page   1
 1                                 Wednesday, 30th September 2009
 2   (Morning session)
 3   (10.00 am)
 4                 GEOFFREY ERIC GRIGG (continued)
 5   THE CHAIRMAN:  Good morning, Mr Grigg.  Thank you for
 6       returning.
 7           It is Mr Holmes but there is something you wish to
 8       deal with?
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  There are two points that are related.
10       Firstly, as you are aware, but we should make everyone
11       else aware, between legal representatives I am
12       discussing what has come to be called a protocol to
13       secure advance notice of lines of cross-examination.
14       One point has been raised with me.  Obviously the
15       intention is that this will deal with the foreseen.
16       There will need to be flexibility for you, sir, to deal
17       with the unforeseen, but that matter is in the course of
18       adjustment so I will keep you advised of developments.
19           Related to that and as a first test of it: over the
20       weekend I revised chapter 12 to include certain matters
21       that have already been covered with Mr Sheppard that
22       could also have been covered with Mr Grigg.  What I have
23       done in my analysis is to set out my personal
24       understanding of the evidence that is available.  On
25       that basis, I have suggested that it is unnecessary to
page   2
 1       raise these matters again with Mr Grigg.  It is on that
 2       basis that I have suggested to my learned friend,
 3       Mr Holmes, that there is a chapter of his
 4       cross-examination he need not cover.  I appreciate from
 5       him that he needs some reassurance that no-one else is
 6       going to raise anything adverse to him insofar as it is
 7       covered by my revised note.
 8   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes, I think possibly the answer would be
 9       that if anyone seeks to raise any issue adverse if he
10       draws it to my attention and then we can deal with it
11       accordingly.
12   MR MOYNIHAN:  I am obliged, sir.
13   MR HOLMES:  I am pleased to advise that as a result of
14       discussions with my learned friend, Mr Moynihan, my
15       cross-examination has been considerably foreshortened so
16       I shouldn't have to delay Mr Grigg very long this
17       morning.
18   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes, as long as we cover the matters
19       satisfactorily.  As I said yesterday, I prefer to have
20       the other expert who does not agree putting positively
21       their case as to why they do not agree rather than you
22       feeling you have to put it to the witness.
23           If you would like to continue, Mr Holmes.
24                 GEOFFREY ERIC GRIGG (continued)
25               Further cross-examined by MR HOLMES
page   3
 1   Q.  Mr Grigg, good morning.  Just a few more questions for
 2       you hopefully.  We were speaking yesterday about the
 3       marking up of enlargements and I would like to speak to
 4       you about the enlargements that you have marked up of Y7
 5       and QI2 for the purposes of the present Inquiry.
 6           So far as the manner in which those enlargements
 7       were prepared is concerned, is the way that you have
 8       marked up the enlargements for this Inquiry the way in
 9       which you would normally do so?
10   A.  Yes, I tried to follow the process that we would have
11       taught our students, although we no longer actually
12       teach the production of enlargements for court although
13       it is a skill we feel fingerprint experts should be
14       capable of should the court require it.
15   Q.  It is the way in which you would formerly have taught
16       students to mark up enlargements though; is that
17       correct?
18   A.  That's correct.
19   Q.  You would mark individual points rather than marking
20       areas of the mark; is that right?
21   A.  Yes, that's the way that it's always been taught.
22   Q.  Would you ever mark up an enlargement by circling an
23       area of the mark for particular attention?
24   A.  I have never done so in the past, although having seen
25       some of the productions by other people involved in this
page   4
 1       case I can see it could be helpful to indicate an area
 2       rather than a specific point where it is perhaps
 3       difficult to pinpoint the actual position you desire to
 4       indicate.
 5   Q.  Is there any reason perhaps you would not do it?
 6   A.  I didn't do it because I didn't think of it.
 7   Q.  You have said that you have seen other enlargements
 8       marked up for the present Inquiry.  Have you seen
 9       Mr McLeod's enlargement which is marked with fairly
10       thick black lines?
11   A.  Yes, I have.
12   Q.  Do you have any comment to make on the manner in which
13       that enlargement has been marked up?
14   A.  Yes, I noted that the lines were very thick and there
15       were large black dots at the end of the lines to
16       indicate the feature that Mr McLeod was trying to show.
17       That wouldn't be the way that we would expect a chart to
18       be produced because a large dot and a thick line can
19       obscure detail visible on the chart.
20   Q.  Thank you.
21           If I can move on from there to your own enlargement
22       of QI2, firstly, is it right, did you say yesterday that
23       you had not previously been asked to look at QI2?
24   A.  No, I only looked at Y7 in the original inquiry.
25   Q.  Are you aware whether Mr Sheppard or Mr Thompson had
page   5
 1       previously seen QI2?
 2   A.  I'm aware that they did look at further marks or a mark
 3       in the inquiry.  I wasn't -- I can't recall being aware
 4       of what that mark was, any reference number or where it
 5       was from, although I was aware there was a second mark
 6       involved that they looked at.
 7   Q.  Before I ask you anything else if I can put your own
 8       enlargement of QI2 up, it is FI0169.  You made reference
 9       yesterday to the inked print and I believe the Chairman
10       asked you yesterday whether there were any special
11       considerations when taking impressions from a deceased
12       person.
13           Can you confirm how are known impressions recovered
14       from a deceased person?
15   A.  It depends upon the condition of the body.  If a body is
16       in fresh, reasonable condition and there's no
17       decomposition, then quite often inking the fingers and
18       rolling them on to card will suffice or powder can be
19       applied to fingers and lifted off with an adhesive tape
20       in order to retrieve the impressions.
21   Q.  Do you know which was done in the present case?
22   A.  No, I don't.
23   Q.  Can you tell from the appearance of the known print the
24       method by which it was recovered?
25   A.  No, I can't.  It could either be a powdered print or an
page   6
 1       inked fingerprint but those aren't the only methods in
 2       any case.
 3   Q.  If powder was used as opposed to ink does that have any
 4       effect on the appearance of the known print?
 5   A.  If the process is carried out carefully, it should
 6       reveal the information accurately in both cases.  Excess
 7       powder can obscure detail on a finger as much as excess
 8       ink could do the same.
 9   Q.  Can the use of powder lead to the appearance of a broken
10       effect in between ridges?
11   A.  Yes, if the condition of the skin is such that the
12       ridges are broken or if the powder is not applied
13       properly or if the finger is wet through condensation or
14       other contaminants on the surface it can prevent the
15       powder adhering to the ridges.  So you can get a broken
16       appearance, yes.
17   Q.  I was going to ask you about the condition of the skin.
18       Does the age of a person make a difference to the
19       condition of the skin or to the appearance of a print
20       that is taken from them?
21   A.  Generally as a person ages their skin loses flexibility
22       and the ridges become less pronounced and often more
23       creased.  So the quality of the impression may be less
24       from an older person than a younger person.  It also
25       depends upon the person's occupation, the way they use
page   7
 1       their hands, whether they are manual workers involved in
 2       heavy work.  All of these things will affect the
 3       condition of the skin but age is definitely a factor.
 4   Q.  Again, can the fact that a print has been recovered from
 5       a deceased person affect the appearance of the print?
 6   A.  Yes, as the body decomposes and depending upon the
 7       manner of death will affect the condition of the skin,
 8       yes.
 9   Q.  Leaving aside the question of the condition of the body,
10       can the fact that the skin of the deceased would have to
11       be perhaps cleaned in between different sets of
12       impressions being taken make a difference to the
13       appearance of the known print?
14   A.  Simply cleaning the skin when the body is in good
15       condition -- the skin is very tough -- should not
16       adversely affect its appearance.
17   Q.  Can it make a difference to the placement of
18       characteristics if the skin has to be manipulated, for
19       example, cleaning the skin in between taking
20       impressions?
21   A.  No, the characteristic's position is fixed.
22   Q.  Can the absence of sweat when the known print is taken
23       from a deceased individual make a difference in the
24       appearance of the known print?
25   A.  The finger should be clean and dry otherwise the powder
page   8
 1       won't adhere to the ridges.  So if there is any sweat
 2       residing on the skin or other moisture it will affect
 3       the appearance.
 4   Q.  In relation to the crime scene print in QI2, is it
 5       apparent from the image how that print was recovered?
 6   A.  No.  As I recall, it had the appearance of being on
 7       a ... if I can just consult my notes again.  (Pause)
 8           It had the appearance of being on an object which
 9       had a label stuck to it bearing the details which would
10       be quite normal.  The object had also been touched
11       repeatedly.  There were a number of impressions visible
12       in QI2.  There was a very confused background as a
13       result of the multiple touches.
14   Q.  Is it possible to tell from the image the means by which
15       the impression was recovered?
16   A.  I'm sorry, I didn't answer the question.  No -- not from
17       a photograph like this.
18   Q.  Can the manner in which a crime scene print is recovered
19       affect the analysis of it?
20   A.  Yes, the method in which the print is recorded can
21       affect the appearance and, therefore, the visible
22       features.
23   Q.  Have you become aware at any stage of the manner in
24       which QI2 was recovered?
25   A.  No, I don't believe I've been given that information.
page   9
 1   Q.  We have heard some evidence that a fingerprint can be
 2       recovered using superglue.  How is that achieved?
 3   A.  The object is placed in a cabinet in which a small
 4       quantity of superglue is heated which vapourises and
 5       settles on all the surfaces in the cabinet.  Where
 6       moisture is present, such as in sweat, the powder forms
 7       a white deposit.  The deposit can then be photographed,
 8       in which case the ridges should be white.  The
 9       photograph can be printed in reverse colour to give
10       black ridges so it is more easily compared with a
11       fingerprint form.
12           Sometimes the image is revealed in reverse in any
13       case in which case the furrows are white.  On some
14       backgrounds where there is no contrast, the superglue
15       deposit could be dyed and then photographed under a
16       fluorescent light in order to increase the contrast and
17       remove the appearance of the background.
18   Q.  Where that method is being used, is it possible that
19       there can be a build-up of the substance that's used to
20       disclose the mark which will lead to a thickening of the
21       ridges in some places?
22   A.  Yes, the process -- the timing of the process is quite
23       critical.  It takes a while to build up a deposit and
24       the process should be stopped at a time when the optimum
25       deposit has been left on the print to reveal it
page  10
 1       otherwise details may be obscured by over-depositing of
 2       the superglue.
 3   Q.  Is that something that you took into account when you
 4       were carrying out your examination of QI2?
 5   A.  I took into account the fact that there are areas where
 6       the print is not revealed clearly through -- appears
 7       faint, should I say, and areas where there are very
 8       thick black deposits, which I took to either be the
 9       background showing through or the development medium
10       over -- developing various areas.
11   Q.  Looking at your own image of QI2, there is a white
12       crescent-shaped area just below the core about 6
13       o'clock.  Can you see that?  It is quite a large area.
14   A.  Yes, I can.
15   Q.  Are you able to say what that is?
16   A.  No, I'm not.  If it had been on a plastic bag or some
17       flexible surface such as that, it is quite common to get
18       this sort of crease showing on the final photograph when
19       the bag is flattened out.  I don't know if that's the
20       case with this particular mark, but it's an area where
21       the developing medium hasn't revealed as much
22       information as anywhere else.
23   Q.  Did you ever become aware of what the object was that
24       QI2 had been recovered from?
25   A.  I don't believe I'd been told officially.
page  11
 1   Q.  And unofficially ...?
 2   A.  I was aware there was a tin involved in the
 3       investigation.
 4   Q.  So the possibility of a crease is not there with that
 5       kind of object, is it?
 6   A.  Not if it was a metal tin, no.
 7   Q.  I will perhaps in due course show you an image of the
 8       object from which QI2 was recovered, but I will ask a
 9       couple of questions first about the mark itself.
10           Is there distortion visible within the mark due to
11       superimposition?
12   A.  Certainly it's a very confused mark.  There are areas
13       where other fingerprints cross over the impression in
14       QI2, yes.
15   Q.  Are those generally to be found on the periphery of the
16       photograph that your enlargement is made from?
17   A.  Yes.
18   Q.  I wonder if you could indicate where those are to be
19       found.
20   A.  If I draw a green line, to the right of that line there
21       is another fingerprint which is crossing over the
22       fingerprint in QI2.
23   THE CHAIRMAN:  That is to the right of the green line that
24       you have drawn?
25   A.  That is correct, sir.  There is also an area here,
page  12
 1       (indicated) and I cannot see it too clearly, over to the
 2       left of the print where there are other ridges flowing
 3       down towards the fingerprint.
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  Just so we can record it, that is where
 5       second green line is drawn, the left-hand green line is
 6       drawn?
 7   A.  That's correct, sir.
 8   THE CHAIRMAN:  The area to the left of it.
 9   A.  Yes.
10   MR HOLMES:  Thank you for that, Mr Grigg.
11           I was going to show you one more image which is an
12       image of the object from which QI2 was recovered.
13   THE CHAIRMAN:  Do we want to record this one?
14   MR HOLMES:  Oh, yes, sir, sorry.  If we could have that
15       saved.  (Pause)
16   THE CHAIRMAN:  I think the difficulty will be recording just
17       this one so what I was going to say was that if we say
18       that the witness has marked a line which goes from 2 to
19       approximately 5 where 5 comes, in other words, the top
20       left-hand segment of the print and the last two-thirds
21       on the right-hand side for the last third, rather, on
22       the right-hand side of the print as being the two areas
23       in question.  I hope that's enough to identify it for me
24       anyhow.  FI3009.01.
25   MR HOLMES:  I'm content with that, sir.  I only have one
page  13
 1       more image to show Mr Grigg which is DB0176.  It is
 2       page 4 of the pdf document.
 3           Mr Grigg, does that appear to be a colour image of
 4       the photograph of QI2?
 5   A.  The crescent-shaped area you mentioned earlier and
 6       striations to the right of it, something similar appears
 7       in both photographs.  There are also white lines in a
 8       grid on the left-hand picture plus white arcing lines at
 9       the top which appear to match in both.  So although I
10       cannot see the fingerprints in the left-hand picture nor
11       the background in the right-hand picture other than the
12       things I've mentioned, yes, they do appear to have very
13       many similar matching features.
14   Q.  The right-hand image, in fact, would you recognise that
15       as QI2?
16   A.  It appears to be the same, yes.
17   Q.  So they appear to be the same and, in fact, they are
18       both identified as QI2 in the annotations on the bottom?
19   A.  Yes, I see them.
20   Q.  The crescent shape that I have previously asked about is
21       what I am interested in.  Having now seen the colour
22       photograph, are you able to say what that crescent shape
23       is?
24   A.  It appears to be part of the design printed on the tin.
25   Q.  It is not a smudge or a smear or any kind of distortion
page  14
 1       in the mark?
 2   A.  No, it appears to be in the background.
 3   Q.  Would you expect any expert who had access to both of
 4       these photographs to be able to tell that?
 5   A.  Yes, I think it's fairly clear they match.
 6   MR HOLMES:  Thank you very much, Mr Grigg.  That is all I
 7       have to ask.
 8   THE CHAIRMAN:  Is there any further matter that you wish to
 9       raise?
10   MR MOYNIHAN:  I have no further matters to raise with
11       Mr Grigg.
12   THE CHAIRMAN:  There is just one matter I want to ask you
13       and you may have dealt with this but, first of all, with
14       Y7 -- and I appreciate that you say that you have to be
15       very careful in an examination for an elimination, but
16       would there have been sufficient in your view to
17       eliminate the print of Shirley McKie on the information
18       available?
19   A.  No, sir, I don't believe the print Y7 was made by
20       Shirley McKie.  There's significant differences which
21       enable one to say they are not made by the same person.
22   THE CHAIRMAN:  So it would not have been sufficient either
23       obviously not for an identification but even for an
24       elimination?  I know you don't --
25   A.  Well, I would say identification and elimination are the
page  15
 1       same process and there is not sufficient to associate
 2       Shirley McKie with that fingerprint.  In fact, one can
 3       say it is not her fingerprint.
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  I acknowledge you say there is no distinction
 5       between the standard required for an elimination and an
 6       identification.
 7   A.  That is correct.  There should not be.  I'm aware the
 8       original identification was made when there was a
 9       16-point standard required for evidence in court and
10       where finger-marks were eliminated and were, therefore,
11       not required for court purposes, the opinion would be
12       given when it was made, regardless of the number of
13       characteristics actually present, therefore,
14       fingerprints might be eliminated with, shall we say,
15       eight characteristics in agreement and nothing else
16       although they wouldn't at that time have been a suitable
17       standard for production in court.  The abolition or
18       removal of that 16-point standard means that now once a
19       decision has been reached about a fingerprint it can be
20       given in court regardless of the number of features
21       relied upon to form a decision.
22   THE CHAIRMAN:  It follows that the same view you would have
23       about QI2, obviously, because you say you would not make
24       an identification and, therefore, you would not
25       eliminate it either.
page  16
 1   A.  That's correct.
 2   THE CHAIRMAN:  Thank you very much and I apologise again for
 3       us having kept you another day, especially when it
 4       wasn't so long this morning.  Thank you very much
 5       indeed.
 6                      (The witness withdrew)
 7   THE CHAIRMAN:  I gather Mr Mackenzie would like a short
 8       break to prepare his documents and so on.
 9   MR HOLMES:  That is correct, sir.
10   THE CHAIRMAN:  It is slightly early to take our morning
11       break but we will break for five minutes to give him
12       time to do that.
13   (10.30 am)
14                         (A short break)
15   (10.35 am)
16                 ROBERT HARVEY MACKENZIE (sworn)
17   THE CHAIRMAN:  Perhaps we could have your full name for the
18       record.
19   THE WITNESS:  Robert Harvey Mackenzie.
20   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sir, Mr Mackenzie has prepared a presentation
21       and it may, in fact, be speedier if we permit him to go
22       through his own presentation in his owner manner.  It is
23       primarily focused on Y7 but there may be some matters of
24       QI2 as well.
25   THE CHAIRMAN:  Certainly.
page  17
 1   MR MOYNIHAN:  Booklets of the presentation have been issued
 2       for everyone's convenience.  The booklets may not follow
 3       entirely the order of the PowerPoint presentation but at
 4       least the booklets may assist others to follow.  I
 5       assume everyone has a copy of the booklet.
 6   THE CHAIRMAN:  Will members of the public be able to follow
 7       it?
 8   MR MOYNIHAN:  The members of the public will be able to
 9       follow the presentation, sir, as it is proceeding.
10   THE WITNESS:  Sir, before I begin I would like to make it
11       clearly understood how disappointed I am that materials
12       used in my presentations on my findings re the mark Y7
13       made to relevant individuals and bodies in the year 2000
14       have now mysteriously disappeared.
15           As you will note within page 42, paragraphs 155 and
16       156 of my 93-page statement to the Inquiry, I have
17       advised of the existence of one-off extra large
18       enlargements which I had produced by Strathclyde Police
19       back in 1999 and on which I subsequently graphically
20       illustrated the identification of Y7 as Shirley McKie's
21       left thumbprint.
22           Immediately prior to the aborted hearing in the
23       Court of Session in February 2006, these enlargements,
24       along with a disk containing the PowerPoint element of
25       my presentation, were handed over by myself to
page  18
 1       solicitors acting for the then Scottish Executive.
 2           Following the termination of that hearing, more than
 3       one formal request accompanied by a list of items, which
 4       included those I have mentioned, were submitted to the
 5       Scottish Executive solicitors by the then Director of
 6       SCRO, Mr John McClaine, regarding the return of such
 7       items to SCRO which was hitherto the normal course of
 8       events for fingerprint productions following the
 9       conclusion of court cases.
10           This request eventually prompted a rather abrupt
11       response which I seem to recall having been written by
12       one of their solicitors, either Shona Bathgate or
13       Lyndsey Nicol.
14           It was stated that the items were deemed to be the
15       property of the Scottish Executive and, as such, they
16       were being retained by their office.  Attempts this year
17       to recover the items which I wished made available to
18       the Inquiry appear to have stalled.  I have made it
19       known that I consider formal police investigation ought
20       to be sought and have suggested that Lothian & Borders
21       Police may be the appropriate force to take up such a
22       task.
23           I have now to conclude that the items handed over by
24       myself in February 2006 have either been: (1) stolen;
25       (2) destroyed; (3) mislaid; or (4) concealed.
page  19
 1           The only recourse left in my view is for a thorough
 2       and exhaustive police investigation to establish their
 3       whereabouts and including searches, if necessary, of
 4       relevant solicitor offices and files.
 5           In the meantime, and in order to allow the Inquiry
 6       to progress I would like to proceed with my presentation
 7       of the identification of Y7, albeit now somewhat
 8       hampered by the failings of those who chose to be
 9       responsible for the safekeeping of materials relevant to
10       such.
11   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes.
12                   Presentation by THE WITNESS
13   THE WITNESS:  This presentation, the booklet you have in
14       front of you, was as a result of materials which I
15       gathered following the acquittal of Ms McKie at the High
16       Court in Glasgow.  The materials it is based on are the
17       elimination fingerprints taken from Shirley McKie at the
18       time of the police inquiry into the murder of Marion
19       Ross and also the Internet images of both the mark and
20       of Shirley McKie's left thumbprint posted by an
21       associate of Mr Wertheim, I understand to be Ed German,
22       on a website of which I don't know what it is.  So that
23       is the basis of the material used in this presentation.
24       Like any comparison, you can only work with the
25       materials that you have.
page  20
 1           Again, it was prepared with a view to at some point
 2       being presented to whatever audience, whether it be
 3       fingerprint experts or non-fingerprint experts.  So if
 4       you can bear with me, it starts off by talking about
 5       characteristics, et cetera, and I know that in the
 6       course of the Inquiry we've described the
 7       characteristics, but for the purposes of this it was
 8       done for a mixed audience.
 9           If you could refer to page 1, on page 1 I have
10       illustrated what a termination or a ending is, marked A.
11       At B --
12   MR MOYNIHAN:  Is this on any of your power point slides?
13   THE WITNESS:  No.  It's on the system but it's also in the
14       book in front of you.  The pages are on the system but I
15       think you will find it easier to follow, sir, through
16       the book at the moment.
17   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, if we can bring up for the
18       members of the public CO0059 and start with page 2.
19   THE CHAIRMAN:  That is the one.
20   MR MOYNIHAN:  The way that this works is that the digital
21       version of what we have in paper form is one digit
22       greater.  So page 1 of Mr Mackenzie is page 2 and the
23       simple reason is the cover page is not numbered in the
24       booklet but it is numbered in the digital version.
25   THE CHAIRMAN:  So we just add one each time.
page  21
 1   MR MOYNIHAN:  Yes, sir.  That will enable Mr Mackenzie to
 2       work with his preferred paper numbers and then we will
 3       bring it up on screen.
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  On you go, Mr Mackenzie.
 5   THE WITNESS:  As I have said, A shows an illustrated image,
 6       the fingerprint image, as a termination or a ridge
 7       ending as we have come to know it in the Inquiry.  B is
 8       a bifurcation or a fork, basically a forking of the
 9       ridges.  C is an enclosure or a lake which is basically
10       made up of two bifurcations.  D is an independent ridge
11       or an island, an island being two ridge endings, and E,
12       a spur, is made up of a bifurcation and a ridge ending.
13           Also within ridge detail, we've heard it referred to
14       in the earlier days, are incipient ridges.  On page 2 of
15       the book, numbered 1 to 5 are pointing to incipient
16       ridges.  Again, they have been referred to by other
17       witnesses.  Now, these are immature ridges.  During the
18       gestation period and when ridges are being formed before
19       birth, the ultimate on birth, basically, features are
20       set for life, but in between the ridges are these
21       incipient ridges which are basically immature ridges.
22       If you were look at the furrows of a field, if you were
23       looking along the field and you saw the peaks of the
24       furrows and then the dips, in the dips, in the furrows
25       are actually where the incipient ridges are actually
page  22
 1       sitting.  They are sitting below the actual surface that
 2       would normally be touched but, depending on the
 3       pressure, be it on a chance impression left at a scene
 4       or under pressure taken in a controlled form, incipient
 5       ridges may or may not show but they are a legitimate
 6       item that can be used in the identification process.
 7           Page 3 and also page 4 -- can they be called up
 8       side-by-side -- basically is a generic description of
 9       how we would go about producing enlargements or
10       illustrations for court.  On the left-hand page,
11       numbered 3, is an image from a mark and on the
12       right-hand page from a controlled print.  That's how we
13       would normally produce an illustration for court.
14           The circles on here are unique to this generic.  We
15       wouldn't normally put circles on but to explain the
16       areas we are looking at and where the arrows are
17       pointing to are pointing to either bifurcations or ridge
18       endings within these white circles.
19   THE CHAIRMAN:  When you refer to a delta, what is the
20       distinction between a delta and a bifurcation?
21   THE WITNESS:  A delta is -- if you think of a river delta
22       where it actually opens out, for example, into the sea.
23       I think Mr Grigg actually drew one yesterday.  It's
24       basically a forking and these tend to be at the edges of
25       the print, depending on which hand it is, whether it's a
page  23
 1       left or a right hand.  For example, on a right hand, the
 2       most common pattern is a loop pattern like this
 3       (indicated) and in a left hand the loop would be in the
 4       opposite direction.  In this example here, would say,
 5       for example, come from a right hand and the deltas on a
 6       loop pattern would be found on the left-hand corner, if
 7       you like, of the mark or of the controlled print if the
 8       whole image was left.
 9           The core is basically -- and it can vary from
10       pattern to pattern but the core is what would be
11       described as the centre of the print.
12           A lot has been said about the initial -- or ACE-V
13       and the initial assessment of what you do when you
14       actually receive a mark from a crime scene for
15       assessment.  Again, like others I have trained many
16       Fingerprint Officers and trainee Fingerprint Officers
17       and I always suggest that the worst thing they can do --
18       and we use something along the lines of a magnifying
19       glass like this (indicated) but a similar magnifying
20       glass to this -- the worst thing you can do is go
21       straight right in to the print with a magnifying glass.
22           You should actually at arm's length -- this, for
23       example, is an actual size mark of Y7 photograph.  You
24       should actually at arm's length take in all the
25       information, not just the ridge detail but, if you can,
page  24
 1       what the surface is and any other features that may
 2       appear within the mark without actually using the
 3       magnifying glass because very often there can be clues
 4       within that.
 5           I think I heard Mr Wertheim refer to Mr Ashbaugh as
 6       having coined the phrase "red flags".  I'm conscious of
 7       this terminology because we also have had training
 8       courses where that terminology has now been added and
 9       it's very important that the practitioner, be it
10       trainee, experienced expert, picks up on potential red
11       flags within a mark because, as has been found actually
12       in this case, many individuals who have, for whatever
13       reasons, commented on this mark it is my opinion have
14       failed to pick up on what are very obvious red flags.
15           Again, it could be down to the images they have seen
16       because -- and I think Mr Moynihan will agree with
17       this -- we have seen various images of various quality,
18       various contrasts and the particular red flag, the most
19       important red flag, as far as I'm concerned, I will go
20       on to actually in some images is less clear than others
21       and in others is very clear.
22           In trying to understand how other individuals may
23       have come to the conclusions that they have, it went
24       through my mind, well, what are they actually looking at
25       and are they actually seeing the red flags that I'm
page  25
 1       seeing?
 2           During our training, we have also been told to look
 3       out for gifts in evidence.  Now within this
 4       presentation, I will highlight what I took as three
 5       gifts that came to me in assisting me in putting
 6       together what has now become this presentation.
 7           The first one, again, an individual's name comes up
 8       again, David Ashbaugh, my understanding is that he
 9       actually gave courses in late 1999 at Durham on the
10       subject of ridgeology, a word which, again, I understand
11       it was him that actually penned that word.  He actually
12       invented that word "ridgeology".
13           Basically, what his course was about was about not
14       just looking at level 1 detail, which is the flow of the
15       ridges and the patterns, not just Level 2 which is the
16       individual characteristics like the ridge endings, the
17       bifurcations, the spurs, et cetera, but going to a
18       further level, termed as third level, which actually
19       looks at the shapes of the ridges; the pores, if they
20       are available in the detail; the distortions; the
21       scarring, injuries, et cetera, taking account of
22       everything you could see within a print.
23           The brain, actually, when you are assessing a mark
24       and then when you put your magnifying glass on in
25       particular, is actually taking in a lot of detail within
page  26
 1       the print not just because we have been trained over the
 2       years to look for ridge endings and bifurcations but
 3       your brain is actually registering everything that your
 4       eye is seeing in that object and, in the instance of a
 5       fingerprint, taking into account not only the second
 6       level detail.
 7           I have had that course disseminated to me in SCRO by
 8       two of the officers who had gone on the course with
 9       Mr Ashbaugh, so that the rest of the staff in SCRO
10       subsequently were given the same course disseminated by
11       SCRO trainers.
12           In addition to that, I have been appraised by the
13       FBI on two occasions.  One was where Steven Meager, who
14       was the latent print chief in the FBI in Washington,
15       came to the UK and gave a presentation at -- I can't
16       remember exactly which fingerprint conference it was but
17       arrangements were made for Mr Meagre to actually come to
18       Glasgow and give a presentation to experts from
19       throughout Scotland.  He actually showed us work he had
20       done on third level detail.
21           I also had occasion to go to the United States to
22       Washington for a week, arranged along with Mr Meagre,
23       and I looked at the training methods and I also looked
24       at the work again that he had done on third level detail
25       and this gave me the opportunity to introduce it into,
page  27
 1       in particular, this case and in both marks Y7 and QI2.
 2           Basically, what he was telling us on the courses,
 3       Mr Meagre -- and I think Mr Ashbaugh has said -- we are
 4       all ridgeologists, we always have been, we have always
 5       noted, although not physically noted in hard copy, what
 6       we see, we've actually noted it mentally, this third
 7       level detail.  So it was basically another tool in the
 8       armoury to expand upon and use in your assessment
 9       process.  Then, if necessary, in your illustration
10       process and that's what I've done within this book.
11           To go back to Mr Ashbaugh, on that course if we
12       could call up TC0017, this is a generic image shown from
13       Mr Ashbaugh's course or on Mr Ashbaugh's course.  What
14       we see here I would describe as a whorl pattern and more
15       or less a series of concentric circles is the format of
16       the pattern.
17           In days prior to computerisation, my training and
18       many of the senior experts involved in this case, our
19       training involved looking at actual size photographs
20       against paper collections of fingerprints taken from
21       arrestees, way years before computers were introduced.
22       So our training in actually looking for one pattern
23       recognition and characteristic recognition was very
24       intensive and that started by -- the initial training
25       involved comparing ten prints against ten prints or
page  28
 1       arrestees fingerprints against those held in the
 2       national collection in Scotland.  So that is where we
 3       got our grounding.  So it's very important that you
 4       assess the finger correctly.  In this one here, you
 5       don't actually know which particular finger that is but
 6       you do know it's a whorl type pattern.
 7           The key to this is in this generic that there are
 8       some red flags.  The top of the image if you look is
 9       smudged so that the area with the ridge detail in that
10       area is unclear.  There is a delta on the right-hand
11       side showing and in a whorl pattern you will get or you
12       may get two or more deltas showing in a whorl pattern as
13       opposed to one in a loop pattern.  So in this image off
14       to the left here will be another delta.
15           The most striking red flag as it is on this occasion
16       is there's a white line thicker round about, I would
17       say, if it was a clockface we were looking at, pointing
18       to about 10.00 in the clockface.  This thickness in
19       white and then it comes across virtually through the
20       centre, the core, of the whorl and thins out and ends up
21       about three-quarters of the way across the mark.  That,
22       although it might look quite insignificant to anyone
23       whose eye wasn't trained in looking for red flags, turns
24       out actually to be a major red flag.
25           If I could take that one off the screen and if you
page  29
 1       could put up TC0018, again this is a whorl-type pattern
 2       but differs somewhat in the overall shape from the
 3       previous one that was shown, marked as unknown, in that
 4       the overall shape of this whorl is what I would describe
 5       as "almond-shaped".
 6           If you can imagine, obviously, an expert or a
 7       trainee working with ten prints, before we even come to
 8       a mark, we're working with ten prints and going through
 9       a collection of fingerprint forms that consist of ten
10       fingers recorded on a fingerprint form and there could
11       be combinations of whorls, loops, arches, tented arches,
12       all the various combinations of fingerprint patterns
13       within these ten fingers.  But looking for the
14       concentric whorl, the concentric circle-type whorl shown
15       previously, the mind alone taking that information,
16       before we even get down to second level detail
17       characteristics, would be switched on to the actual
18       pattern shape.  So that's why we talk about level 1
19       being the patterns.  It's actually the ridge flow and
20       ridge flow creates patterns within each individual
21       finger.
22           Just glancing at that alone, although we would be
23       taking a target area of characteristics now, it depends
24       just where that individual officer would be taking his
25       target.  If he was taking it in the core area, for
page  30
 1       example, quite crucially there's not a lot of
 2       bifurcations or ridge endings in there.  There are,
 3       again, the concentric circles but if he was taking say
 4       the right-hand corner there, the delta area, and looking
 5       for some of these features that might be the officer's
 6       target area.
 7           What I am basically saying is on a paper search,
 8       potentially, which you had to look at thousands of
 9       prints per week turning over paper, it may well be that
10       on your first impression to narrow down the candidates,
11       if you like you are looking for, the very tight
12       concentric whorl shown in the previous image could have
13       been missed if you came to an image like that and it's
14       very important then you are actually homing in on a
15       target area of characteristics.
16           If we could actually now show these side-by-side,
17       put the first one on the left-hand side and that one to
18       the right, if you take some time to actually look at the
19       various clusters, then the expert could still identify
20       this at the end of the day and, obviously, this
21       illustration is a warning to experts and that's how it
22       was brought out in this course, that everything you see
23       initially is not always how it actually looks in the
24       controlled situation.  For my point of view, this was an
25       excellent generic example of red flags which brings me
page  31
 1       on to if we could now look at page 5 in the book.
 2           This was an enlargement basically, obviously, to the
 3       size that would fill this A4 size booklet to try and
 4       show the mark as I saw it initially at the assessment
 5       stage.  What was actually catching my eye was a major or
 6       one or two red flags, if you like, that had to be taken
 7       into consideration.
 8           Much like the generic one that we have just shown --
 9       if we could possibly use the facilities here to
10       circle ...
11   MR MOYNIHAN:  What do you want to circle?
12   THE WITNESS:  It may be easier to illustrate what I'm
13       talking about here.  Roughly that area (indicated).  I
14       think we have seen it discussed by earlier witnesses
15       but, like the generic, there is an area that is smudged
16       or whatever.  At first appearance, on the very initial
17       assessment, so take cognisance that there's something in
18       that area that's not natural, it's not basically clear
19       as some of the other areas in the print are.
20           Then if I could draw a line roughly from about here
21       (indicated) down across the mark and up here.  I can't
22       remember how you change the colour in this.  It must be
23       something about magenta because this is the colour I
24       actually used in my presentation I wasn't aware that it
25       was Mr Wertheim or whoever previously who said it was
page  32
 1       their favourite colour ...
 2   MR MOYNIHAN:  What you do is you go to the line and slide
 3       the line and then if you right click on the mouse, that
 4       gives you the option.  Do you want to take the green
 5       line away?  Is that what you want to do?
 6   THE WITNESS:  I'm quite happy to leave it because I am going
 7       to show you in the book the magenta, but roughly this is
 8       the area that I'm talking about as the fault line,
 9       immediately in my original assessment of this mark back
10       in February '97 I took cognisance of in that there was
11       something unnatural going on in this mark.  The overall
12       shape of it wasn't a natural one touch and this was a
13       warning sign to me.  This is before I even got down to
14       actually looking at individual characteristics and
15       target areas, et cetera.  So I was very conscious of
16       this and I have termed this fault line.  I think
17       Mr Wertheim said he had never heard the term before.
18       I've heard Mr Grigg actually using it several times
19       yesterday so I had to actually give this a label and
20       this is how I described this, as a "fault line".
21           If we could look at page 6 in the book --
22   THE CHAIRMAN:  Before we go should we record this one?
23   MR MOYNIHAN:  Yes.
24   THE WITNESS:  That an approximation, I must say, just
25       looking at this image on the screen, but that's roughly
page  33
 1       the area that I was conscious of having noted at the
 2       time I first saw this mark.
 3   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's FI3009.02.
 4   THE WITNESS:  Before I call up page 6, I should actually
 5       comment because I have heard Mr Holmes ask witnesses
 6       about actually the ridge count between the core area and
 7       the top of this image.  From my experience, it's not a
 8       natural touch, of the thousands of marks I have looked
 9       at.  Certainly this is a mark by itself.  There's no
10       fingers surrounding it.  My first assessment would
11       suggest to me, looking at this cold and I've no
12       knowledge of what it had been previously identified as,
13       that it's a finger by itself and the size of it would be
14       relevant to a thumbprint.
15           It's certainly not natural the extent of the ridge
16       detail from the core to the tip.  I've made this -- I
17       think I mentioned it at Justice 1 as well -- that you
18       get two kind of fingerprint impressions.  You get plain
19       impressions which are virtually straight down and you
20       get rolled impressions which are normally taken under
21       controlled conditions.
22           What I've said is that the job of the fingerprint
23       expert would be made very easy if perpetrators of crime
24       were actually to come along and actually put their
25       thumb, for example, to one side and roll it right across
page  34
 1       to the other side.  That would make our job very easy.
 2           Likewise, I'm not aware of perpetrators of crime
 3       actually putting their thumb on and tipping it right up
 4       to the nail, although in certain types of crime we are
 5       conscious that tips of fingers as opposed to the core
 6       can be left, specifically in fraud cases where marks and
 7       particularly thumb marks are left on chequebooks when
 8       people tear cheques out of books.  So that's an area
 9       we're very conscious of.  But actually to get a print
10       from the core area to what would appear to be the end of
11       the ridges up at the end here is totally unnatural to
12       what I've seen in my experience.  Again, my brain is
13       taking all that information in in the assessment stage.
14           If we could move to page 6, again this was my --
15       when I made this up in '99, at the end of '99, I had
16       done an outline.  Again, I was outlining this area to
17       the top of the mark (indicated) and there was something
18       going on out, as I have described, right and I later on
19       described that as to the right of the lower segment.  By
20       that I mean that the lower segment is under the fault
21       line that I've already described and on the right-hand
22       edge there.
23           If we come to page 7 you will see that the magenta
24       pen came out.  It doesn't show so well there but it's
25       magenta on here.  So this is just what I've described.
page  35
 1       This area on the right-hand corner, there were features
 2       within that in my initial assessment which actually were
 3       impressed in my brain, if you like.  I was conscious of
 4       these as being features that were worthy of note and may
 5       help in my assessment of this mark and eventually a
 6       comparison.
 7           I would like to just at this point -- again, if I
 8       can choose a circle -- the area I'm circling here
 9       there's a break in the ridges (indicated).  There's a
10       ridge coming down more or less vertically and there's a
11       very prominent break in there.  Immediately to the left
12       of that -- do I just click the right-hand of the mouse
13       to take that off?
14   MR MOYNIHAN:  What we're trying to do is simply to retain a
15       record of your evidence.  If you take that off we have
16       lost it.  So put the circle back in.  What we do is, if
17       you want to clear the screen, then what we will do is
18       save the image, save the mark and then bring a fresh
19       copy up.
20   THE WITNESS:  Give me a chance to put a better circle in.
21       In fact, what I'll do is ...
22   MR MOYNIHAN:  If you give me a second.  I'll double click to
23       get it back.
24   THE WITNESS:  You need to bear with me with this.  (Pause)
25           I'm trying to select it again ... I think I've got
page  36
 1       it this time.
 2   THE CHAIRMAN:  Just repeat again what the red circle marks.
 3   THE WITNESS:  Within the red circle that I've now marked,
 4       I've pointed to, actually, there are two ridges
 5       virtually running vertical within this circle -- sorry,
 6       there are three ridges contained within this circle
 7       running vertically.  The middle of those ridges has a
 8       break.  This white part here (indicated).
 9   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes.
10   THE WITNESS:  Immediately to the left of that, so that we
11       know to make reference to this further on in the
12       presentation, is what I describe as or have described as
13       a bit like Italy, the shape of Italy without the heel.
14       Someone has also suggested it's more like a sock on a
15       foot.  It actually comes down here and bends and it
16       comes out, the toes, out here.  So this feature is
17       actually catching my eye and it's immediately adjacent
18       to the left of the ridge with this break in it.
19       (Indicated)
20           The reason I'm emphasising this is that further on I
21       will comment on this break that has been commented on by
22       another participant for this Inquiry.
23   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, if I could help, what we should
24       do is put an arrow in at the toe of the sock to help
25       you.  As I understand it, my pen or pencil is pointing
page  37
 1       to the feature that you are referring to.
 2   THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's the toe of the sock.
 3   MR MOYNIHAN:  I will come slightly to the side so I do not
 4       obscure the feature.  That is what you are indicating,
 5       is the black mark immediately to right of my arrow?
 6   THE WITNESS:  Correct, that's fine.
 7           I talked about gifts coming to me that helped with
 8       this presentation.  The next gift that came somewhere
 9       down the line after Shirley McKie's case and acquittal
10       was that there was a CD, I understand, that was
11       circulated by Kasey Wertheim through an individual
12       called Ed German.  I understand it went to all
13       fingerprint bureaux, at least in the UK and presumably
14       further afield.
15           I briefly viewed this CD because our bureau was one
16       of the recipients of this circulation and on the very
17       last image contained within this CD there was an image I
18       would describe as the ridges are shown in purple and the
19       reason I'm showing it is that it's a colour reversal,
20       the black ridges actually appear in purple but the fault
21       line that I've been trying to point out that's within
22       this mark is very prominent.  It is TC00 --
23   MR MOYNIHAN:  Give us a second.  You are about to change the
24       image so we will save it on the screen just now.
25   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's saved as image FI3009.03.
page  38
 1   MR MOYNIHAN:  I am sorry, you had another reference.
 2   THE WITNESS:  TC0021.  It's basically upside down.  It's on
 3       it's side now.  That's correct.
 4           Again, in this image you will see -- I will try and
 5       draw a line.  It's magenta.  Basically that is along the
 6       lines of what I've tried to point out in my earlier ...
 7       and I thought, again, this was very relevant.  It was a
 8       bit like Mr Ashbaugh's generic example.  This is a very
 9       good example actually produced by Mr Wertheim's son and
10       illustrates the area where the movement is recorded and
11       a very definite red flag.  So if you want to record
12       that ...
13   MISS BAHRAMI:  FI3009.04.
14   THE WITNESS:  To go back to my first involvement in this
15       case, it occurred on, if my memory is correct, 17th
16       February 1997 whereby I understand a phone call was
17       taken by Chief Inspector William O'Neill round about
18       4.00 in the afternoon.  From recollection it was a
19       Monday.  That phone call, I understand, came from the
20       Divisional Commander at Kilmarnock Police Office.  He
21       was requesting of Chief Inspector O'Neill that a
22       previous comparison that had been done for a mark in the
23       murder of Marion Ross (namely, Y7) could be compared
24       again, this mark having been previously eliminated as a
25       mark being made by Shirley Cardwell.
page  39
 1           On that occasion, I used a police elimination form
 2       that was available that day, along with an actual size
 3       photograph of Y7.  As I've mentioned before, there are
 4       ten fingers on a ten-print form.  An elimination form is
 5       much the same as a charge fingerprint form or ten-print
 6       form in that it has ten rolled impressions, numbered 1
 7       through to 5 on the right hand and 6 through to 10 on
 8       the left hand.  The images on the left of the right hand
 9       recording start at the thumb and go through to the
10       little finger and the images of the left hand start with
11       the left thumb as number 6 and go through to the little
12       finger in number 10.
13           Also within these forms, there are taken plain
14       impressions of the left and the right hand.  The
15       forefinger, middle finger, ring finger and little finger
16       are put down as a sequence of fingers, first of all, of
17       the left hand at the bottom of the form and then the
18       right hand at the bottom of the form and that is done
19       simultaneously.
20           The plain impressions are then recorded individually
21       and some officers will actually put the person's thumbs
22       down together on to the areas and actually take them
23       together or they will do them individually.
24           There are also occasions where, particularly as I
25       mentioned before about where we may be investigating
page  40
 1       fraud cases and a person has been arrested for a
 2       particular fraud case, that the officers would have been
 3       conscious of the need to actually take more detail even
 4       within the plain impressions and on some occasions you
 5       get the plain impressions of the thumb rolled right up
 6       to the nail.  But the majority, I would suggest, of
 7       officers taking them take them just straight flat down
 8       as you would expect on a normal -- if you looking at how
 9       a mark was left at a scene.  So there's different ways
10       of recording control prints and that's all down to
11       training.
12           These prints were taken by means of ink on paper.
13       Currently, fingerprints are taken of arrestees on a
14       system called LiveScan and it's an electronic capture
15       but at this time back in the beginning of '97, it was
16       just before the introduction of Live Scan, all prints
17       were taken with ink.  There are occasions where
18       elimination prints can sometimes be taken by Live Scan
19       if an individual is asked to attend at a police office
20       and record their prints that way, but normally they are
21       taken by more traditional methods from householders,
22       et cetera, the point being that on 17th February I had
23       one police elimination form and one actual size
24       photograph to compare.
25           The form that I looked at on the 17th, I don't
page  41
 1       recall when it was actually taken but I understand that
 2       it was taken for that murder inquiry because normally
 3       officers' fingerprints are held within the local
 4       Fingerprint Bureau pertinent to that force but my
 5       understanding was on that occasion when the list of
 6       police officers was submitted for comparison purposes,
 7       when the officers were working their way through that
 8       list of officers and came to Shirley Cardwell, then her
 9       police card, for whatever reason, was missing from the
10       file.
11           Further, I understand that a set of fingerprints was
12       then sought.  So that set of prints that was sought
13       wasn't one that had been previously held on file but had
14       been taken specifically for this inquiry and then to
15       retain and that was the one that I looked at on the
16       17th.
17           I do recall that the rolled impression of the left
18       thumb which -- and it was the left thumb I was looking
19       at because I did have the knowledge that the previous
20       elimination from the information, I think it was marked
21       on the photograph, actually had finger numbers saying
22       number 6 recorded on it, which was an indication that,
23       yes, as I had initially assessed this, it looked like a
24       thumb and that pointed to the fact that the initial
25       elimination had been a left thumb.
page  42
 1           You are then left with two choices.  You have the
 2       rolled impression and you have a plain impression
 3       available to you.  That's all.  At that stage, my
 4       judgment was that the rolled impression was poorly taken
 5       in that it was smudged and the overall clearer detail
 6       was shown on the plain impression, although rolling of a
 7       fingerprint taken in ideal conditions and taken properly
 8       should disclose the maximum amount of ridge detail but
 9       that wasn't available to me.
10           What I was working with was material that allowed me
11       to make a comparison and my choice was that the left
12       thumbprint on that particular form was better that the
13       rolled impression.
14           I made a comparison using magnifying glasses and
15       also I was assisted by using the comparator machine,
16       which I think was shown to some of the witnesses earlier
17       on in the Inquiry.  The comparator machine basically
18       would give you the facility to enlarge the mark on a
19       screen and that would be shown on the left-hand of two
20       screens and the image from the left thumbprint selected
21       and, on this occasion, the plain impression would be put
22       on the right-hand side and displayed side-by-side with
23       that other mark.  Using that facility as a tool, and
24       it's only a tool to help in the assessment, if you like,
25       and also in the comparison, it's a facility to enlarge,
page  43
 1       whereas given more time then you may want in a
 2       comparison to have a photographic enlargement made,
 3       given the actual quality of the material you are looking
 4       at.  On that occasion I was using the magnifying glasses
 5       in a binocular manner; in other words, two magnifying
 6       glasses like this (indicated), one on the mark and the
 7       other one on the digit you are making the comparison
 8       against.  You actually look through both eyes, two
 9       magnifying glasses, and, having found your target area
10       of a cluster of characteristics, you would then start
11       the process of looking to the control print to see where
12       your target area was, if there were features similar in
13       nature on the control print.
14           My conclusions on that day, on that form, within the
15       time constraints because -- and again it's wrong, you
16       should not be constrained by time but turning the clock
17       back that was the situation, there was a demand to be a
18       result on that, like, as soon as.  It's not the
19       conditions an expert would normally work under.  They
20       wouldn't have any demands put on them.  It would be you
21       take as long as you want to do the comparison.  But the
22       circumstances on that day demanded a result back to the
23       Divisional Commander at Kilmarnock.
24   THE CHAIRMAN:  Would this be a suitable moment?  As you
25       know, we take a break at this stage and we will stop now
page  44
 1       until 11.55.
 2   (11.33 am)
 3                         (A short break)
 4   (11.55 am)
 5   THE WITNESS:  During the break there, I remembered I
 6       actually hadn't finished -- if I could refer back just
 7       for a second or two to the generics we talked about,
 8       Mr Ashbaugh's, and the reason given.  I want to make it
 9       quite clear that these impressions were made by the same
10       individual just in case that was lost, but also that the
11       reason given for the difference was it was explained to
12       us by, like, somebody actually held up a thumb and said
13       your skin can get wrinkled and it was where the skin had
14       become wrinkled and part had touched and part had not
15       touched.  So basically that's what caused this fault
16       line, as I've described it, on the generic and that was
17       the explanation given for it.
18           As an exercise, if anyone wants to try it and had
19       printouts of this, you can actually, on the known print,
20       fold the print up and so it actually forms the same
21       shape as this and that's actually what was done on the
22       course.  So it was remiss of me to go off at a tangent
23       there and miss that bit so I just wanted to clarify
24       that.
25   THE CHAIRMAN:  No.  One looked more elongated, I think you
page  45
 1       referred to as almond.
 2   THE WITNESS:  You can actually fold it and make it into that
 3       shape.  It's excluding an area roundabout, I would say
 4       about, on the clockface on this, about 9.00 where it's
 5       very plain there's no second level detail in that
 6       particular area.  When you actually fold it up, it
 7       produces this shape here (indicated).
 8           It would be remiss of me to miss out what the
 9       explanation was, so hopefully I've clarified that.
10   THE CHAIRMAN:  Thank you for dealing with that.
11   THE WITNESS:  I think we got to page 8 -- sorry, I was
12       describing the comparison I had done on 17th
13       February 1997.  My conclusion was, with the form that
14       was available on that day, that I was satisfied that the
15       mark Y7 was eliminated as the left thumbprint of Shirley
16       Cardwell and the number of characteristics that brought
17       me to that conclusion at that time was in the vicinity
18       of 10 or 11 characteristics.
19           If we could look now at page 8 of the book, this is
20       a form that was taken and it's marked, although that
21       says "Copy of 'original'" over there I've actually got
22       the full copy and the Inquiry has, as far as I know, the
23       original of this.  It was a set of prints taken by
24       William Shields who I understand was one of the earlier
25       witnesses to the Inquiry.
page  46
 1           What I understand happened after I had made my
 2       comparison -- I know that prior to me making my
 3       comparison Alan Dunbar had actually done an independent
 4       comparison and reached a conclusion it was eliminated.
 5       That information was then imparted to Chief Inspector
 6       O'Neill who I understand at that juncture informed the
 7       Divisional Commander at Kilmarnock that the comparison
 8       had been done again and that the conclusion was that the
 9       elimination was correct as being Shirley Cardwell.
10           The next stage was that we were told the next
11       morning that Shirley McKie was going to be printed again
12       and officers from the Identification Bureau of
13       Strathclyde Police were going to revisit the scene and
14       re-photograph Y7 on the doorframe and that a new
15       photograph of Y7, along with the additional set of
16       elimination prints from Shirley Cardwell, were to be
17       brought to the SCRO Fingerprint Bureau as soon
18       thereafter.  That occurred roughly about 11.00 in the
19       morning or certainly some time between 11.00 and 12.00
20       in the morning.  I then carried out a further comparison
21       against the new photograph and this second set of
22       elimination prints.
23           The reason I'm pointing out this was a different set
24       of prints was that on page 8 in the copies that you have
25       it says "copy of 'original' form".  The reason why I've
page  47
 1       put on "'original' form" was that when this fingerprint
 2       form or one of two fingerprint forms, elimination
 3       fingerprint forms, came back or was returned from the
 4       court following Ms McKie's acquittal, these forms came
 5       back from the court in I think it was early August 1999
 6       and attached on the top left-hand corner of this set of
 7       prints taken on 18th February '97, which was a Tuesday,
 8       had a piece of paper stapled to it saying "original
 9       form".
10           Now, just to clarify it, I thought there might be
11       some confusion that some people might think was that the
12       first form but what I think it probably means is
13       either -- I think the explanation probably was -- from
14       the Fiscals' Office -- was that this actually was an
15       original; it wasn't a photocopy.  So it was to clarify,
16       when I was dealing with two different forms, which form
17       I was talking about but it was actually a piece of paper
18       stapled to it saying "original form".  So I'm not
19       implying that this was the form I looked at on 17th
20       February, it is to clarify this was the one taken on the
21       18th and had a label on it at some point.  Whether it's
22       still got the label on it I don't know.
23   THE CHAIRMAN:  So it's an original but the second --
24   THE WITNESS:  It was the second one I looked at; just to
25       avoid any confusion.  I thought it was right in my
page  48
 1       presentation to point that out because this piece of
 2       paper was actually stapled to it.
 3           What I am showing on page 8 and has been highlighted
 4       in yellow is the impression, again, that on my second
 5       comparison I deemed to be the best quality.  So by this
 6       juncture I had two forms available to me.  I had two
 7       rolled impressions of the left thumb and I had two plain
 8       impressions of the left thumb.  As with the first form
 9       looked at on 17th February, the rolled impression from
10       this form taken by William Shields leaves something to
11       be desired in the quality as far as it is also smudged.
12           The left thumb plain impression, of the four
13       impressions that I've now at this stage looked at, is
14       the best one at that point that I have seen disclosing
15       crisp ridge detail in a controlled manner.  So this is
16       the one that I've gone on to use within the
17       presentation, along with other materials that became
18       available later.
19           If we could turn to page 9, this is a photographic
20       enlargement directly from the impression highlit in
21       yellow on page 8 and, as you will see, compared with a
22       number of images that may have already been shown in the
23       Inquiry, as I mentioned before, this is crisp in detail
24       and it's very sharp; very focused; it shows incipient
25       ridges; it shows pores and it's well taken, as far as
page  49
 1       the quality control opinion on it.  It's a well-taken
 2       plain impression.
 3           So this is what I used for my second comparison and
 4       my conclusion on 18th February on comparison was that
 5       again the mark Y7 was eliminated as Shirley Cardwell and
 6       on this occasion I saw 12 or 13 characteristics.
 7           At this stage I'm making up my presentation on
 8       materials '99 for use at the earliest in 2000, as it
 9       turned out I didn't know when they would be used but
10       late '99 I'm gathering material and I'm remembering back
11       more than two and a half years to February '97 as to
12       what I remembered seeing, so my memory was that from the
13       second form I saw 12 or 13 characteristics.
14           If we could move on a step to February, just prior
15       to -- it would be January/February -- in fact, I think
16       it was the beginning of February 2006 and it was the
17       preparation by the Scottish Executive solicitors for
18       defence of the case brought in the Court of Session by
19       Shirley McKie.  Myself and my colleagues were asked over
20       a period of about two weeks to digest and report on a
21       whole raft of statements which virtually involved,
22       within the working day and on some occasions working to
23       I can remember about 9.00 at night, a very intensive two
24       weeks preparing and giving our opinion on statements
25       that we were given sight of.
page  50
 1           In addition to this, we were asked to take part in
 2       yet another exercise, this time for the Scottish
 3       Executive solicitors, whereby they wanted to give us
 4       enlargements of Y7 and enlargements of Shirley McKie's
 5       left thumbprint and asked us -- this was a question in
 6       February 2006 -- the question was, "If we give you
 7       enlargements, can you mark up on these enlargements what
 8       you remember seeing in 1997".  We were talking then nine
 9       years before.
10           I say obviously we've moved on quite a while to 2006
11       but I remember at the time of preparing for this
12       presentation material that I had recalled seeing 10 or
13       11 in the first form and 12 or 13 on the second form.
14       So the question was, "Mark up what you remember seeing
15       when you originally saw this".  Again, I think within
16       the Inquiry's files they have copies made by myself and
17       other officers for this exercise.
18           I vividly remember -- and I was actually quite
19       annoyed, to be honest -- I can't remember which it was
20       but it was one of the two Scottish Executive solicitors,
21       once this exercise had been completed by myself and
22       others, one of them came into my room (it was either
23       Shona Bathgate or Lyndsey Nicol) and said, in this tone,
24       "Why have you only marked 13?"  My answer to that was,
25       "Well, you asked me to try and remember what I saw in
page  51
 1       1997".
 2           "Why have you not marked 16?"  I went, "Well, just
 3       for the very reason, the question you posed and that's
 4       what I ..." so I tried to remember and marked on an
 5       image that they gave me.  I understand that, along with
 6       some of my colleagues they had consulted and a decision
 7       was made to work from, a bit like the exercise we've
 8       gone through now, work from a common image.  The image
 9       chosen by some of my colleagues and printed by the
10       Identification Bureau happened to be a rolled
11       impression.
12           I also commented on that when I saw that before I
13       started the exercise.  I said, "Well, the impression
14       that I found and the clearest one was the second plain
15       impression or the plain impression on the form recorded
16       on 18th February" and, basically, there was a kind of
17       intransigence, I would suggest, by the lawyers to the
18       effect, "That's the image you'll work with, you know,
19       basically do what you can".  I said, "Well, for purposes
20       of the exercise and to accommodate and be co-operative
21       I'll do what I can".
22           So basically that is based on a rolled impression
23       and not on the plain impression that I chose because, as
24       I've already said, the crisp detail in this particular
25       impression for me was the one that led me to my initial
page  52
 1       conclusions.  I think it's important that that
 2       background comes out and the way that that was handled
 3       by the Scottish Executive solicitors, bearing in mind we
 4       had been put through two weeks of assisting the office
 5       of the Scottish Executive solicitors in the preparation
 6       of this case and that's the way I know myself as an
 7       expert and others that was the other side of how we were
 8       being dealt with.
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  If I may interrupt, it may assist.  What
10       Mr Mackenzie has is a photocopy of his civil charting.
11       Two points, first of all, we have in the hall here the
12       original so he can use the original if he wishes and
13       others will have it available to them digitally as
14       SG0373H.  So it is a higher resolution version.
15           Sorry, Mr Mackenzie, to interrupt you.
16   THE WITNESS:  Okay.  I don't really intend to refer to it
17       unless others want to refer to it but basically it was
18       just a comment on the chain of events.
19   THE CHAIRMAN:  Just to see what you are referring to.
20   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sorry, if I just ask you, if you look we
21       happen to have brought up the marked version of Y7.  Is
22       that indeed what you were brandishing yourself as a
23       photocopy?
24   THE WITNESS:  Yes.  In fact, the photocopy, that actually
25       comes out a lot clearer.  It's another example of
page  53
 1       contrast.  If you actually see this one it's quite
 2       black, whereas that's actually, in that area of the
 3       black blob, as some people referred to it, it's actually
 4       quite a good image up there on the screen.  You can
 5       actually see into the black blob.
 6   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sir, for the record what is on the screen just
 7       now is SG0373H.003.
 8           Sorry, Mr Mackenzie.
 9   THE WITNESS:  If we then move on to -- as I say, these court
10       productions came back in August 1999.  It was at that
11       point that Chief Superintendent Harry Bell, knowing that
12       this would be the first opportunity since the acquittal
13       of Shirley McKie, the first opportunity that persons
14       within the Bureau would have to actually review or, as
15       I've termed this, revisit the case of Shirley McKie and
16       it wasn't until, obviously, these materials had been
17       returned from the court that any such review could take
18       place.  That was mid-August 1999 onwards that I started
19       putting together, basically, what I've shown you here, a
20       copy of the form, a copy of the left thumbprint
21       enlarged, et cetera.
22           Round about September 1999, because of what had been
23       reported as activity going on on the Internet that the
24       IT department of SCRO, unknown to me originally but in
25       the background the IT department had obviously been
page  54
 1       instructed to monitor this situation and it came to
 2       light that, again on a website -- and I think, as far as
 3       I can recall, apparently it was operated by this
 4       gentleman called Ed German.  Who is an associate of
 5       Mr Wertheim -- appearing on this website were, one,
 6       copies of Crown productions shown in the case,
 7       presumably, of Shirley McKie or David Asbury, in other
 8       words the books and illustrations of the SCRO mark-ups,
 9       Crown productions, copies, appearing on the Internet
10       and, along with that, nine images apparently taken by
11       Pat Wertheim of the left thumbprint of Shirley McKie.
12           I know that at the time of the Justice 1 in 2006,
13       their Inquiry into this case, I had posed the questions
14       and I've never had the answer yet and it may be
15       interesting for the Crown representatives if they
16       actually have an answer to it but I had posed the
17       question as to how on earth did Crown productions end up
18       on an Internet website for the world to see?  However, I
19       didn't get an answer.  However, as I've said, nine
20       impressions of the left thumbprint of Shirley McKie as
21       taken apparently by Pat Wertheim and they were all plain
22       in nature.
23           I also noted round about the time of the trial and
24       the publicity surrounding it that Mr Wertheim had
25       purported to have claimed to have taken 56 impressions
page  55
 1       of Miss McKie's left thumbprint.  This was a question
 2       that was expanded or a question came out of that in
 3       Justice 1 by one of the MSPs as to why were only nine
 4       shown on the website.  In other words, the question was
 5       put to Mr Wertheim where were the other 47.  The answer
 6       was, "Oh, I took about 100 impressions of Ms McKie's
 7       left thumbprint".  Of course the Inquiry has now heard
 8       from Mr Wertheim last week and that figure has now gone
 9       to between 100 and 150.
10           When again questioned at Justice 1 as to could these
11       be produced, the answer given was, no, they had been
12       given to people throughout the world and they weren't
13       available.
14           Obviously the potential of these impressions being
15       put on the Internet, other than copies of the mark, the
16       potential for further ridge detail to come my way in my
17       preparation of and revisiting of the case was, as it
18       turns out, I would suggest, is the third gift.  The
19       first gift was Mr Ashbaugh's, the second was Kasey
20       Wertheim's and the third one we're talking about now
21       actually came from Mr Wertheim having material put on
22       via Mr German on to a website.
23           So within these nine impressions of the left
24       thumbprint, if you could look at page 16, again I didn't
25       deem all of the nine impressions of additional value but
page  56
 1       within the nine I chose two that I thought disclosed or,
 2       at the end of the day, did disclose more detail than was
 3       available to me previously on the police form.
 4           Again, this seemed to be some source of amusement at
 5       Justice 1, particularly from -- I can remember one
 6       particular MSP of a certain political persuasion who in
 7       his questioning of me was rather sarcastic that I had
 8       used Internet images.  The reason I'm explaining here
 9       is, and I've already explained, is that this gave me an
10       opportunity to see if there was further ridge detail
11       that would be of use in my revisiting of this case;
12       hence the reason it was used.
13           As I say, the sarcastic way it was put in the
14       Justice 1 virtually washed over my head but I recorded
15       it and bring it back out again today, as much to say
16       there's been criticism of people viewing this on the
17       Internet, which some have done in the absence of
18       actually seeing the original material, and we've talked
19       about this in the Inquiry from day 1, that the original
20       mark from Strathclyde Police and the original
21       elimination forms are the best evidence that can be put
22       forward and anything other than that is additional
23       potential information.  That's the way I had addressed
24       this within my productions here or, sorry, my
25       presentation booklet.
page  57
 1           So page 16 was what I've deemed the first left
 2       thumbprint on the Internet.  I can say it's a sort of
 3       grey tone -- these were virtually printed for me from
 4       the IT department at SCRO.
 5           Page 17 is the second image that I chose from the
 6       Internet, again because there was quite an extensive
 7       area shown and you can see again it's a darker image
 8       somewhat, but again like assessing a mark, equally when
 9       you're doing a comparison at the end of the day, you are
10       working with what materials you have but, equally,
11       having assessed a chance impression -- now that's what a
12       scene of crime mark is and it can be in various forms
13       the way it's left with distortion, et cetera.  Equally,
14       control prints can be badly taken.  As I've already
15       explained, the rolled impressions weren't taken in the
16       best quality.
17           But in this particular instance -- and this is where
18       you should look out for the red flags as well -- even
19       within a control print and it even applies these days to
20       electronic capture of fingerprints the same way it would
21       apply to inked prints.  If prints are badly taken,
22       smudged, distorted, then the expert has to take
23       cognisance of all that detail and it's only through the
24       eye being trained over many years that you come to
25       notice discrepancies, et cetera, or warning signals and
page  58
 1       red flags, as Mr Ashbaugh talks about.
 2           In this particular image, from roughly the core
 3       area, which has been described to the Inquiry already,
 4       running at an angle of about 45 degrees through to
 5       about, if you imagine looking at this image as a
 6       clockface, running through to about 2.00, there is
 7       evidence of a disturbance in the ridges from the core
 8       area right up through to about 2.00 on that image.
 9   THE CHAIRMAN:  Is that what you have marked on 18?
10   THE WITNESS:  Yes, that is what I was going to come to.
11   THE CHAIRMAN:  It is just for the purpose of the record.  We
12       needn't record it.
13   THE WITNESS:  I know you have looked at the book.
14   THE CHAIRMAN:  It is just so we do not need to record the
15       mark now because you will show us.
16   THE WITNESS:  On page 18 I have marked approximately with an
17       orange marker -- could you show page 18 -- the area
18       roughly I am talking about.  When you actually go back,
19       if we could actually go back one slide to page 17, and
20       could we put that to the right-hand of the screen and
21       then go back and show page 9 on the left-hand side of
22       the screen -- either way it doesn't matter.  They are
23       Internet images on the screen on the left and the police
24       elimination plain impression is shown on the right.
25           There's no evidence on that police elimination form
page  59
 1       taken on 18th February '97 of any traces of what appears
 2       to be interruption to the ridges.  From my experience
 3       that appears to be an injury having occurred to that
 4       thumb that made that impression.  My experience tells me
 5       that that's the remainder of scarring from an injury.
 6       How that occurred that's not for me to speculate.
 7           I'm pointing that out, that that was a known
 8       difference that I picked up on when I saw these images
 9       in September 1999.
10           If I could take you to page 23, again as part of my
11       presentation being, as I say, to non-fingerprint people
12       or even to fingerprint people, I thought this was an
13       excellent example and it's not a generic of looking at
14       an inked control print of Shirley McKie and then
15       presumably an inked controlled print as taken by Pat
16       Wertheim and to actually show how -- and we've discussed
17       this at some length with witnesses about how a
18       bifurcation can, in instances, show quite clearly as a
19       ridge ending and vice versa.  But this was actually two
20       images from Miss McKie and the particular features that
21       I have marked here is on page 23 I've marked three green
22       areas highlit.  The uppermost one is a bifurcation to
23       the right and immediately on the ridge below that a
24       ridge ending to the right.  Then going to the green
25       marker on the left, a bifurcation to the right.  Then
page  60
 1       the green area on the right, a bifurcation to the right.
 2       The reason I've highlit these are these are
 3       characteristics that I will refer to later on in the
 4       presentation.
 5           Could we call up side-by-side now -- individually,
 6       if you could call up page 24 just to show it separately.
 7       On the Internet copy, I've marked these in it's actually
 8       magenta, the upper mark in magenta shows what appears to
 9       be more or less two continuous ridges.  The one to the
10       left shows a ridge ending and the one to the right shows
11       a ridge ending.
12           If we could now show side-by-side 23 and 24, I need
13       to add at this point that by this stage or certainly
14       before I gave my presentation, my first presentation,
15       which was in January or February 2000, I was aware that
16       obviously people had been looking at the Internet, I was
17       aware of people having written letters, made statements,
18       et cetera, based on what they had seen on the Internet
19       and, in the interests of transparency, I was trying to
20       work out in my head why are people, knowing of the
21       comparison and the assessment I had done and the
22       conclusion I had come to in this matter, why are people
23       not seen what I'm seeing?
24           It wasn't until I got this example -- and I say it's
25       not a generic, this is using two impressions from
page  61
 1       Ms McKie -- that something as subtle as that, if you
 2       were, for example, looking for a chance impression which
 3       involved characteristics or events, whatever you want to
 4       call them, in this area, if you were looking at, say,
 5       the Internet one but you were actually looking for the
 6       features, particularly the top feature there on the
 7       green on page 23 there is a clear bifurcation in the
 8       ridge ending below it.  If you were actually looking at
 9       Mr Wertheim's image of Ms McKie, then that could be
10       sufficient as a starting point to exclude in the
11       comparison, if it was just a small area we were looking
12       at, and this was a very clear example and it was good it
13       was actually from the same individual to show.
14           If I could just add that since I actually did this,
15       there's actually another very good example within this
16       of a glaring difference and, again, the same would apply
17       if individuals were looking at materials on the
18       Internet, not having had the advantage of the clear
19       police elim' they may have come to conclusions based on
20       information that looked different on the Internet.
21           The area I am hopefully going to circle on this
22       occasion -- can I continue with the mouse going on to
23       the other image without clicking again?
24           Sorry, the circle I've put in, the area I'm
25       referring to, if you go to the green marker on page 23,
page  62
 1       to the left of the three green marks, is the
 2       bifurcation shown on page 23.  If you come down 1, 2, 3,
 3       4 intervening ridges you come to a clear ridge ending to
 4       the left.
 5           If you come down from the magenta mark on page 24 on
 6       the left, 1, 2, 3, 4 you come to an occurrence happening
 7       in that area but quite different in the form that has
 8       been given.  There are what looks like two short dots or
 9       independent ridge units and then there's a ridge ending.
10       That again alone, if I was working in a very small area
11       of detail and not having the knowledge of what's on the
12       police control print and if the mark, for example,
13       looked like the control print of the police form with
14       the clear ridge ending, again that might be sufficient
15       for me to consider it as points to exclude this as an
16       identification.  I think it's a very good graphic
17       illustration because, as I say, all throughout these
18       years I've been questioning and trying to be transparent
19       and say why are people not seeing.
20           Along over that period of time it's been suggested
21       that you actually need to be looking at the original
22       material and again there's been a lot of sarcastic
23       comments about this had passed over various inquiries
24       and basically people giving statements, et cetera.
25       Hence the reason I've produced all this to actually show
page  63
 1       to the lay person and there's lay persons in the
 2       audience and there's experts in the audience.  So that
 3       was the reason for page 23 and page 24.
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  Perhaps we should save those if you are
 5       moving from them but the magenta marks on page 24 are
 6       intended to be as near as possible to the equivalent
 7       point marked green on page 23?
 8   THE WITNESS:  Yes, they are.  For example, the magenta one
 9       on the left where the bifurcation is shown on the green
10       one the ridge actually is, the lower edge of that is
11       actually showing as a ridge ending.  But, as I say, the
12       most important one for me was actually the top one which
13       looks nothing like the formation that's on the upper
14       green one on the other side.  That alone, not having all
15       the knowledge and the best prints, could be enough for
16       somebody to come to a different conclusion.
17   THE CHAIRMAN:  Maybe we should just record that.
18   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's FI3009.05.
19   THE WITNESS:  I have commented on, back in 1996, the
20       Scottish Executive had asked me to remember nine years
21       before what I had seen and now we are on ... 1997, so
22       we're about 12 years down the line -- no 13 years down
23       the line since I first looked at this but my
24       recollection is that my starting point, if you like --
25       and if you look and call up page 10, the reason I've
page  64
 1       highlit this and this is not the way the comparison was
 2       done or the assessment was done but it was basically
 3       again for the lay person to highlight what I meant by
 4       the core area.  But in my initial assessment of the mark
 5       cold, before any comparison, was that my recollection
 6       was I had homed in on the core, which is a normal thing
 7       for an expert to do where you've got a fixed point.  I
 8       think it's probably mentioned by other experts.  If
 9       you've got a fixed point of where you think the core is
10       or there might be a fixed point of where a delta is,
11       it's sometimes a good area to start to look for your
12       target area, if you like.
13           There are also dangers, and I've seen it in
14       particular in delta areas, that you can get common
15       features, perhaps more in a delta area than a core area,
16       but certainly I've seen examples of ridge detail in a
17       delta area and this has come about by, actually, random
18       suggestions that have been made by the automated
19       fingerprint retrieval system, AFR, that over the years
20       it has allowed us to see like candidates that are
21       actually not.  So one of the dangers that experts have
22       got to be aware of is, particularly in a delta area, if
23       that is where your target area is that there may be a
24       number of people with a certain number of similar
25       features in a delta area but, again, that all comes down
page  65
 1       to experience.
 2           In this instance, and I've highlit this, only on the
 3       police elimination form for the lay person to relate
 4       that it was the core area but the core area of the mark
 5       where I had, from memory, started my assessment and
 6       looking for features, et cetera.
 7           As I've already explained, and it's come out in
 8       Mr Ashbaugh's courses, et cetera, that the brain, when
 9       you're actually doing this, the A part of ACE-V, the
10       assessment, you're actually taking in all the
11       information.  The eye is actually sending a message to
12       the brain: here's all the information in this area.
13           The fingerprint expert through his training will
14       traditionally at some point, when it comes to do a
15       comparison, will have been looking for ridge endings and
16       bifurcation but the brain has been taking in all the
17       information in that area and that may be pores, it may
18       be incipient ridges, it may be the shapes of the ridges,
19       over and above the second level detail, which is ridge
20       endings and bifurcations.
21           My recollection within this area -- and, again, if I
22       can use a control impression to actually show you what I
23       mean and then I can show you it on the mark later -- if
24       I could go back to page 9, a very strong feature for me
25       was basically the bifurcation above the core area in the
page  66
 1       mark Y7.  I know for a number of people it's a very
 2       strong feature.  But also within that and not
 3       illustrated but, again, an example of what the brain was
 4       taking in and I've viewed this even since I made this
 5       presentation is that where the arrow's pointing to is
 6       something that is also I use the term "unique" -- and I
 7       know it's been referred to in the Inquiry as well, "what
 8       exactly do you mean by unique" -- but an area that is
 9       embedded in my brain from my comparison initially was
10       that there are two pores there, one above the other, in
11       what appears to be a thickening of the ridge.  What it
12       is, actually, is it's the bifurcation has come together
13       before it actually goes to the left into one solid
14       recurving ridge.
15           But these two pore marks stand out for me as, over
16       and above second level detail, information that my brain
17       was taking in and these are present on the actual mark
18       Y7 in that location.
19           In addition, there's two incipient ridges inside the
20       right-hand leg on the mark Y7, inside the right-hand
21       inner-most recurving ridge.  So to the left of the
22       right-hand edge of the inner-most recurving ridge, if
23       that explains it, are two small incipient ridges.
24   THE CHAIRMAN:  Those are the ones you have marked with the
25       two lower of the red arrows?
page  67
 1   THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 2           Now, the core -- what I will do is I will put this
 3       arrow to the other side.  It will still be the red.  The
 4       core of this print is marked with the arrow coming in
 5       from the left and that's what's described as a centre
 6       staple.  That's a ridge coming more or less vertically
 7       up through the image here (indicated) and immediately
 8       beside that there's actually another staple which stops
 9       short of the core, immediately to the left of that.
10       These are actually all present within Y7.
11           I don't want to go down the line of making the image
12       too confused with drawing lines like the other officers
13       have done so.  I would like that one saved, that page,
14       at that stage.  I will come on to other features during
15       the presentation in that area that were actually key to
16       and are present in Y7 that was in my assessment, mental
17       assessment process, that led me to start my comparison
18       from the core area and then move out to the right.  So
19       if you want to record that ...
20   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's recorded as FI3001.06.
21   THE WITNESS:  I think for Mr Smith's purposes, I'd like to
22       turn to page 11, before I actually start the PowerPoint
23       element of the presentation.  He did remark yesterday, I
24       think it was Mr Grigg, that the features marked as 38 to
25       45 don't appear on page 12, which is the control print
page  68
 1       in this comparison.  If you want to actually put up
 2       page 12 as a side-by-side.
 3           I totally agree with the observation of Mr Smith
 4       that they are not shown on the control print and the
 5       reason will become apparent through the presentation.
 6       These points, for part of the record, were identified
 7       using Internet materials supplied by Mr Wertheim and
 8       they will be addressed within the presentation.
 9           Lastly on Mr Smith, I need to comment that I've
10       heard this actually published in newspapers, and
11       Mr Smith repeated it yesterday and I think this is what
12       this misinformation that has got into the newspapers,
13       claiming that there were 45 characteristics in sequence
14       and agreement.  There are not 45 characteristics in
15       sequence and agreement with each other.  There is a
16       total of 45 features recorded within page 11 and 12.
17       Some of them are in clusters which are in sequence and
18       agreement.  I think that needs to be made very clear
19       because that was, again, probably a throwaway line but
20       I've actually seen it in the media and it's completely
21       false.
22           Could we now look at the PowerPoint presentation.
23       In the lower part of the hall you've all got the books
24       to follow so I'll try and do this in conjunction with
25       the PowerPoint and reading pages 11 and 12 so you will
page  69
 1       see the points I'm actually referring to.  I have a list
 2       explaining the sequence of these characteristics.  It is
 3       a matter of take our time, we'll go through and we'll
 4       look at each characteristic by reference to the book but
 5       also to the PowerPoint.
 6           What we have in the first slide is the image of Y7
 7       as shown on page 5 of the book and on the right-hand
 8       side we have the image of Miss McKie's left thumbprint
 9       taken on 18th February 1997 which, to this day, I deem
10       as the best image for clarity that I've seen in a
11       control print, be it it's not rolled.
12           We are now looking at -- I've put red markers on the
13       ridges.  Where you will actually see just a mall red
14       line, it's to indicate the alignment of a ridge ending
15       and where I will go on to show bifurcations it will be
16       shown in the shape of a bifurcation, but to actually
17       apply this to the PowerPoint is no mean feat, actually
18       going into that detail on that kind of image on a
19       screen.  Hence we will follow that along with pages 11
20       and 12.
21           What we have here is point number 1, my point number
22       1, which is a ridge ending upward.  Immediately to the
23       right of that on the next slide is point number 2, which
24       is a ridge ending downwards.  I need to point out at
25       this stage -- which again was possibly remiss of me
page  70
 1       before I started putting the markers on -- in that just
 2       to remind, and using the cursor here, that the fault
 3       line on the mark on the left, using the cursor, falls
 4       across here and goes up here (indicated).  So this point
 5       number 2 is, in effect, a ridge that's come down the way
 6       and has been dissected by the fault line.  So what you
 7       are seeing is a small part of this ridge on the control
 8       print that has actually been dissected.  I hope I've
 9       made that clear enough.
10           If we move to the right of that, with no intervening
11       ridges, there's a bifurcation upward which I would
12       describe as a spur, although the left-hand leg of it is
13       not as large as in the generic example I gave at the
14       beginning of the book but the best way of describing
15       this for me is a spur and that's point number 3.
16           Immediately to the right of that is a small
17       incipient ridge.  I've marked both ends of that in blue
18       to try and decipher, to actually show you the difference
19       between what's the incipient ridge and what is a second
20       level detail, bifurcation or ridge ending.  So that is
21       an incipient ridge present in both Y7 and Ms McKie's
22       left thumbprint.
23           If we go to the next slide and we miss one
24       intervening ridge to the right of the incipient ridge,
25       we come to a ridge ending up from the edge of the print.
page  71
 1       What is important about this is this is a ridge coming
 2       from the outside in, which is quite different from the
 3       potential of a ridge going outwards on to the edge of a
 4       print.  So this is a ridge ending with the cursor on at
 5       the moment, on the right-hand side is pointing, is
 6       coming in the way and up to that point and that's the
 7       equivalent point marked on Y7 on the left.
 8           If we move across two intervening ridges to the
 9       left, we have -- to explain where it is in relation to
10       point 1.  It's further down the ridge ending point 1,
11       the ridge then bifurcates and that is point 6 present on
12       Y7 and the plain impression of Shirley McKie.
13           If you move down the right-hand leg of that
14       bifurcation number 6, you come to a bifurcation upwards
15       now shown on the mark Y7 and on the left thumbprint of
16       Shirley McKie.
17           If you then move up the left leg of that
18       bifurcation, you come to a clear ridge ending, which is
19       contained within the space following down from
20       bifurcation number 6.
21           If you move two intervening ridges to the left and
22       upwards, you will come to another incipient ridge, now
23       shown on both impressions.
24           If you then miss one intervening ridge to the left
25       of that incipient ridge and come down a touch, there's a
page  72
 1       ridge ending upwards marked as number 10.
 2           If you follow down from that ridge ending, down that
 3       ridge, there is point 11, which is a ridge ending
 4       up -- sorry, to the left of that ridge is a ridge ending
 5       up.
 6           If you then go two intervening ridges and upward,
 7       you come to another ridge ending upwards, which is
 8       point 12.
 9           If you go to the ridge immediately to the left of
10       that and follow that up, you come to a downward
11       bifurcation, number 13.
12           If you go one intervening ridge to the left, we then
13       have point 14, a bifurcation down.  Sorry, what I am now
14       illustrating is point 15, so if you go on to the ridge
15       to the left of the last bifurcation and follow that down
16       there's a bifurcation down, point 15.  Adjacent to that,
17       at about 10.00 if you were looking at a clockface, again
18       there's a small incipient ridge.
19           Then to the left of that, a bifurcation, which is
20       number 17 -- sorry, I should have said the incipient
21       ridge was 16.  17 is the bifurcation down.
22           18 I have marked in yellow.  I'm not claiming this
23       to be second level detail.  It's not a bifurcation or a
24       ridge ending but it is a very prominent feature which I
25       stopped short of actually showing you when I was talking
page  73
 1       about the initial assessment stage but again it's a
 2       feature that my eye took in in the overall assessment of
 3       the detail in the core area.
 4           If I could ask you to look at page 15 just to
 5       explain what I mean by this, the area highlit in yellow
 6       is what I'm suggesting is this is where the ridge wall
 7       has deviated due to a large pore and it's actually
 8       pushed the edge of the ridge wall out.  Again, I say
 9       this is on the best image of Shirley McKie's left
10       thumbprint I have seen and it does not show, certainly
11       in that clarity in any other image that I've seen,
12       Internet or otherwise, but it's a key element in my
13       assessment of this area and in my illustration of the
14       identification and it appears on the right-hand leg of
15       the inner-most recurve.
16           If we could possibly go back to the last slide in
17       the PowerPoint, the next slide is an incipient ridge.
18       This is the lower of the two incipient ridges I have
19       previously referred to which are within the inner-most
20       recurve at the core of the mark Y7.
21           Illustrated as point 20 is an incipient ridge which
22       is the upper of the two incipient ridges present in the
23       core area of Y7 and also on the left thumb of Shirley
24       McKie.
25           Point 21, which I pointed to before in another
page  74
 1       illustration, is the core of the print and it's a ridge
 2       ending upwards, stopping just short of the inner-most
 3       recurve.  I described it earlier as a centre staple.
 4           Again, back to the area discussed before about what
 5       was very prominent was this bifurcation above the core
 6       area and in which I had also observed two pore marks
 7       together in the mark.  At this stage what I've
 8       illustrated is where I'm totally satisfied that this
 9       alone, that the donor of the mark Y7 was Shirley McKie
10       based on all the information I've gathered in this area
11       which I refer to in the presentation as the lower
12       segment or the lower area.  By "lower" I mean it's all
13       below the fault line because the explanation of the
14       fault line which is to come is that this area up here
15       (indicated) is not only a second touch, the whole image
16       is subject to movement and, as I've described in other
17       documents as swivelling, more than one touch and the top
18       area here (indicated) itself is, in fact, from my
19       comparisons more than one touch.
20           So at that stage that's me totally satisfied.  I
21       haven't even come to looking at other images or other
22       material that has become available.  That's based on
23       original mark Y7 from Strathclyde Police and an original
24       police elimination form with what I think is the
25       clearest impression, albeit it's not the rolled
page  75
 1       impression or a rolled impression.
 2   THE CHAIRMAN:  Shall we save now what you have done.  That
 3       is up to 20.
 4   MR MOYNIHAN:  I don't know if it can be saved on the
 5       PowerPoint.
 6           Mr Mackenzie, you will have to tell me, are you
 7       pressing through pages in your PowerPoint presentation?
 8   THE WITNESS:  I'm going to continue.
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  Is there any way that you can tell us what the
10       digital page is that we're looking at just now?  Is
11       there any reference?
12   THE WITNESS:  Obviously, I was -- it's after point 22.  That
13       last feature, which is a bifurcation, is point 22.  I
14       could, if you like, go through the slides later on and
15       identify it for you.
16   MR MOYNIHAN:  I think that is what we would need, just for
17       the record.  As you have seen, when we save images we
18       try to get the reference.  We will do some work on that
19       ourselves over lunchtime to see if there is a way that
20       we can, but at the moment, certainly for my purposes,
21       what we are looking at is a screen which includes, among
22       other things, the prominent yellow feature and a few
23       other details beyond that.
24   THE WITNESS:  It's 22 features that are marked on there and
25       actually, I think if you actually -- and this pure
page  76
 1       coincidence which people suggest is not -- but it's pure
 2       coincidence that if you take away the incipient ridges
 3       and the yellow unique feature it's reduced to 16.
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  By coincidence.
 5   THE WITNESS:  It is pure coincidence, let me tell you.
 6   THE CHAIRMAN:  You can discuss how best to record this and
 7       we will sit again at 1.50.
 8   (1.05 pm)
 9                      (Luncheon Adjournment)
10   (1.50 pm)
11               ROBERT HARVEY MACKENZIE (continued)
12   THE CHAIRMAN:  I gather that we can record the slides.
13   THE WITNESS:  Slide 24, sir.
14   MR MOYNIHAN:  For the future I understand that
15       right-clicking the mouse will bring up the particular
16       page that we happen to be looking at on the PowerPoint
17       presentation.  That is a discipline we will just have to
18       do as we proceed, not saving every page but, as we have
19       done before, saving pages from time to time.
20   THE CHAIRMAN:  Thank you very much.
21             Presentation by THE WITNESS (continued)
22   THE WITNESS:  As I said before lunch, this concludes my
23       assessment of the lower half and where my conclusions
24       came from, that this mark, Y7, was made by the donor,
25       Shirley McKie, whose left thumbprint was on the
page  77
 1       right-hand image.
 2           At the time of the trial or after the trial, I
 3       learned that there had been criticism of the SCRO
 4       officers.  One, there was a suggestion that the mark had
 5       been severely cropped to exclude the top area, which I
 6       would now talk about as being the upper area above the
 7       fault line.  So this was an area that I thought was
 8       relevant, that I should address when I revisited the
 9       case August 1999 onwards.
10           The position of this image being by itself, one
11       digit, I was in no doubt that this upper area in fact
12       had belonged to the same person who had made the lower
13       area, but obviously I had to analyse what detail was
14       available in that area from the materials available.
15           As I said, at that juncture, '99, September onwards,
16       other materials in the form of these Internet
17       impressions taken from Shirley McKie gave me the
18       opportunity to explore over and above what information
19       was present in the police form.
20           What I'm about to show you is what I gleaned
21       initially in looking at this upper area from what was
22       available in the police elimination forms and, again,
23       because of the quality and the clarity of that left
24       plain impression from the second form that I'd seen was
25       what was my starting point.
page  78
 1           Now, again, a lot of these images have been seen of
 2       mark Y7 and reference has been made to -- and I think I
 3       actually circled it earlier in the presentation -- this
 4       area in the upper half has been referred to in the past
 5       by some as a black blob.
 6           Depending on the contrast of some of the photographs
 7       you see, and I know that explicitly in the enlargements
 8       that I prepared which have mysteriously disappeared, I
 9       was able, along with the material I had and these
10       enlargements, to then illustrate a cluster of
11       characteristics which were present in Y7 and also
12       present on the police elimination form.  These are the
13       next I think it's six characteristics from memory.  23
14       through to 28.  If you are looking at page 11 in the
15       book, they are above the cluster previously referred to
16       by Mr Smith and clarified by myself.  So this is the
17       area above the ones with 38 and 45.  This is the
18       6 points, 23 through to 28.
19           The first one I've marked is a bifurcation to the
20       right.  My explanation of this area at the top is
21       that -- first of all, I should have said that the bottom
22       or the lower part of the mark from an axis area round
23       about the core has, in my terminology, swivelled.  The
24       finger has swivelled on lower of the bottom segment and
25       that turning of the digit has continued and then been
page  79
 1       lifted off and placed on at least twice on the upper
 2       part.  This part I'm describing is one of these touches
 3       in the upper half; hence the angle from what you're
 4       looking at on the screen there is off because that part
 5       of the digit has actually turned round.  I've heard it
 6       been referred to as 66 degrees.  I have not measured it
 7       but all I know is that in my independent analysis this
 8       is an area that I found 6 characteristics.  They are
 9       possibly a little clearer in the book than what is on
10       the PowerPoint but I have endeavoured in the PowerPoint
11       to mark them where they are in the book.
12           Point 24 is a ridge ending to the right.  Point 25
13       is a bifurcation to the right.  Sorry ... 25 is a
14       bifurcation to the right.  We miss one intervening ridge
15       from, basically, on the lower leg of bifurcation 23, you
16       come along that leg, there's a bifurcation to the right.
17       This you will probably remember is in the area I
18       referred to earlier when I was referring to the print of
19       Ms McKie on the police elim showing with the green
20       highlighters and the same area again which was shown
21       with the magenta highlighters on Mr Wertheim's version,
22       which didn't show the same features as bifurcation and
23       ridge ending in that upper group.  They showed more like
24       continuous ridges.  This is what I meant by if somebody
25       is actually looking in a particular area they may not
page  80
 1       have seen what's actually on the police form.
 2           The next one is a ridge ending to the right further
 3       along the upper ridge on that last bifurcation and it
 4       comes to an end pointing to the right.
 5           Then if you miss one intervening ridge going
 6       downwards there's a bifurcation to the right.  So that
 7       gave me a cluster of six ridge characteristics in that
 8       area and, as you will see, they are literally contained
 9       within what has been referred to previously as the black
10       blob.  But, depending on the contrast of the photographs
11       you have and the one that I have in my presentation
12       folder you can actually see the ridges running through
13       that area contrary to other images that have been shown.
14           In addition to that, I've illustrated as 29 missing
15       one intervening ridge from bifurcation to the right,
16       number 28, there's a small incipient ridge and then
17       missing another intervening ridge below that, another
18       incipient ridge, numbered 30.
19           On the mark at 31 on the left-hand image -- that's
20       on Y7, that's been marked 31 -- which is to the right of
21       incipient ridge 29 and then below incipient ridge 31 one
22       intervening ridge is what appears to be another
23       incipient ridge.  But on the police form it doesn't
24       appear to be showing, as I said before, incipient
25       ridges, depending on the pressure in particular areas
page  81
 1       may or may not show but I was conscious that there was
 2       the appearance of two further incipient ridges there
 3       more than what were showing on the police form so I
 4       noted them.
 5   MR MOYNIHAN:  Can I stop you there because we have reached a
 6       point that if I was going to ask you some questions
 7       about so could you tell me which image we are on just
 8       now, if you right click and tell me which image you are
 9       on.  It is 33.
10           Just for the avoidance of any doubt --
11   THE WITNESS:  I actually clicked off it and went back to 33
12       so 34 is the last incipient ridge, slide 34.
13   MR MOYNIHAN:  Just so that I can get the numbering correct,
14       in the upper right section there are two incipient
15       ridges one below the other, below the last red
16       bifurcation on the right-hand side.  It's the numbering
17       of those, looking at my book -- bear in mind I only have
18       a copy -- those two blue incipient ridges seem to be: 29
19       is the upper one and 30 is the lower one.  You have been
20       mentioning 31, so it is 29 and 30.
21   THE WITNESS:  29 and 30 is the first two I spoke about, yes.
22   MR MOYNIHAN:  So 29 is the upper and 30 is the lower?
23   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
24           At this stage, there was obviously other ridge
25       detail that I was curious about and what we're talking
page  82
 1       about -- I don't seem to have the bar along the bottom.
 2       Oh, I can't do it on PowerPoint.  If I could use the
 3       cursor, what I'm pointing to on Y7 is this (indicated).
 4       Below that cluster of six, I'm pointing to the ridge
 5       ending to the right here which has come to be known as
 6       the Rosetta characteristic.
 7           I'm totally satisfied that I'd found a cluster of
 8       six and that's the previous numbers 23 through to 28
 9       supported at that stage by two incipient ridges, 29 and
10       30, but I was conscious of the possibility of a further
11       two incipient ridges to the right of them and that is
12       why I have left them marked on the slide although
13       there's not an equivalent on the right-hand slide and we
14       will come to that in due course.
15           I've now circled the area, that larger area that
16       encompasses the two features that I mentioned earlier
17       on.  That was the break in the ridges and immediately to
18       the left of it the shape of Italy or the sock.  You
19       should be able to see them within that circle 1, 2, 3,
20       counting the first three ridges up from that circle, the
21       sock is in the second ridge and the break is in the
22       third ridge.
23           I'm going to freeze the PowerPoint at this stage and
24       move on to actually discussing the area within the
25       circle and where I established from the Internet version
page  83
 1       or where the Internet versions of Ms McKie's left thumb,
 2       I established a further cluster within that area that
 3       was identified to Ms McKie using that Internet material.
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  Do you have the number of the one that you
 5       want?
 6   THE WITNESS:  Sorry, I am just about to come to that.  If we
 7       look at the book, page 27.
 8   THE CHAIRMAN:  Do you want it smaller again?
 9   THE WITNESS:  That will do just now for the sequence of
10       events, the area surrounded by the circle, this was
11       shown, I think, to Mr Wertheim momentarily and virtually
12       rejected by Mr Wertheim as to the quality.
13           To explain that, that is a photograph taken of that
14       relevant area from the photograph -- sorry, a
15       photographic enlargement taken from the specific area
16       that I have outlined in the photograph shown on page 11,
17       just for the record.
18           It may be better now if we could put that to the
19       side and bring the -- I know we're working from the
20       book, it's the clarity in the book but if you want to
21       show it on the screen so that those who don't have the
22       book can see.  Page 28.
23           The capture of that page for the system has cut off
24       the numbers on page 28 but I will explain it because
25       basically the white labels where the numbers start at
page  84
 1       the top and finish at the bottom so it would be easy
 2       enough to reference it to this slide if you are
 3       capturing this.
 4   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, what we can do, by my bad
 5       handwriting on this, we will try to insert the numbers.
 6   THE WITNESS:  Okay, just to make it easier for those
 7       watching.
 8   MR MOYNIHAN:  33 ... it's not actually going to do it very
 9       well ...
10   THE WITNESS:  I can start off at point 33.  That is a ridge
11       ending upwards shown on mark Y7.
12   THE CHAIRMAN:  It is not very distinct on the Internet copy.
13       Could you just mark where you say that is.
14   THE WITNESS:  I can't do that, Sir Anthony, on the
15       PowerPoint, or can I?  Sorry, it's not PowerPoint ...
16   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, just while we're considering
17       this you may wish, sir, to study the image that I
18       actually have because mine may be a better copy even for
19       your purposes.
20   THE CHAIRMAN:  I have one here at page 28.
21   MR MOYNIHAN:  It is to see whether your copy is as reliable
22       as mine.
23   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes, I think I have the same one.  I meant
24       the one on the Internet is not very clear.  That is what
25       I meant.  Thank you.  I can see it clearly on the print
page  85
 1       but I cannot see it as clearly on the screen.
 2   THE WITNESS:  The circle's not very big.  Maybe if choose an
 3       arrow ... sorry, so if we move from point 33, one
 4       intervening ridge to the right we come to a ridge ending
 5       down which forms the top half of the ridge break, if you
 6       wish to describe it as that, which I have commented
 7       earlier there's a break in the ridge.  Following that
 8       down, ridge ending up 35, is the lower part of the break
 9       I previously described.
10   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes, I can see that.
11   THE WITNESS:  Moving immediately left of 35 on to the next
12       ridge and on the end of that, that's what I've described
13       as the end of Italy or the toe of the sock -- sorry,
14       I've jumped.  Could we rerun that?
15           If we go from 35, we follow that down and then to
16       the left of it we have 36 which is a ridge ending up and
17       immediately to the left of that I correct that by saying
18       that point 37 is the toe of Italy or the toe of the
19       sock.
20           So right from my initial assessment, that area
21       actually jumped out at me in my initial cold assessment
22       of Y7, but up until this stage where the Internet
23       material became available, be it of a slightly lesser
24       quality as you can see from comparing it with the police
25       form, it did show identical sequence of these five
page  86
 1       characteristics that I've marked that are present on
 2       Shirley McKie's left thumbprint.
 3           If we go back momentarily to page 11 --
 4   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sorry, again, it's just the discipline of
 5       saving the image.
 6   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's FI3009.07.
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  You can proceed, Mr Mackenzie.
 8   THE WITNESS:  Sorry, before we go to page 11, if we could go
 9       back to page 27 and, if I can put arrows on here, I want
10       to actually show you how this cluster relates to the
11       area immediately to the left that we've discussed in the
12       morning session to show that this area is, in fact, in
13       sequence and agreement with the area where I had marked
14       the 22 features.
15           It confirms my assessment that the mark or the digit
16       had swivelled so that the actual location on the mark
17       appears to be slightly round to the right but it's
18       actually all in sequence and agreement with the 22
19       features already discussed.  As a point of reference,
20       and referring back to point number 1 in my presentation,
21       I'm actually going to highlight where it is in this
22       area.  The red arrow is pointing to the ridge ending up,
23       number 1, shown on pages 11 and 12.  The second red
24       arrow is pointing to the ridge ending down, shown on
25       pages 11 and 12 as point number 2.
page  87
 1   THE CHAIRMAN:  That is the right-hand of the two red arrows?
 2   THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Basically, as I explained before, the
 3       segmentation of the mark, the fault line cuts right
 4       across here over, as I say, the ridge with point 2 in it
 5       and then goes back up here (indicated).
 6           What I'm trying to do is to show you in sequence and
 7       agreement from the points already discussed that this --
 8       and as a reference point -- to count across to the base
 9       of Italy or the toe of the sock.  If we go 1, 2, 3, 4
10       intervening ridges, we come to the toe of the sock.  If
11       we go across on the right-hand image 1, 2, 3, 4, you
12       come to the toe of the sock, which is 37.
13   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, I've two points: first of all, I
14       am told that there is a tool on Trial Director that
15       would enable us to actually enter the numbers in the
16       image better than I can write them.
17   THE WITNESS:  Would it help if I put the two equivalent
18       arrows on to there --
19   MR MOYNIHAN:  Just stop, just for a second.  I am interested
20       in the left-hand image, that is page 27.  Could we
21       actually put in the numbers.  The right-hand arrow, the
22       one at we are looking at just now, is your point
23       number ...?
24   THE WITNESS:  2.
25   MR MOYNIHAN:  And the left one is point number 1?
page  88
 1   THE WITNESS:  Yes.  If it helps I can put the arrows in.
 2   THE CHAIRMAN:  I think if you can put the equivalent arrows
 3       on the other side.  You just need to put in the arrow.
 4   THE WITNESS:  Hold on, point number 1.
 5   MR MOYNIHAN:  If you just put the arrows in and then we will
 6       come back and number them in a second.
 7   THE WITNESS:  Okay.
 8   THE CHAIRMAN:  A great improvement on Mr Moynihan's writing.
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  Fortunately, that is what I hope is the first
10       of many redundancies on my part.  I live in hope.
11           Mr Mackenzie, perhaps I am not redundant in this
12       respect: the points that you have marked as 1 and 2, the
13       reason I wanted those numbered, am I correct that these
14       are the points in the SCRO charting, 15 and 16, that
15       Mr Wertheim referred to as the handshake, and I referred
16       to as the --
17   THE WITNESS:  From memory, earlier in the week of you
18       showing these charts, I seem to recall that that's what
19       that would be.
20   MR MOYNIHAN:  We are looking at 15 and 16 in the SCRO
21       charting.  Take your time to cross-check.
22   THE WITNESS:  15 is my number 1 and 16 is my number 2, on
23       the SCRO chart.
24   MR MOYNIHAN:  Thank you.  Perhaps we should save that image.
25   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's saved as FI3009.08.
page  89
 1   THE WITNESS:  Can we now go to page 11.  I want to now look
 2       at the ones that are numbered 38 to 45, which in my book
 3       are numbered in magenta, and referred to Mr Smith
 4       yesterday and I raised that subject again this morning,
 5       that this is the area now where I found another eight
 6       characteristics which are in sequence and agreement with
 7       the area on Shirley McKie's left thumbprint but, on this
 8       occasion, taken from the Internet because this area
 9       wasn't available to me on the police elimination form.
10           On page 31, if you can show that, this again is a
11       photographic enlargement taken out of that relevant area
12       I previously referred to a minute or two ago on page 11.
13       On this photographic enlargement I've marked in sequence
14       38 through to 45 and on page 32, if we can see page 32,
15       this is the identical area within Shirley McKie's left
16       thumbprint.
17           Point 38 I've described as a ridge ending downward.
18       This is the characteristic that has been otherwise known
19       as the Rosetta characteristic.  I should possibly add at
20       this stage and confirm, I think, when Mr Moynihan said
21       earlier in the Inquiry -- I don't know who, in what
22       order they had actually identified this characteristic,
23       but I know that in late '99, once I received this
24       material, established this area and what is now known as
25       the Rosetta characteristic.  I understand that the name
page  90
 1       penned to this was by Mr John Berry.  I didn't later
 2       learn of his establishment of the same identification
 3       until I think it was January or February 2002.  So
 4       unknown to each other we had actually been working on
 5       images of Y7 and Shirley McKie's print and had actually
 6       come to the same conclusion on this particular
 7       characteristic.  So that's the history of it as far as
 8       any connections that may be made.
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, for technical reasons that I am
10       not entirely clear about, unfortunately the image we
11       have on the screen is not as clear as the image I have
12       in the book form and perhaps others have.  Because this
13       is an important feature and I accept without question
14       what you said attaching the label the Rosetta character
15       to it was a later development, what I would like to do
16       nonetheless is pinpoint it on this image with a degree
17       of certainty.
18           I understand that it is located where my cursor is
19       currently situated (indicated).
20   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
21   MR MOYNIHAN:  For reasons which I will come back to when I
22       am asking you questions about it, the way I locate it is
23       the shape immediately to its right has to me the
24       appearance of a crescent moon.  Is that correct?
25           The crescent shape I am marking just now -- roughly
page  91
 1       there (indicated).  This is where you will have to help
 2       me.  Am I correctly positioning the Rosetta
 3       characteristic just now?
 4   THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 5   MR MOYNIHAN:  So if I just point a point --
 6   THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  -- that is the Rosetta characteristic?
 8   THE WITNESS:  As a point of reference.  Your description of
 9       a crescent, I would probably say it was quite unusual in
10       that the way it dips down but I'm quite happy, if it'; s
11       to label it in some way or other I wouldn't necessarily
12       describe it as a crescent shape but I understand what --
13   MR MOYNIHAN:  It's a shape.  It's an unusual shape.
14   THE WITNESS:  It's unusual.
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  Perhaps again, I am not very good at driving
16       this machine either.  What we will do is if we could put
17       in the box number 38 so I know the red arrow is pointing
18       to number 38.
19           What I would like you to do is save that image.
20   THE CHAIRMAN:  I think we have the same problem we had this
21       morning.
22   MR MOYNIHAN:  I can recreate this one if necessary.  I think
23       we have to reboot the computer; is that the case?
24       (Pause)
25           Because I know what I am looking for we can recreate
page  92
 1       it so if we have to reboot, we have to reboot.
 2           Mr Mackenzie, just while we are waiting, if I could
 3       ask you, I think what you actually have in front of you
 4       as your own booklet are in fact the photographic
 5       originals of all of this presentation; is that correct?
 6   THE WITNESS:  Yes.  The left-hand is a glossy photograph
 7       from the mark.
 8   MR MOYNIHAN:  What about the right-hand side?
 9   THE WITNESS:  That's an image taken from the Internet by the
10       IT department.
11   MR MOYNIHAN:  But you have the original of it.
12   THE WITNESS:  That's enlarged from what they printed off.
13       They didn't print it on to photographic paper as such.
14   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sorry, we are at crossed purposes.  What I
15       have in my booklet in front of me is a photocopy of --
16   THE WITNESS:  Of the one I marked up.
17   MR MOYNIHAN:  You have the original one that you marked up.
18   THE WITNESS:  Yes.
19   MR MOYNIHAN:  So, therefore, two things.  For clarity, if we
20       require we can display your original on the projector
21       but, secondly, when you have finished your presentation
22       and finished your evidence, it may actually help -- I
23       appreciate what you said about things having been lost
24       in the past -- but it may actually help if we retain the
25       original just in case there is any uncertainty because
page  93
 1       the digital images are not as clear as they might be.  I
 2       will not dispossess you until you have finished.
 3   THE WITNESS:  What you have in your various books and
 4       particularly the book you have and others have had in
 5       the past is a copy of this mark up in this page.
 6   MR MOYNIHAN:  When you have finished giving your evidence, I
 7       will take possession of it and I will be responsible for
 8       it.  If the Lothian & Borders Police need to look
 9       anywhere they can come to me.
10   THE CHAIRMAN:  I think the problem is resolved.
11   MR MOYNIHAN:  I am grateful.
12   MISS BAHRAMI:  Saved as FI3009.09.
13   THE WITNESS:  We discussed 38 as being what's now known as
14       the Rosetta characteristic, a ridge ending to the right.
15       If we go down one ridge and along that ridge to the
16       left, we've got a ridge ending up, number 39, which
17       actually forms the right-hand part of a ridge break and
18       following along that ridge --
19   MR MOYNIHAN:  Again, because the image is so poor, is my
20       cursor now pointing to that ridge ending which is number
21       39 -- sorry, it's lower, is it?
22   THE WITNESS:  Yes.
23   MR MOYNIHAN:  Is it where my cursor is just now?
24   THE WITNESS:  Yes.
25   MR MOYNIHAN:  Is it where the pen tip is?  (Indicated)
page  94
 1   THE WITNESS:  Up a fraction.  Yes, there.
 2   MR MOYNIHAN:  Perhaps we will call that one 39, please.
 3   THE WITNESS:  Following along that ridge to the other side
 4       of the break, the ridge ending down, number 40.
 5   MR MOYNIHAN:  This is where things will become rather
 6       difficult.  Again, is my pen tip --
 7   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
 8   MR MOYNIHAN:  So we are going to have to just come up from
 9       it slightly.
10   THE CHAIRMAN:  It's immediately opposite.
11   THE WITNESS:  Yes.  It's the other side of the break in the
12       ridge, yes.  The easiest way to describe it is a ridge
13       ending.  It's a feature.
14   MR MOYNIHAN:  As his Lordship says, it is to the side of the
15       arrow number 39.
16   THE WITNESS:  Actually, it may be that you want on this,
17       because of the quality of this, to actually -- although
18       they are marked with my markers, it might be easy enough
19       to go through this sequence and actually mark them
20       because that area is quite dense in this copy on the
21       screen.
22           Would you like me to?
23   MR MOYNIHAN:  If you give us just a second, what we will do
24       is save the image that we currently have.  (Pause)
25   MISS BAHRAMI:  FI3009.10.
page  95
 1   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, I am conscious of what you said.
 2       What we could do is start again with CO0059.033.  We
 3       will start with a clean image.  This is something I want
 4       to ask you some questions about hence why I am taking
 5       some time.
 6           What I would suggest is that we simply put a mark,
 7       with whatever colour suits -- there seem to some red
 8       marks anyway -- at the positions where these features
 9       are to be seen.  First of all, if I find what I have
10       referred to as my crescent shape, I'll put a mark.  The
11       first one I've marked is number 38.  Is that correct?
12   THE WITNESS:  Okay.
13   MR MOYNIHAN:  Then number 40, I will mark --
14   THE WITNESS:  Sorry, 39.
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  39, I am marking.
16   THE WITNESS:  Mr Moynihan, if I can interrupt at that point,
17       I am going to come on to showing another version of the
18       same without the lines marked off and it's actually over
19       the page which -- if we go ahead with this and then --
20       because it's actually taken from a different image.
21       Let's complete this part and then we'll look at the
22       next --
23   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, the only reason I am bothering
24       to take the time is that this is an important image for
25       the questions I want to ask you and I would like with
page  96
 1       clarity to establish where the points are and I'm not
 2       going to go too far but I want 38, 39 and 40 established
 3       just on this image.
 4           So 38 I have already drawn.  If I can then come to
 5       39, am I correct?
 6   THE WITNESS:  Yes, just up a fraction.  Yes.
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  So that's 39 and 40 is adjacent to it.  Is the
 8       ridge ending in this vicinity, yes?
 9   THE WITNESS:  Okay.
10   MR MOYNIHAN:  If I put in arrows, we have the three
11       points 38, 39 and 40 and, again, if I could ask that
12       those numbers be inserted, beginning where the cursor is
13       just now as 38 and going round the clock, 39 and 40.
14       Could we save that image, please?
15   MISS BAHRAMI:  FI3009.11.
16   MR MOYNIHAN:  I interrupted you so I will let you gather
17       your thoughts and then you can proceed.
18   THE WITNESS:  If we go along the ridge with the Rosetta
19       characteristic going back to the left and up one ridge,
20       marked as number 41, is a bifurcation to the right.
21           Would you like me to add a marker on to this?
22   MR MOYNIHAN:  We have saved these image so we can either
23       start again with a fresh image or add to this if it's
24       readily visible when we add it in but as you please.
25   THE WITNESS:  I think it might be better to actually save
page  97
 1       that and take them off because if I start drawing
 2       arrows, we've seen with previous ones it confuses.
 3   MR MOYNIHAN:  This has been saved as FI3009.11.  So what we
 4       will do then is start again.  There is a clear image of
 5       CO0059.033.
 6           You can start again, Mr Mackenzie.
 7   THE WITNESS:  This is the bifurcation here.  You come up
 8       back along from the Rosetta characteristic and come up
 9       one and you have a bifurcation to the right where the
10       arrow is pointing to and that is number 41.
11   THE CHAIRMAN:  Has it got a --
12   THE WITNESS:  Sorry, can I change this?  The arrow is
13       actually going to interfere with the next couple.
14           The arrow is now pointing to the bifurcation one
15       above the ridge where the Rosetta characteristic is.
16       That's going back to the left, along the ridge from the
17       Rosetta characteristic and up one is a bifurcation to
18       the right.
19   THE CHAIRMAN:  Do you want to number that?  That is 41.
20   THE WITNESS:  Yes.  If you want to number them as I go
21       along, it's not a problem.  It's just I'm more concerned
22       about crossing over arrows.  I'm trying to avoid that.
23           If we move one above that bifurcation and slightly
24       to the right, there's a ridge ending I've described as a
25       ridge ending upwards, number 42, which I'll indicate
page  98
 1       with an arrow.  If you want to label that one 42.
 2           Then immediately above that and a fraction to the
 3       right is ... sorry.  Sorry, to keep this in sequence I
 4       was actually going to go to the one above it, that is
 5       actually number 45, so to follow in the sequence --
 6   THE CHAIRMAN:  Take them whatever order you want.
 7   THE WITNESS:  I think if I mark them with the arrows and
 8       then you put the numbers on I can tell you which ones,
 9       it might be simpler.  The one I've just indicated is 45.
10   THE CHAIRMAN:  You just put the arrows in.
11   THE WITNESS:  I should have said that 43 is a ridge ending.
12       No, 43, sorry, is a bifurcation to the right.  44 is a
13       ridge ending to the right.  The one I marked earlier out
14       to the side was a ridge ending to the right, number 45,
15       this one on the right-hand side.
16           You can label them now.  So, basically, of the three
17       arrows that are unlabelled: the left-hand one is 43,
18       that's a bifurcation to the right; the next one which is
19       a ridge ending to the right is 44; and the last one is
20       45.
21           I have described -- and I remember back from
22       Tulliallan nine years ago, describing the shape here
23       between 44 and 45 and I'm pointing to it with the cursor
24       just now (indicated) -- in that the ridges are kind of
25       stepped.  The way I described that, indicating with the
page  99
 1       cursor -- would you like me to try and -- I'm not keen
 2       on drawing lines but would you like to try and draw the
 3       shape of what I'm trying to describe, would that help?
 4   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes, whatever you think presents your --
 5   THE WITNESS:  It's just I'm not confident on drawing lines.
 6   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, it's actually fine.  Probably
 7       what is better -- it's simply due to the poor quality of
 8       our digital reproduction of your own item -- so what is
 9       better is if you want to just highlight by let's say a
10       yellow circle the particular feature.  I will bring it
11       up so we can get a yellow circle and then if you proceed
12       just to mark the feature.
13   THE WITNESS:  Contained within that I say there's a kind of
14       stepping feature of the ridge and that is something that
15       caught my eye and it caught my eye in the mark as well.
16       It's possibly when we come to page 33 over the page it
17       might even be clearer -- maybe -- but how I described
18       that was if you know what an old fashioned plane, as in
19       woodworking plane, looks like or a carpenter's plane,
20       the shape in the bit that comes down with the blade,
21       that's what that reminded me of.  To actually picture it
22       in my mind that particular feature and that's what that
23       reminded me of, the carpenter's plane with the blade
24       coming down.
25           That's what I've just illustrated was a photographic
page 100
 1       enlargement from the enlargement on page 11 and on the
 2       right-hand page, page 32, the image taken from the
 3       Internet or one of the Internet images of Shirley
 4       McKie's thumbprint.
 5   MR MOYNIHAN:  If we could save this one.
 6   THE CHAIRMAN:  Maybe when it is saved we should try to stick
 7       to our set hours and rise for ten minutes.
 8   MISS BAHRAMI:  That is image FI3009.12.
 9   THE CHAIRMAN:  We will sit again then a couple of minutes
10       after 3.00.
11   (2.52 pm)
12                         (A short break)
13   (3.03 pm)
14   THE CHAIRMAN:  Yes, Mr Mackenzie, if you would like to
15       continue.
16   THE WITNESS:  What I have done during the break there is
17       I've actually traced round the shape of the plane to
18       show you.  I'll enlarge it to show you what I meant.
19   THE CHAIRMAN:  Maybe we should save that.  This is the plane
20       shape that you referred to.
21   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's FI3009.13.
22   THE CHAIRMAN:  Do you want us to come back out of this?
23   THE WITNESS:  Oh, yes.  That's it.
24           I mentioned before the break there that I'd done
25       similar marking of these points on another image and
page 101
 1       it's on page 33, which is the next page.  Could you turn
 2       it so 33 is down in the bottom right-hand corner?  Could
 3       you turn it clock-wise?  I've indicated the direction
 4       with the red arrow there (indicated).  The image is on
 5       here.
 6           Likewise, where I said the previous one was a
 7       photographic enlargement from the relevant area on mark
 8       Y7, on this page on the left-hand side is an enlargement
 9       taken from the Internet image of mark Y7 in the same
10       area.  On the right-hand side, the same area as we've
11       referred to on page 32 but enlarged.  That's taken from
12       an Internet copy of Shirley McKie's left thumbprint.
13           Again, Mr Moynihan, the image I have in my page 33
14       is a lot clearer than what's on the screen.
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  In fact, Mr Mackenzie, I think the advantage
16       of having the paper one was to enable everyone to follow
17       and realise in fact that the digital images are as poor
18       as they are.
19           What I have said, sir, to Mr Mackenzie is we have
20       found some other documents that we can get better copies
21       by resubmitting them to Epic to have them copied in
22       higher resolution.  It's obvious that Mr Mackenzie's
23       presentation would benefit from that exercise.
24       Unfortunately, that will have to be done after he has
25       completed his evidence.  I do apologise to Mr Mackenzie.
page 102
 1   THE CHAIRMAN:  Should we give it the number that it would
 2       otherwise have been given had it been clear so that it
 3       can be interposed at that number?
 4   MR MOYNIHAN:  I think, sir, what is likely to happen is that
 5       the whole production will be recreated and we will be
 6       able to follow very easily because what has happened
 7       with other productions of this type is that what we have
 8       just now as CO0059 will become CO0059H, the H standing
 9       for higher resolution but then the internal pagination
10       will remain the same.  So what we are looking at just
11       now is CO0059.034 and that will be reproduced, I am
12       sure, in better clarity in due course.
13           I do think, unfortunately, members of the public
14       will have difficulty seeing this but I think for those
15       of us who have booklets it's a little clearer.
16   THE WITNESS:  As far as page 33 is concerned, I am quite
17       happy to replicate again what we have done on the
18       previous one but if you are satisfied and if you have
19       better images of this then the red dots certainly on
20       what I have here stand out.  You can hardly see them on
21       the screen.  If you're happy, I'm quite happy to go
22       through and try and label them as was on that screen but
23       they are certainly clear on the hard copy, a lot
24       clearer.
25   MR MOYNIHAN:  I think, Mr Mackenzie, it is probably
page 103
 1       sufficient if you, sir, can see them in the book form.
 2   THE CHAIRMAN:  I can, yes.
 3   MR MOYNIHAN:  We will come back then.  I do apologise to the
 4       members of public who are having to watch this.  It is
 5       entirely our fault that the image is as poor as it is
 6       but if we save time and just proceed.
 7   THE WITNESS:  Okay.
 8           The reason for doing this again was to utilise the
 9       material that was available so to try and illustrate
10       that this particular group of characteristics I used
11       both what I could glean from the Strathclyde photograph
12       and also from the Internet version of Y7.  So,
13       basically -- I was going from both angles, basically,
14       here's material on the Internet and here's from the
15       glossy photograph to try and get the best illustration.
16       So I've included both.
17           Page 34, 35 and 36 are images again taken from the
18       Internet of mark Y7 and these show what has been again
19       termed the brush mark or striations, whatever, basically
20       running horizontally across the mark.  I still
21       personally would like to have satisfaction of knowing
22       how this occurred and presumably the Inquiry would as
23       well, but I have to draw conclusions as to the actual
24       area that this occurs, in that in my opinion it occurs
25       directly above the fault line, as I have previously
page 104
 1       described.
 2           If I may just go off for a minute and explain how I
 3       first heard of another image and it was following the
 4       trial of Shirley McKie I was given the opportunity by
 5       Chief Superintendent Bell to view a note that had been
 6       taken by an officer from Strathclyde Police --
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Mackenzie, if I can try and deal with this
 8       lest we get ourselves into more difficulty.  If I
 9       understand you, please just answer yes or no: are you
10       going to suggest that the striation has been placed
11       there deliberately by someone to conceal the fault line?
12   THE WITNESS:  I'm saying that there's a coincidence that has
13       appeared across the fault line.  In the absence of
14       explanation that I can't make any other comment other
15       than it occurs directly above the fault line.
16   MR MOYNIHAN:  The second point is that -- let's be very,
17       very careful about this.  All that we know as a point of
18       history is that if we take as the last set of undamaged
19       photographs, Mr Kent's photographs are undamaged.
20       Correct?
21   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
22   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Zeelenberg's photographs are damaged?
23   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
24   MR MOYNIHAN:  From which the inference may be drawn that
25       some damage occurred between the dates of those two sets
page 105
 1       of photographs.
 2   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
 3   MR MOYNIHAN:  Mr Wertheim, sorry -- damage occurred between
 4       the dates between Mr Kent's photographs and
 5       Mr Wertheim's photographs.  Correct?
 6   THE WITNESS:  Correct.
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  But there is no evidence I suggest to you as
 8       to who actually damaged the mark.
 9   THE WITNESS:  No evidence has been brought forward.
10   MR MOYNIHAN:  It may be that from Dr Bleay's report that one
11       possibility is that it has been damaged as a result of
12       twine that was attaching a label to the exhibit between
13       those two dates.
14   THE WITNESS:  Okay.  If I could add on that point --
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  I want to be very clear.  Why I am trying to
16       stop you is I don't want to entertain conjecture about
17       the cause of the damage.
18   THE WITNESS:  I wasn't actually going to do that.
19   MR MOYNIHAN:  With that warning, please, continue.
20   THE WITNESS:  I was going to explain when my first knowledge
21       of a different version of the photograph had come to
22       mind.  That was all.  I had been given access to a
23       record that was taken in the High Court by a Strathclyde
24       police officer who -- Strathclyde, I think, in these
25       days, it was a Discipline Branch.  They are called ...
page 106
 1       whatever, personal ... I can't remember but they've
 2       renamed the department anyway.  Basically, they had an
 3       officer observing the proceedings for whatever reason
 4       and I was given sight of his notes and he had recorded
 5       in it that, it was at some point in Fiona McBride's
 6       evidence, that she had apparently noticed there was
 7       something different about Mr Wertheim's production when
 8       she was shown it and that was the level of my knowledge.
 9           So until such times as, I think it was at
10       Tulliallan, very briefly, at the end of the Tulliallan
11       presentation, very briefly, Mr Wertheim's production was
12       shown and later on that week -- it's in my statement --
13       I formally asked if I could actually examine that and
14       that's when I then -- that was confirmed that there was
15       a different photograph being used.  So that's the point
16       I just wanted to make.
17   MR MOYNIHAN:  The police officer whose notes you would have
18       seen would have been Inspector Carle, C-A-R-L-E.
19   THE WITNESS:  I do understand that is the name, yes.
20   MR MOYNIHAN:  We have access, as you understand, to his
21       notes.
22   THE WITNESS:  That was the chain of events, to put it into
23       context.
24           So what happened actually was, as I say, the IT
25       department had alerted us to items on the Internet,
page 107
 1       given me these various printouts and it was Mr Bell
 2       actually who -- because, prior to this page, I had done
 3       my analysis, my comparison against the Strathclyde
 4       material and also against the additional images of the
 5       thumbprints, the control print taken by Mr Wertheim, and
 6       I was going to just show these images from the Internet,
 7       the mark in the book unmarked.  It was Mr Bell that
 8       said, "Have a go and mark on the points that you can
 9       see", and again, probably for the same reason that I'd
10       said earlier on in my evidence, that I was wondering why
11       people, even on the Internet, couldn't see.  So I
12       thought, one, the Chief Superintendent was asking me to
13       do it.  I'll do what I can.  Hence on 34, 35, 36 there
14       are a series of red dots marking the characteristics in
15       the various clusters and that was a result of what I was
16       asked to do.
17           I think something that's actually very noticeable is
18       that, particularly on page 35 and 36, the area
19       previously described as the black blob, the contrast and
20       again in my original copies that I've been given from
21       the Internet actually show the ridge detail running
22       through this area.  There's a particular feature, if I
23       could actually refer to the characteristic, it's my
24       characteristic number 41, which is a bifurcation to the
25       right, and this is the one immediately above and along
page 108
 1       to the left of the Rosetta characteristic.
 2           For me, looking just recently within the last few
 3       days, the images on 35 and 36, in particular 36,
 4       actually show this bifurcation quite clearly on the
 5       mark.  I thought it was relevant.  I hadn't noticed this
 6       in my previous presentation but I actually noticed this
 7       and I thought that's relevant, I should bring that out,
 8       so I brought it out.
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  You will need to help us because for those of
10       us who have the benefit of something with the red dots
11       visible in page 36, all that we actually have is a polka
12       dot of dots.  We don't have any numbers.  So feature
13       number 41 that say is visible on page 36, is there some
14       way you can actually indicate?
15   THE CHAIRMAN:  Shall we bring up 36.  That is 41.
16   THE WITNESS:  That is 41.
17   MR MOYNIHAN:  If you have finished with that one,
18       Mr Mackenzie, if we save that particular image, please.
19   MISS BAHRAMI:  That's FI3009.14.
20   THE WITNESS:  Before I move back to the final part of the
21       presentation, which is the PowerPoint again, I should
22       add that when I came to this upper half I said that my
23       opinion was that this was at least two touches on the
24       upper half.
25           Now, the clusters that I've described, first of all,
page 109
 1       as 23 through to 28 is a separate touch from 38 through
 2       to 45, but within these characteristics there are
 3       actually common characteristics.  That's how I know it's
 4       more than one touch.
 5           The characteristics in question are, starting with
 6       the first group, 26, which is a bifurcation to the
 7       right, is in fact 41, a bifurcation to the right; 27,
 8       the ridge ending to the right, is in fact 44 which I
 9       have described before as a ridge ending downwards but
10       it's basically the same to the right; and 28, which is a
11       bifurcation to the right, is the same as 41, a
12       bifurcation to the right.
13   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sorry, you have said 26 is 41 --
14   THE WITNESS:  26 is 43.
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  Sorry you said 41.  26 is ...?
16   THE WITNESS:  43.
17   MR MOYNIHAN:  26 is 43 --
18   THE WITNESS:  27 is 44, 28 is 41.  So that's how I come to
19       the conclusion that's it at least in two parts in the
20       top.
21           Can we now return to the PowerPoint presentation.
22       You will remember prior to describing the features in
23       the upper half I also went on to describe the five
24       characteristics in that area.  I've also mentioned that
25       I have completed the ridgeology course as originated by
page 110
 1       Mr Ashbaugh and also taken cognisance of what the FBI
 2       have done in the way of third level detail.  This area,
 3       which I mentioned right at the beginning of my
 4       presentation, actually was standing out in my initial
 5       analysis as an area of interest.  I thought that given
 6       the knowledge and the processes of illustrating third
 7       level detail, which includes edgeoscopy, the actual
 8       shape of the ridges, then I wanted to look at this area
 9       in more detail.
10           What I have done, because of trying to match like
11       with like and scale with scale, there's some difficulty
12       in trying to enlarge a mark taken from the police
13       material and reconciling it with images of Ms McKie's
14       left thumb from the Internet.  But as Mr Wertheim had
15       provided images of the mark and images of the left
16       thumbprint on the Internet, I thought the best way
17       forward for this was to actually use like with like.
18           So what I then did was -- I think it's on your
19       system somewhere -- but I actually show an example like
20       this (indicated) which actually shows an area to the
21       right of mark 7 taken from one of the Internet images
22       and I've put the red circle on, which is the same area
23       as circled on the PowerPoint here, to capture the same
24       area as within that circle in here (indicated).  Then on
25       the same area, which is off to the right of this plain
page 111
 1       impression on the police plain impression shown here,
 2       it's actually off the edge but shown, which I've already
 3       described when I went through these five
 4       characteristics, the appropriate area from Ms McKie's
 5       left thumbprint taken from the Internet.
 6           So in other words Internet mark (indicated);
 7       Internet left thumb (indicated) so as to accommodate
 8       scaling the same.
 9   MR MOYNIHAN:  If you could just give me a second, what I
10       will do is ask them to be brought across to us so we can
11       have a look.
12   THE WITNESS:  If not, you can take these.
13   MR MOYNIHAN:  If not, what we will do is put them up on the
14       projector so everyone can see them.
15           I think these are actually on your PowerPoint
16       presentation so we should be able to bring it up as part
17       of it.
18   THE WITNESS:  Not in that format.  That's why I was pointing
19       out so as you know exactly when we come to the next bit
20       of the PowerPoint where they were taken from.  So that's
21       actually evidence where they came from.
22   MR MOYNIHAN:  If you allow me just a moment, please.
23       (Pause)
24           They are apparently at the end, for us, of CO0059.
25       They are not in anyone's notebook, I'm afraid, or at
page 112
 1       least not in mine.  Could we just go to the end.
 2       (Pause)
 3           Mr Mackenzie, what I will do is to save time I will
 4       ask for these to be displayed --
 5   THE WITNESS:  Can you take these off the screen because it's
 6       rather --
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  They have to come off the screen anyway.  So
 8       what I will ask is these be displayed and will begin
 9       with one that is on the edge of the fingerprint of
10       Ms McKie.
11   THE WITNESS:  Sorry, mr Moynihan, would it not be better for
12       me to run through the sequence and then you glean the
13       material after?
14   THE CHAIRMAN:  Are those the ones you are speaking about?
15       Is that what you are speaking about?
16   THE WITNESS:  It's just the introduction to where the
17       material came from, the explanation of it.  This is the
18       second image.
19   MR MOYNIHAN:  Miss Gilpin has an encyclopaedic knowledge of
20       these documents.  She tells me that TC0019 is what we're
21       looking for.  TC0019.
22           There's apparently four sheets, Mr Mackenzie, on
23       here.  So what we will do is scroll through the four
24       sheets so you can see what we have and then you can tell
25       us which of them you wish to use.
page 113
 1           That is TC0019, page 1.  If we go to page 2, page 2
 2       has a tracing; page 3 would seem to have the edge of the
 3       print, which is one of the sheets you have shown me; and
 4       page 4, another tracing.
 5   THE WITNESS:  It may not be the order I take them in but
 6       that's the material we're talking about.
 7   MR MOYNIHAN:  In that case if you tell me we will scroll
 8       back through them and you tell us to stop at the image
 9       you want to begin with.  It is obviously not 4.  Go back
10       to 3.
11           Is that one of the images you want to talk about or
12       the alternative, I think, is number 1.
13   THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's number 1, that's number 2.  So
14       that's number 1.
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  So you want to start at number 1.  TC0019.001.
16   THE WITNESS:  My explanation is to prove the audit trail, if
17       you like, of where that came from and that is the area
18       that I then go on to enlarge.
19           Now, I can't remember the amount of enlargement,
20       whether it's from the actual size mark but, from memory,
21       from the actual size mark up to the image I'm going to
22       show you shortly is something like about 26 times
23       enlarged.  That's somewhere between 22/26 times enlarged
24       is the recommended size for examining ridgeology in
25       Mr Ashbaugh's term or ridgeoscopy, et cetera.  That's
page 114
 1       the approximate or optimum size to enlarge.  So I can't
 2       remember exactly how this was.  It may have been 22, 23.
 3       It may have been as much as 26 from the actual size but,
 4       as I say, this is purely for the audit trail.
 5           This came from one of the Internet images supplied
 6       by Mr Wertheim of the mark Y7.  Then the next one, which
 7       I have as number 2, is the appropriate area taken from
 8       one of the Internet thumb marks of Shirley McKie, again,
 9       used within the presentation book, the appropriate area.
10           3 is going back to the mark, the area of the mark,
11       and 4 is going back to the area from the left
12       thumbprint.  So that establishes where the material came
13       from, if you can take that away now and I'll go on to
14       the PowerPoint.
15   MR MOYNIHAN:  Again, you need to tell us, Mr Mackenzie,
16       which page and I think what you have to do is click
17       through the pages to resume where you wish.
18   THE WITNESS:  That is basically an enlargement from what I
19       have shown you on what I referred to as page 1 a minute
20       ago.  That's the edge of the mark enlarged up and, from
21       memory, this is something in the region of 22 to 26
22       times enlarged of the actual size mark.
23           I think I should add at that point before I forget
24       my train of thought that within these courses it's been
25       suggested that applying third level detail in this very
page 115
 1       fine, drilling down to this level of detail can normally
 2       just be applied within marks of a small number of
 3       ridges.  You wouldn't expect to, for example, to take to
 4       the extremes a palm-print, to try and enlarge it 22/26
 5       times, a whole palm-print.  So actually to get within
 6       accuracy, within a small number of ridges, the only
 7       other factor to remember is that Y7 is a chance
 8       impression and we know it's already subject to major
 9       distortion and twisting; whereas the version, the police
10       version and also Mr Wertheim's version, is a controlled
11       print taken in a controlled situation and may not have
12       the same distortion or will probably not have the same
13       distortion as the mark, where you would expect to have.
14       So just to add that is another element that's brought
15       into account in the overall picture I'm giving here.
16           So that's the area highlit in there.  If there was
17       anything I would have done again in this I wouldn't have
18       actually highlit it in yellow because I think it
19       detracts a little from it but it was done with the best
20       of intentions, to segment that area within the bigger
21       image for illustration purposes.  If I was to go back
22       and start again, I wouldn't have been putting the yellow
23       on there.  You can probably see why.
24           So take a few minutes to actually take in the detail
25       with your eye, everybody, experts and non-experts.  Take
page 116
 1       in the area that I've talked about.  I've already
 2       described some of the features in second level within
 3       there.  Just take a second or two to have a look at
 4       that.  (Pause)
 5           We will move on to the next slide.  Again, this is
 6       taken from my page 2 of my material and it's the edge of
 7       one of the Internet thumbs shown in the book showing the
 8       appropriate area and, again, enlarged up to the same
 9       level of enlargement as the one from the mark.  Again,
10       take a few seconds out for your eye to take in the
11       detail.  (Pause)
12           As you can see, this area we're talking about maybe
13       coming in from the edge probably about five ridges plus
14       parts of ridges at the edges but certainly the central
15       part of this is we're talking about an area of five
16       ridges and enlarging to this level you start to talk
17       about ridge units, et cetera, like Mr Wertheim, I think
18       mentioned.
19           The next slide is a side-by-side again.  On the
20       left-hand side it's from my page 1 and on the right-hand
21       side is from my page 2 of this material.  As I've
22       explained already, a slight curvature in the left-hand
23       image due to it being a chance impression and my
24       knowledge that the mark is twisted somewhat and the
25       controlled impression is slightly straighter, the ridge
page 117
 1       formation.
 2           You will see what I meant about not highlighting in
 3       yellow.  In hindsight I would have put a circle round
 4       before these markings were on and shown the area like
 5       that (indicated).  So that's page 1 now with tracings
 6       done round the shapes of the ridges, the ridge units
 7       themselves.
 8           I've put descriptors on here for my own purposes of
 9       how I would describe some of these features.  We've
10       already spoken about indicating with the cursor here and
11       that's like two ridges in from the left on this image is
12       the shape of Italy without the heel or the sock which we
13       saw quite clearly in my earlier illustrations on a
14       smaller scale.
15           I've then talked over time about this next part here
16       (indicated).  I've described it in the past as a bit
17       like a foetus, it's got a head and a body.  Someone else
18       suggested to me -- it was actually somebody in my family
19       that referred to this and they actually said it's maybe
20       a bit like Venus without the arms.
21           If we move to the right, a prominent shape here
22       (indicated).  How exactly I would describe this part I'm
23       indicating here I'm not quite sure, maybe a bit like a
24       serpent, this being the head (indicated) and immediately
25       above that I liken this to possibly like a valve within
page 118
 1       an engine, a valve coming down from the top, the shape
 2       of this.  So that's the kind of names, if you like, that
 3       I've got in my head of these particular features.
 4           Likewise, I then traced round the edges from the
 5       image that was shown on page 2 and I've now shown on
 6       page 4 and that's what this is.  We have the sock, we
 7       have the foetus, we have the serpent, we have the valve
 8       and the stem of the valve up here (indicated) and then
 9       we have them side-by-side.  The mark on the left, the
10       left thumbprint on the right.  The sock or Italy, the
11       foetus or Venus.  The foetus, the serpent, the serpent,
12       the valve and the stem of the valve.
13           Also another prominent feature is two out to the
14       right of the serpent.  You can see the ridge units
15       joining in a bit like a kind of delta formation, if you
16       like, where there's an indentation where one unit joins
17       the other and it's very prominent up here (indicated).
18           Also, another feature is a very square edge.  On the
19       ridge between the foetus or Venus and the serpent there
20       is the particular shape of the edge of this ridge unit
21       which is very square, a bit like a table top, I would
22       suggest, as opposed to the more irregular rounded
23       features of each ridge unit which surrounds or they
24       surround pores and on the ridge here (indicated) between
25       the foetus or Venus and the serpent, again in the same
page 119
 1       area, the very square appearance of this ridge unit.
 2           Going down to the bottom of the print on the right,
 3       again, a square shape appearing as this left-hand ridge
 4       joins on to the ridge below the sock point.  Equally, on
 5       the mark side, this squareness where it comes to nearly
 6       join on to the ridge below the sock feature.
 7           I then took a tracing from the control print because
 8       that's the more accurate one for recording of the detail
 9       and bearing in mind that there is a twist on the mark
10       then that's taken into account.  I took a transparency
11       tracing over this side (indicated), which is the next
12       slide, so that is a replica of that (indicated).  We can
13       see over here because of the slight twist in the print,
14       very marginally, a difference in the position of this
15       and you will get that possibly a ridge/half a ridge
16       slight difference between a scene of crime mark and a
17       control print.  That's what we were taught on courses
18       and going from the FBI that there will be these marginal
19       differences.  It was due to that knowledge that I
20       gleaned from two different parties, from Mr Ashbaugh and
21       the FBI, I applied this to this presentation.
22           Over and above my original initial assessment and
23       the comparison of the lower half of the mark, this along
24       with the various areas in the upper half of the mark led
25       me to conclusively come to the opinion that this mark
page 120
 1       was made by Shirley McKie and no other donor.
 2           That concludes my presentation for Y7.
 3   THE CHAIRMAN:  Thank you.
 4           Mr Moynihan, ten minutes, if you would like to
 5       begin.
 6                     Examined by MR MOYNIHAN
 7   Q.  I can start.
 8           Mr Mackenzie, you have indicated just by the title
 9       of your presentation, "McKie case revisited", do I take
10       it that the detailed work that was carried out by you
11       was something of an investigation after Ms McKie was
12       acquitted to see if you could reconcile, in a sense, the
13       evidence that was given by your colleagues on behalf of
14       the prosecution and the evidence given by Mr Wertheim?
15   A.  I didn't take into account -- and I'll come back to this
16       in a minute -- the politics of it, if you like, maybe
17       that's not the right phrase, but I didn't take into
18       account what my colleagues had taken to court.
19           It was because of the events that happened in that
20       particular trial, the outcome of it and the way in which
21       the evidence was presented by SCRO in general and the
22       way that Mr Wertheim presented his evidence to the jury
23       and, obviously, the jury were presented with two
24       opposing views and styles of presentation.
25           Obviously, the outcome and some of the outspill from
page 121
 1       it, the inferences and a lot has been written about it,
 2       I think has been touched on it, about cropping of marks,
 3       ignoring the upper section, et cetera, and that was an
 4       area that obviously struck a chord.  I think that's
 5       recorded -- and it's recorded in the Inquiry -- that in
 6       the meeting that we had with Mr Murphy after the trial,
 7       that that was an area that was discussed about the
 8       non-explanation, if you like, of the upper half of the
 9       area or the suggestion, just because the SCRO officers
10       chose, which was the norm for any enlargement-type
11       situation, to highlight the area that they identified.
12       There was nothing untoward in that but, because of all
13       the inferences that were going on and being aired
14       publicly, then obviously as far as I was concerned and
15       obviously my bosses were concerned that, as soon as it
16       was possible to get the material back from the court,
17       which didn't occur until early August 1999, then that
18       would be the first opportunity to revisit the case and
19       that's basically how I titled it.
20   Q.  What you were trying to do was, among other things, to
21       revisit it to see if an explanation could be given for
22       the points of difference that Mr Wertheim had identified
23       in his evidence?
24   A.  Well, obviously that was an area that had been highlit
25       and very publicly highlit.
page 122
 1   Q.  When you yourself studied Y7 you did so twice in
 2       February 1997?
 3   A.  Yes.
 4   Q.  You found a maximum of 13 points in sequence and
 5       agreement.  Those were in the lower half?
 6   A.  Yes.
 7   Q.  You discounted the upper half due to your perception at
 8       the time that it was affected by distortion?
 9   A.  Correct.
10   Q.  However, when you revisited the matter in the last
11       quarter of 1999, you discovered that not only were there
12       features in Y7, the upper part, but in fact you could
13       find at least 23 points in the upper part in common
14       between Y7 and Ms McKie?
15   A.  Let me just check that again.  It doesn't sound right,
16       23.
17   Q.  If you look at page 11, you have a total of 45, 22 of
18       which (1 through to 22) were in the area of your
19       original charting.
20   A.  I think you are including 33 to 37 in that.  I've
21       explained that obviously with the benefit of having
22       other material at that later stage that -- and I've
23       explained to you as well the distortion, the swivelling,
24       as I describe it, of the lower half but it is confirmed
25       that that area, 33 to 37, is in sequence and agreement
page 123
 1       with the lower half.
 2           Obviously that area wasn't available for me in 1997
 3       with the material that was available to me.
 4   Q.  Let us just have a look at that.  If we bring up
 5       Mr Zeelenberg's charting, FI0170A and perhaps do the
 6       usual, bring it up twice.
 7           In your phase 2 comment on Mr Zeelenberg, you are
 8       one of the individuals who has pointed out that the
 9       Rosetta characteristic is, in Y7, the feature that
10       Mr Zeelenberg has numbered 11?
11   A.  No, number 14.
12   Q.  No, number 11 on Y7.
13   A.  Sorry, number 11, yes, on Y7.
14   Q.  The Rosetta characteristic you are saying has come from
15       the area on Ms McKie's print which is numbered 14?
16   A.  Correct.
17   Q.  Yes?
18   A.  (Nodded)
19   Q.  Do you know the source of the image of Y7 and the source
20       of the fingerprint of Ms McKie that you have displayed
21       before you?
22   A.  My understanding is that that's an original on the
23       left-hand side of Y7 and I think I'm correct in saying
24       that that would be the plain impression from the first
25       form I looked at.
page 124
 1   Q.  So the image of Y7 is a reproduction from the negative
 2       of the picture of Y7 that your colleagues signed when
 3       they first identified Y7 as Ms McKie's print.  Yes?
 4   A.  Yes.
 5   Q.  The fingerprint that we have brought up as part of the
 6       comparative exercise is similarly a fingerprint taken
 7       from the form available at the same time.  That is the
 8       form that is date stamped 7th February.  Yes?
 9   A.  I don't know what it's date stamped.
10   Q.  If you take it from me it's date stamped 7th February,
11       it would have been available, therefore, and would have
12       been among the material you first studied in
13       February 1997?
14   A.  If you can clarify that that is the form that I looked
15       at on the Monday, I think somewhere along the line in
16       the Inquiry did I not hear that there was another set of
17       prints?
18   Q.  There's multiple sets of prints.  If I show you -- I
19       will show you ST -- take these two down just now and
20       bring up ST0004H.  We will proceed on.  That's a form.
21       The date of the fingerprint, the elimination form, is
22       6th February 1997.
23   A.  Okay.
24   Q.  It's date stamped 7th February 1997?
25   A.  Okay.
page 125
 1   Q.  Are you willing to accept from me that the fingerprint
 2       that's used as part of the comparative exercise is a
 3       version that's shown on this form of Ms McKie's left
 4       print?
 5   A.  If you tell -- I wasn't party to selecting that for the
 6       exercise but if you're telling me that's the one.  The
 7       only point I was making was that, for the first time
 8       ever, I learned that there was possibly -- as far as I
 9       was aware there was only two sets of elimination prints,
10       the two that I looked at, but I think somewhere in the
11       Inquiry I heard -- and I don't know whether it was round
12       about that date -- of another set of elims being taken.
13       Am I wrong in that?
14   Q.  I am aware of prints taken on 6th February that you see.
15       I 'm aware of prints being taken on the second occasion
16       when you looked at the print, would that 18th February?
17       I am aware of prints taken the following year in
18       March 1998 on her arrest.  Three sets of prints taken by
19       the police.
20   A.  That's fine.  I'm satisfied with that.  I just thought
21       earlier in the Inquiry there was questions put to some
22       witnesses about another comparison having been -- am I
23       confusing that with another set of marks?  There was
24       something ...
25   Q.  I think you are confused.  I don't know the origin of
page 126
 1       the confusion.
 2   A.  Just, if you are saying there only were two elim forms
 3       and the arrest form I'm satisfied that that would be the
 4       one I looked at first of all.
 5   Q.  The reason for my question then is, if we go back,
 6       please, to the Zeelenberg copy just for clarity, that's
 7       FI0170A twice, if these are, as I've said to you, the
 8       materials that were available to you and your colleagues
 9       as at 17th February 1997 that material would have shown
10       as calling for an explanation the Rosetta characteristic
11       clearly in the upper half of the mark.
12   A.  As I said before, I recognise the major distortion in
13       the upper half of the mark but I also recognise that the
14       mark, particularly due to the fault line, was in more
15       than one piece and, as far as my comparison was
16       concerned, I chose, as my colleagues appear to have done
17       for the court case, they have chosen the lower half,
18       below the fault line, and I satisfied myself both on
19       17th and 18th February on that area because I was
20       satisfied that that was the area that could be clearly
21       used for the comparison and at that stage that was it.
22   Q.  Mr Mackenzie, what that then means is that you chose to
23       concentrate on the lower part and to ignore, at that
24       time, the upper part.
25   A.  I think I already explained that.  My assessment of the
page 127
 1       whole mark, there was movement in it, there was
 2       distortion in the top and my target area and my
 3       comparison took place below the fault line which I
 4       recognised from day 1 and across, as far as I could go
 5       on the material that was available to me on these two
 6       dates.
 7   Q.  If you concentrate on a target area which has some
 8       similarities, you must still consider is there a
 9       difference anywhere else on the mark.  Correct?
10   A.  Okay.
11   Q.  And the Rosetta characteristic is a difference?
12   A.  In that area, yes.
13   Q.  Calling for an explanation?
14   A.  Not at that moment in time, no.
15   Q.  Why not?
16   A.  I think I've now -- this is the third time.  I was total
17       satisfied -- my assessment of this from day 1 was that
18       the -- and I've explained to you, you've got to take
19       into cognisance all the features that you see on that
20       and the fault line for me under a glass, on the
21       comparator, was so distinct that it allowed me to
22       determine that there was major disruption above and I
23       think I've now gone on to prove that there is major
24       disruption on the upper half, but the lower half allowed
25       me to give a firm, I think you've used the term,
page 128
 1       100 per cent confirmation on the area below the fault
 2       line that the donor of this mark was Shirley McKie.
 3   Q.  This will be the last question for this afternoon.  You
 4       have reached a conclusion of 100 per cent certainty by,
 5       in effect, closing your eyes at this stage to the upper
 6       part of the mark, have you not?
 7   A.  I'm not closing my eyes.  I have taken cognisance of
 8       everything that was there and I'm able to explain from
 9       my memory -- and I think my memory's actually very good
10       compared with many others that we've heard -- but from
11       my memory I know the area that I worked on, and the
12       reason for excluding it at that moment in time was that
13       it was severely disturbed and also I was working with
14       two rolled impressions that were smudged and one the
15       first -- well, obviously one rolled impression the first
16       day and then a clearer, if you tell me this is the one
17       here, the plain impression and then on the second day
18       another rolled impression that was smudged and then
19       another plain impression.
20           So within that narrow window of opportunity from
21       materials, being asked to give an opinion, I gave my
22       opinion on what was available that day and obviously,
23       being given the benefit at a later stage of seeing other
24       materials, I was actually then able to further confirm,
25       if you can confirm more than 100 per cent, because I was
page 129
 1       100 per cent certain on 17th February and 18th
 2       February 20... sorry, 1997 -- moved on ten years -- 1997
 3       and I say 100 per cent and absolutely no doubts about
 4       it.
 5   Q.  Mr Mackenzie, I said the last one was the last question
 6       but I will just follow this logically through.  On 17th
 7       February 1997, how could you have been 100 per cent
 8       certain of the identity of these two marks without a
 9       fully reasoned explanation for the Rosetta
10       characteristic?
11   A.  My fully reasoned explanation, based on my experience,
12       from examining a mark like that -- which I've said from
13       the beginning was unnatural, despite what other experts
14       have said, unnatural in its overall form.  In fact,
15       depending on the orientation that you see of this mark
16       with various inputs, in fact the one in my book I
17       suggest you turn it maybe about 45 degrees, and the area
18       at the top stands out for me like a beacon as being
19       separate from that area.  The red flag, as we now call
20       it, that fault line was the key to this.
21           Now, I have said, and I'm on record at Tulliallan in
22       saying, that if this mark was in fact one piece this is
23       not Shirley McKie's print.  But from day 1 I'm totally
24       satisfied that the fault line here was the key feature
25       and that's what has I'll probably use the word irked me
page 130
 1       somewhat that other people who may or may not have
 2       seen -- I don't know what material they have seen but
 3       they have come to the judgments not taking cognisance of
 4       this fault line.  I can only speak for myself.  I took
 5       cognisance of the fault line there from my experience,
 6       from the overall assessment of the whole mark, because I
 7       was looking at everything that was there.
 8           I take your point the Rosetta characteristic was
 9       there, but the level of detail available to me in the
10       lower half of that mark on 17th and 18th February 1997
11       led me to my conclusions which, after all this time and
12       with the benefit of looking at other material, I know I
13       came to a correct decision at that time 100 per cent.
14   THE CHAIRMAN:  I think we should stop now and we will meet
15       again at 10.00 tomorrow, please.
16   (4.07pm)
17        (Adjourned until 10.00 am the following morning)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25