient ‘brass neck’ could set themselves up as a forensic science expert and mislead the court, a Court of Appeal judge has warned.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 23rd November 2010
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“Lawyer for Victor Nealon says crucial forensic evidence was left untested as surgeon insists wrong man was convicted.”
The Guardian, 22nd August 2010
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A sex attacker caught after a cold case review has been jailed for 10 years.”
BBC News, 25th June 2010
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Rapists are not being convicted because doctors are making errors when examining victims, according to medical experts specialising in sexual assaults.”
The Guardian, 22nd June 2010
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Dozens of miscarriages of justice could occur in the next few months because the body that regulates expert witnesses in court is being shut down by the Government, senior scientists warned yesterday.”
The Independent, 22nd March 2009
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Vital evidence which could have secured the release of one of Britain’s longest-serving victims of a miscarriage of justice 11 years ago was held in a forgotten forensic science archive on an industrial site in the Midlands, the Guardian can reveal.”
The Guardian, 19th March 2009
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Findings from blood expert and undisclosed police negatives are reviewed as murderer makes his third appeal against conviction.”
The Guardian, 15th March 2009
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“High-profile prosecutions have relied on DNA to convict the guilty. Steve Wright who murdered five women in Suffolk, and Mark Dixie the killer of Sally Anne Bowman, would probably not have been convicted without DNA evidence.
But the use of forensic evidence is not always so straight-forward in proving guilt, as Clive Coleman finds out when he debates the use of forensic techniques with a panel of experts.”
BBC Law in Action, 27th May 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
“Evidence of those experienced in comparing ear-prints was capable of being relevant and admissible but such comparison would provide information which could identify the person who had left it on a surface only when sufficient minutiae could be identified and matched.”
The Times, 16th May 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“A burglar who was convicted on the evidence of an ear-print left on a window had his conviction quashed by the Court of Appeal on Wednesday.”
Daily Telegraph, 17th April 2008
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The case of a burglar convicted after police matched an imprint of his ear to the scene of a robbery will be heard again at the Court of Appeal.”
BBC News, 16th April 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A burglar has been caught because of his bow-legged walk, but how easy is it to catch a criminal by analysing their gait?”
BBC News Magazine, 15th April 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024