page 1 1 Friday, 9th October 2009 2 (10.00 am) 3 JOHN NEIL MACLEOD (sworn) 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr MacLeod, could you give me your full names 5 so that we have them on the record. 6 A. John Neil MacLeod. 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Please take a seat, Mr MacLeod. 8 Examined by MR MOYNIHAN 9 Q. Good morning, Mr MacLeod. 10 A. Good morning. 11 Q. What you will find is the microphone in front of you is 12 not very sensitive, just directly in front of you, so 13 you will have to keep it relatively close. 14 A. Okay. 15 Q. What I want to do is to look with you at some general 16 points in relation to the mark Y7. 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. In particular, trying to look at its location and 19 orientation as a mark. 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. For reasons that we will come to, I am not going to go 22 into the detail of your comparison of Y7 itself. Others 23 may do, but I am not going to do so. 24 A. Okay. 25 Q. What I am going to do is to look at the detail of your page 2 1 comparison of QI2, again for reasons that will become 2 apparent. So that is a rough overview. 3 The second more general point which should be 4 mentioned is that you yourself have prepared a 5 PowerPoint presentation; is that correct? 6 A. I have, yes. 7 Q. I have also indicated to you, because I spoke to you 8 first thing this morning, that because I have prepared 9 on a different basis, I for my part am not going to go 10 through the PowerPoint but it is available should it be 11 needed. 12 A. Okay. 13 Q. I am sorry for that. It is probably going to be faster 14 if I proceed in my order. 15 A. I would imagine so, yes. 16 Q. Thank you. 17 What I am going to do is to begin with your first 18 report or at least the first report to which I have 19 access and it is SG0635. It will be brought up on the 20 screen. This is a report which we see from the cover 21 page has in the bottom right-hand corner a date, 22 July 2004. 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Is this your first report? 25 A. Yes. page 3 1 Q. If we look, please, in page 2 of that document, you set 2 out at the middle the instructions that you were given. 3 You were instructed by a lady in the office of the 4 solicitor to the then Scottish Executive -- 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. -- to consider whether Fingerprint Officers took 7 reasonable care when identifying a particular print 8 involved in the case of Shirley McKie. Then you say 9 against the Strathclyde Joint Police Board Scottish 10 Ministers and others. 11 So by this stage there was a claim for damages; is 12 that correct? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Just from the terms of the instruction, since they were 15 asking whether or not the officers had taken reasonable 16 care, one might wonder if -- and this is no more than 17 looking at the possibility that a certain lead was being 18 given to you as a Fingerprint Officer -- that it might 19 carry an implication that the Executive was regarding 20 this matter as already a mis-identification and asking 21 you if it was simply a mistake or something more than a 22 mistake. 23 Did you take any necessary implication when you 24 started your work as to whether Y7 had been correctly 25 identified or incorrectly identified? page 4 1 A. From the paragraph there that you just read out, I 2 really didn't take the view that it had already been 3 decided that it was not an identification. I didn't 4 take that view but the implication is there. 5 Q. So when you were looking at Y7, did you regard its 6 proper identification as -- 7 A. I did, yes. 8 Q. Did you think a completely open question? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. You do set out, if I go to -- stop there sorry. It is 11 page 5 digitally. You set out there very clearly the 12 documents that you were shown by the Scottish Executive 13 solicitors? 14 A. Yes. I've got page 4 on the screen at the moment. 15 Q. Yes, I apologise. What you will find is that because 16 the front page of your report when it has been copied 17 here is page 1 for us. If you look at the top very top 18 left-hand corner, you will see a code SG0635.005. 19 Do you see that at the very top left-hand corner 20 just above your text? 21 A. Oh, right, off the page? 22 Q. Yes. 23 A. I see it. 24 Q. If I just explain to you, because it will happen a 25 number of times this morning, that is an electronic page 5 1 reference for the computer. So I will tend to use 2 electronic references. 3 A. Okay. 4 Q. On your report you have set out a number of documents 5 that you were shown. It happens to be paragraph 5 or 6 section 5 of your report. 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. (a) is a document I will come back to shortly, the mark 9 worksheet BY31, 5A? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. I've just noticed that in some of your later reports, 12 even though paragraph numbers change in later reports 13 you still refer to some documents that you have seen by 14 reference to these original numbers. Would that be 15 correct? 16 A. It would be, yes. 17 Q. So 5A is the mark worksheet BY31. In addition you were 18 given at (b) a document described as production 189, a 19 book containing photographs of the crime scene mark and 20 the left thumbprint of Shirley McKie. So you had access 21 to that? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. If I also go on just to indicate a few, not all, at 24 paragraph (g) you mention that you had a 47-page 25 document entitled, "Scottish Criminal Record Office page 6 1 Fingerprint Bureau McKie case revisited"? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. That we have seen as a presentation by Mr Mackenzie. 4 You also had in paragraph (k) a report by Mr Rudrud and 5 Mr Zeelenberg? 6 A. I did, yes. 7 Q. Indeed, as we will see later you come to refer to some 8 of the details by numbering that Mr Rudrud and 9 Mr Zeelenberg used, just for consistency? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. You had at (l) a 3-page document from a Mr John Berry? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Then some statements, or precognitions as they are 14 sometimes referred to in Scotland, (m) to (p) on the 15 page from a number of Scottish Criminal Record Office 16 officers? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. So you had all of that material available to you? 19 A. I did, yes. 20 Q. If I turn, please, to page 12 of your report, we will 21 see at section 5 you set out your comparison. 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. The reason for my next question is it can be seen from 24 even this page that before one reaches section 5 of your 25 report, what you have done, as we see at the top of this page 7 1 page, is a heading, "Examination of exhibits continued"? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. What you have actually narrated in your report is the 4 information you deduced from the variety of sources you 5 had been shown? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Then you come to your comparison of the mark? 8 A. That's correct. 9 Q. Can you recollect, Mr MacLeod, if, when you were first 10 instructed, you yourself simply made a comparison of Y7 11 against Shirley McKie or had you read some of the other 12 reports before you made your -- 13 A. No, I hadn't seen any reports at the time I first looked 14 at the marks. 15 Q. When you first looked at the mark Y7 -- I'll just take 16 it in that stage -- when you looked at it did you look 17 at the mark Y7 alone or did you look at the two 18 side-by-side? How did you carry out the work? 19 A. I had them side-by-side. I looked at Y7 first and from 20 a distance I could see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 points and I looked 21 at the left thumb of Shirley McKie and I saw 1, 2, 3, 4, 22 5 and thought, "This looks okay". Then when I looked 23 closer it was all wrong. Although they looked in a 24 similar sort of appearance, once I tried to relate them 25 with ridge counts and the actual characteristics it page 8 1 just -- it went wrong, completely wrong. 2 Q. In a completely lay sense, the first immediate look at 3 Y7 and Shirley McKie was that there were similarities, 4 as you say, five similarities? 5 A. That is what I thought initially, yes. 6 Q. The area of Y7 in which you saw these apparent 7 similarities, can you recollect the area? I will bring 8 it up for you just to assist you. What I will do, if 9 you give me just a second -- the reference that comes 10 most readily to mind for me is TS0006. We can give you 11 the original. It is a Mr Kent image and Mr Kent's 12 images were amongst the images you yourself used? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. The only reason I am going to this is it happens to be 15 an unmarked image so that we don't have any clues from 16 anybody else's markings. (Handed) 17 What we require to do is the usual, to rotate it 18 anticlockwise by 90 degrees and then I will enlarge it. 19 THE CHAIRMAN: If you just follow the screen I think you 20 will find it easier, Mr MacLeod. 21 A. Thank you. 22 MR MOYNIHAN: We can enlarge it even further if you wish. 23 A. That's fine. The area that I thought looked similar 24 initially was roughly there (indicated). 25 Q. If you are not familiar, there is an assistant beside page 9 1 you to help. 2 A. That was the approximate area. I mean, I'm going back 3 four or five years now but that were my initial 4 thoughts, there's something there that looks similar. 5 That only lasted a few seconds because when I put the 6 glass on it, the magnifying glass, it was all wrong. 7 Q. What I will do is we have an ability to record the image 8 you have just marked. So what I will do is just mark 9 that image and save it and then carry on with your 10 examination. 11 MISS BAHRAMI: That's image FI0910.01. 12 MR MOYNIHAN: If we can bring back up, please, on the 13 right-hand side a clean image -- in fact, let us just Y7 14 as it is just now and on the left-hand side if I could 15 go, please, to page 15 of the report. 16 Looking to the very end of your report, it is the 17 opinion section of your report, what I want to look at 18 is the penultimate paragraph. You say: 19 "In my opinion, given the quality of the mark even 20 if it had been made by Shirley McKie and I do not 21 believe that it was, it should not have been taken to 22 court." 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. That is what I just want to have a look at. I have, 25 Mr MacLeod, running in my head a distinction in relation page 10 1 to the initial assessment of marks such as Y7 that a 2 Fingerprint Examiner will assess it to determine if 3 there is enough detail in it to carry forward into a 4 comparison with suspects or neighbours or whoever else 5 so that a Fingerprint Examiner has to reach a view 6 whether there is sufficient detail in it to be capable 7 of reliable comparison. Is that fair? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. So far as Y7 itself is concerned, what conclusion did 10 you reach about the amount of detail in it and whether 11 it was suitable for comparison or not? 12 A. This was an unusual request to get and I didn't really 13 approach it with that in mind which I would normally do 14 with a crime mark. This was an inspection of someone 15 else's work and I just carried on as if it was possibly 16 identifiable. 17 Q. I do not want to -- as you say, first of all, this is a 18 number of years ago and, therefore, to some extent a 19 hypothetical exercise. I do not want to press your 20 evidence any further than you are comfortable and you 21 have had time to reflect. 22 I was wondering whether, by that sentence I brought 23 up, whether you had yourself formed the view about 24 whether the mark would, in ordinary fingerprint work -- 25 I accept what you say the task you had was an unusual page 11 1 one -- this is a mark that you would have carried 2 forward for comparison or simply discarded as being 3 insufficient in detail? 4 A. I think it's insufficient in detail. 5 Q. Thank you. Explain why. 6 A. Well, if the whole mark if I thought the mark was one 7 mark only, then -- could I say something, a little 8 aside, if you like? 9 Q. Yes. 10 A. There's a new standard in fingerprint identification 11 since this was produced and that is a non-numeric 12 standard. Now in the non-numeric standard this mark 13 would be identifiable. In the numeric standard, which 14 at the time in Scotland I understand needed 16 15 characteristics, I don't think it should have held up. 16 Q. You don't think it should have ...? 17 A. Held up in court. I don't think there was enough there. 18 Q. So you don't think there are enough details there to 19 find 16 points? 20 A. 16 clear characteristics, no. 21 Q. Forgive me, just to make sure there is no 22 misunderstanding. I am looking at this as an initial 23 assessment. You don't even think there are 16 clear 24 points in that mark, let alone 16 points in agreement 25 with Ms McKie's print? page 12 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. We will come just in a moment to this question about it 3 being a single mark or not. In fact, we will just go 4 directly to that. In your own report, if I take you 5 back, please, to section 5 -- if I go back to the 6 beginning I will find the section and just proceed 7 through. 8 You have a section where you are talking about the 9 comparison made -- I apologise, I have misread my notes. 10 If I go back to page 6 of the report, you are 11 looking at the exhibits and it is the last paragraph on 12 the page -- perhaps we could highlight that -- we will 13 just take this the stages: 14 "The mark is one of poor quality. It shows pressure 15 areas, movement and few well-defined characteristics." 16 So that is the point you were just making? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. You think there are few well-defined characteristics? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. "My first impression, when viewing the mark on the door 21 surround ...", so you actually saw the piece of wood 22 itself? 23 A. I did, yes. 24 Q. "... was that this mark had been made by a right thumb." 25 A. That was my first impression, yes. page 13 1 Q. I will ask you when we have gone through this to go 2 upstairs to look at the photograph you have seen this 3 morning. 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. "Closer inspection revealed that the mark was formed in 6 two parts, the top of the mark having been made by the 7 tip of a thumb and the lower part by the area of the 8 thumb from just below the core and upwards." 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. "The two parts of the mark, in my opinion, are likely to 11 have been made by the same thumb at more or less the 12 same time. This could have been caused by the thumb tip 13 coming in contact with the doorframe with some pressure 14 and the thumb then turning in a clockwise direction so 15 that the lower part of the mark was formed when the part 16 below the tip part of the mark to below the core was in 17 contact with the doorframe with less pressure." 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. "I cannot exclude the possibility the finger-mark may 20 have been formed by two separate digits but I consider 21 this the less likely option. When closely examined, the 22 mark shows that it was made with some movement of the 23 thumb causing some distortion where the upper and lower 24 parts forming the mark meet. There is also a difference 25 in the pressure applied by the thumb when the mark was page 14 1 left." 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. First of all, if I take it just in stages, your 4 assumption would be, it would seem, let's take the most 5 likely option, it's made by one digit. 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. I just happen to be holding up my right thumb but it is 8 coincidental I am holding up my right thumb. Your 9 assumption is that the top part of the mark is made 10 first; is that correct? 11 A. That's one option. 12 Q. Then the lower part of the mark you say is made on a 13 second contact, yes? 14 A. It could have been a second contact or a continuous 15 contact. 16 Q. In any event, what you are saying is that if we assume 17 the top part is made first, the lower part would be 18 after a clockwise motion of the thumb? 19 A. Correct, yes. 20 Q. Forgive me for this. If it had occurred in the opposite 21 order (namely, the bottom part deposited first and the 22 top part deposited second), would it follow that the 23 motion would, in fact, have been anticlockwise? 24 A. Absolutely right, yes. 25 Q. So whether it is clockwise or anticlockwise depends on page 15 1 the sequence of the deposits? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. If I can take down your report, please, and let us just 4 give ourselves TS0006.002. What is probably better to 5 do is simply to give ourselves a clean copy of the mark 6 and, again, if we rotate it. What I will do is 7 highlight, again, a part. I may have to highlight just 8 a little bit more of the picture. I have highlighted a 9 large section so that there are some other smudges and 10 whatever in the vicinity. Please feel free to enlarge 11 it further if you wish. 12 What I was looking for was an explanation by you of 13 what the telltale signs are for you in that mark that 14 this the product of more than one contact? 15 A. If I draw in roughly there (indicated), maybe the middle 16 part should be down a bit, the top half is one part of 17 the impression and the bottom half roughly is the bottom 18 part of the impression made by one, probable, thumb. 19 Q. If I could just stop you for clarity, first of all, I am 20 having a little difficulty hearing you. The microphone 21 is not as sensitive as one might wish. 22 Are you indicating, again without wishing to tie you 23 down to absolute accuracy, that the blue line you have 24 drawn across marks approximately the boundary between 25 the two contacts? page 16 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. What is there about the differences between the bit 3 above that line and the bit below that, to your eye, 4 suggests more than one contact? 5 A. Well, it's unnatural to have that sort of flow in a 6 thumb without there being a twist to the mark. The 7 ridges do appear to continue but the angle seems a bit 8 unnatural. 9 Q. Is there any particular section where you are 10 considering the angle of the ridges, in relative terms, 11 becomes unnatural? Can you point by an arrow maybe to 12 the area. 13 A. If you look above the left-hand half of the blue line, 14 the ridges there appear thinner, whereas the ridges 15 above that are much fatter, which can happen anyway but 16 that together with the angle it's twisted at, is just 17 not normal for a straight impression. 18 Q. So it's, first of all, the fact that if one goes -- 19 perhaps if I draw a second line you will see that 20 there's an ability to choose a different colour. If you 21 mark another area where there's ... 22 A. Roughly (indicated) the area between the green and blue 23 lines, the ridges there are much thinner, which would 24 indicate they might have been squeezed together as the 25 thumb's twisted. page 17 1 Q. So squeezing while the thumb twists? 2 A. Yes, a twist on the surface. 3 Q. You are indicating therefore the section that is 4 immediately to the right and above the blue line, are 5 you contrasting that where the ridges are thicker and 6 perhaps more spaced? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. So it is comparing the part within the angle of the 9 green and the blue with the opposite section of that 10 same area above the blue. 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. It was the relative thickness and angles of those 13 ridges? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. It so happens that whether it is considered as a single 16 contact or more than one contact, your conclusion was it 17 was not the thumbprint of Ms McKie; is that correct? 18 A. That's right. 19 Q. What, so far as your own analysis, is the significance 20 of it being the product of more than one contact? Does 21 that have a bearing on the reliability of the observable 22 characteristics or what? 23 A. No, it doesn't. 24 Q. So you just observe it seems to be the product of more 25 than one contact? page 18 1 A. No, no. I thought it was one thumb but twisted, either 2 that way or that way, (indicated) as you've already 3 described. The chances of it being two separate digits 4 can almost be ignored because of the continuous flow of 5 the ridges from one to the other. 6 Q. It also so happens that the TV monitor in front of you 7 is strategically placed in such a way that I can see the 8 hand movements you are making but I am afraid the 9 Chairman cannot. If you can just indicate? 10 A. If this is the piece of wood that the mark is on, the 11 thumb was either on it like that and twisted that way 12 (indicated) or the tip went first and it came down, 13 either anticlockwise or clockwise and I can't tell 14 which. 15 THE CHAIRMAN: Could you just describe it again slowly, so 16 that if you turn slightly round. I've seen it. 17 A. The thumb was approximately like so (indicated) and 18 twisted that way or the tip came in front first and it 19 went clockwise. 20 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 21 MR MOYNIHAN: I will not try to translate that into the 22 note. It is reasonably clear in the memory, whether it 23 is in a few months' time is another matter but at the 24 moment it is. 25 What I want to do is, before I take you up to see page 19 1 the piece of wood, I wanted to just pick up a question 2 about the orientation of the mark on the piece of wood. 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. First of all, we will save this image so that we know 5 where the green line was. 6 MISS BAHRAMI: FI0910.02. 7 MR MOYNIHAN: If I could go back, please, to the report 8 which is SG0635, page 6, and perhaps bring up page 6 and 9 7. 10 What we have done is read the paragraph on the 11 bottom left-hand side. It continues in the top right 12 and you say: 13 "This has caused some ridges, especially near the 14 bottom left side of the top of the mark, to be pressed 15 so close together as to be badly defined and unable to 16 be read." 17 You have just show us that as within the angle of 18 the green and the blue lines. 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. "When I examined the area of the mark between the core 21 and up towards the lower part of the tip, I considered 22 that the mark could have been made by a left thumb, 23 albeit the tip shows characteristics and ridge flow more 24 commonly found in a right thumb." 25 I just stop there. Your own natural impression had page 20 1 been that you were looking at a right thumb? 2 A. It was, yes. 3 Q. However, you concede the possibility that it is a left 4 thumb? 5 A. Well, it could be. 6 Q. Do you have a preference between the two yourself? 7 A. Yes: right thumb. 8 Q. We will look at that just in a moment. 9 Then you say this: 10 "Taking the height, position and the orientation of 11 the mark on the door surround into account I consider 12 that a left thumb could easily have left this mark. To 13 leave a right thumb in such a position I consider less 14 likely." 15 Your own preference would have been for a right 16 thumb? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. But looking at the orientation of it on the piece of 19 wood inclines you to the opposite view? 20 A. Yes. At that time I should say I wasn't aware on which 21 side of the door the piece of wood had come from. 22 Q. I am grateful to you because if I then take you to the 23 later report which you wrote, there is a bit of a clue 24 that you can follow through. If I take you to SG0705 25 and I want to bring up pages 8 and 9. This is your page 21 1 October 2005 report. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. What I have just been reading to you from your 2004 4 report has paragraphs -- it is now broken down into 5 numbered paragraphs, 44, 45 and 46? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. But there is a helpful addition in paragraph 46. If I 8 look at the last three lines or so -- I am not very good 9 with the highlighter but we can see roughly where it is: 10 "To leave a right thumb in such a position I 11 consider less likely." 12 Then you actually add on this occasion: 13 "This presupposes the RHS mentioned at 5a means 14 right-hand side when viewed from inside the bathroom." 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. So you are very clear. That was one of my reasons for 17 asking you earlier about the references because if we 18 look within your October 2005 report we will not find a 19 5a but 5a from your earlier report gives us a document 20 BY31. 21 We will just test it by looking at the document but 22 if you accept that from me? 23 A. Okay, I do. 24 Q. If I bring up then BY31, which is SG0385, page 18, and 25 if I just magnify, it is the first few entries. There page 22 1 are in the middle column marks listed Y7, Z7, A8, 2 et cetera? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Y7 is what we are interested in. What you are picking 5 up in your report is RHS? 6 A. That's right. 7 Q. Right-hand side, hallway, bathroom door surround, 5 feet 8 and an arrow up? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. As you say, you don't know right-hand side viewed from 11 which direction? 12 A. That's right. 13 Q. But you are assuming right-hand side -- if I reduce that 14 and go back to your report -- that the author meant 15 right-hand side when viewed from inside the bathroom? 16 A. It was a pure assumption. 17 Q. There's no criticism at all. An assumption had to be 18 made. It is just when we are trying to understand what 19 persuaded you to go to a left thumb one must have in 20 mind the mental picture you had of the physical 21 location. 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. What I want to do is to bring up a photograph and we 24 have to be careful in relation to this. Just before we 25 bring it up, I will double-check. What I am looking for page 23 1 is photograph L, so it should be ST0003.014. Before it 2 comes up I should just tell people it has been 3 pixillated out for reasons which will be apparent. 4 This is a photograph taken from the murder scene and 5 what we are looking at is the doorframe into the 6 bathroom. If I give you an arrow just now. The 7 doorframe that I am interested in or the door is the one 8 to which my arrow is pointed. That is the door into the 9 bathroom. 10 A. Yes, I see that. 11 Q. So when you were assuming that the author of the report 12 had referred to the right-hand side viewed from inside 13 the bathroom looking out, you were accordingly 14 assuming -- green seems to be my colour today -- that 15 the author was looking at the side that I've just 16 highlighted (indicated) by the green arrow? 17 A. Yes, that's correct. 18 Q. It was the assumption that Y7 had been placed in that 19 position which caused you in your report to move from it 20 being a right thumb to a left thumb? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. If I tell you that in fact the orientation is the 23 opposite (namely, that it is right-hand viewed from the 24 outside in so, therefore, the right-hand side is the 25 side where the red arrow is? page 24 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Would that cause you to reconsider whether it is 3 properly a right or a left thumb? 4 A. I would think it would be unnatural to put a left thumb 5 in that position while facing that post. 6 Q. You say when facing that post -- 7 A. Looking into the bathroom. 8 Q. So if the person who is depositing the mark is standing 9 in the hallway looking into the bathroom, you would 10 envisage it unnatural that it's a left thumb? 11 A. I would have thought so. 12 Q. If however one reverses the position of the donor of the 13 mark and puts the donor of the mark in the bathroom 14 coming out into the hall, do you have a comment on 15 whether it is natural or unnatural to find a left thumb 16 in that position of the red arrow? 17 A. Coming straight through the door the right thumb could 18 well have been positioned there where the red arrow 19 points. 20 Q. If I can just be absolutely clear, because I may be 21 misleading you, the red arrow simply gives me right and 22 left. 23 A. Okay. 24 Q. It is rather difficult to do this with an arrow. I 25 understand Y7 to be 5 feet up from the ground -- so page 25 1 again roughly where the tip of my pen is just now -- I 2 will show you it on the door itself and it is on the 3 inner facing of the door surround. So it is not outer 4 facing to the hall; it is on the section of the door 5 facing that points across the opening. 6 A. Okay. 7 Q. Again, if I make a mark now with a blue arrow -- I'm not 8 intending that to be the correct height -- it is roughly 9 in that position on the inner door facing. I will 10 demonstrate it for you on an actual door in the hall for 11 the moment. 12 Again, given that position, I will not return to the 13 question of the person on the outside going into the 14 bathroom because, as you say, that would envisage them 15 crossing their chest with their hand and their left 16 thumb going up. 17 If however they were coming out of the bathroom then 18 it would be their left hand that would be most adjacent 19 naturally to that section of the door frame? 20 A. Yes, it would. 21 Q. Does that have any bearing on whether you would regard 22 it as natural or unnatural for a left thumb to be there? 23 A. It could be there, yes. 24 Q. It could be? 25 A. It could be. page 26 1 Q. There is one other piece of information that I want to 2 refer to. If I go back, please, to the report and let 3 us looked at SG0705 and bring up pages 8 and 9 -- sorry, 4 we will save this. 5 MISS BAHRAMI: That's saved as FI0910.03. 6 MR MOYNIHAN: I should also thank you for preparing the 7 image for me in the first place. 8 If I go back to your report, SG0705, pages 8 and 9, 9 I am just trying to find -- there is a reference here 10 that I have lost. 11 Did you have also available to you a report by the 12 Scottish Criminal Record Office about the orientation of 13 the mark? Do you recollect that? If I show you the 14 document ... could we go, please, to page 10 of the 15 document. I will just go directly to the document I was 16 going to ask you about. There's a report by the 17 Scottish Criminal Record Office dated 27th March and it 18 is DB0004, page 4. This is a report by the Scottish 19 Criminal Record Office officers. They say: 20 "From examination of the photographed impression 21 itself and the examination of the locus photograph of 22 the impression Y7 in situ it was ascertained that the 23 top of the left thumbprint which was identified was 24 facing in an inward direction relative to the bathroom." 25 Do you recollect that? page 27 1 A. I don't recollect that but I must have seen it. 2 Q. So far as the tip facing inwards of the bathroom, you 3 have now seen the photograph I have just shown -- 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. -- do you have any comment about the tip facing inward 6 of the bathroom? 7 A. Yes, not inwards 90 degrees but certainly sort of 8 10.00/11.00, something of that nature, towards the 9 left-hand side, which would be in if the mark is on the 10 right-hand. 11 Q. If we go back to the saved image with the various 12 arrows, the last saved image from today with the arrows. 13 Are you assuming that the author of the report I just 14 referred to is thinking that the tip of the thumb is 15 orientated pointing into the bathroom or pointing coming 16 out of the bathroom? 17 A. Into the bathroom. 18 Q. Into the bathroom? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Again, we have taken it that if the individual who 21 deposits it is walking into the bathroom, it is a rather 22 unnatural position for a left thumb to be positioned 23 because he or she would have require to have a hand 24 across the chest? 25 A. Exactly. page 28 1 Q. And the door would get in the way as well? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Whereas a person coming out of the bathroom towards the 4 hall, it's more naturally that the right thumb is 5 closest to the doorframe. If they are coming out, would 6 you expect the tip to be pointed into or out of the 7 bathroom or do you have no view on that? 8 A. I would expect it to be pointing out. I mean it could 9 point in but it would be an unnatural contact. 10 Q. Since I can see what you demonstrated, if you can just 11 stand up so everyone can see what you are indicating. 12 A. If the door is here (indicated) and you are coming out, 13 the thumb would be like that when the tip was left but 14 it's much simpler and a more comfortable position to be 15 in, of course, pointing the opposite way. 16 Q. So if the authors of the joint report on 27th March, by 17 indicating that the thumb tip was pointing inwards, 18 seemed to be again themselves working on the basis of a 19 more difficult contact with the left thumb? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. What I will do is actually let you see -- and this will 22 involve us all moving up -- you yourself have had an 23 explanation from me about the door at the top of the 24 stairs so if we just go up and we will carry on and 25 repeat the conversation we had so that you can just give page 29 1 some evidence about this. 2 What I would like you to do though is if we go back 3 and bring up TS0006. This is Mr Kent's image, page 2. 4 Again, if we orientate it correctly. 5 I will give you a copy of Mr Kent's image. (Handed) 6 One assumes that it is now orientated -- do you have it? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. One assumes that it is now orientated correctly so we 9 are looking at it top to bottom. 10 Do you have a view yourself, before we look at the 11 doorframe, if I assume that the Kent 17th March 1998 is 12 on the bathroom side and, therefore, there is no 13 manuscript writing on the right-hand side and the 14 right-hand side is the hallway -- 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. -- before we get too far into this particular exercise, 17 what would you say is the predominant orientation of the 18 tip of the thumb? Would it be into the bathroom or out? 19 A. It's just a fraction more out than in. 20 Q. In other words, it's the reverse of what the report in 21 March had suggested? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. With that in mind, and, please, take that photograph up 24 so that you can use it as you require ... 25 Sir, this would be an appropriate point just to ... page 30 1 THE CHAIRMAN: It will take a moment because we have to move 2 everybody up. So if you would like to go up ... 3 MR MOYNIHAN: As someone says, it's not the place one would 4 want to put one's finger in case it gets trapped in the 5 door. What I explained to you earlier -- and again this 6 just happens to be a door that is hung in the same 7 way -- I'm assuming that the print is about 5 feet on 8 the inner facing, somewhere on the inner facing. 9 Plainly this wood configuration is not exactly the same 10 as the door and if I bring you to the front, you will 11 see that the photograph is a life-size photograph of the 12 mark Y7 which I'm pointing to so we can see its relative 13 height. We can also see how small it is. 14 Now, if I tell you that this piece of wood would be 15 transferred -- and, yes, you are now holding it up 16 roughly -- what is your view on that as the deposit of a 17 left thumb? 18 A. Well, it would have to be like this (indicated). 19 (Photograph taken: FI0910.A) 20 Q. Do you have any comment on that as something that you 21 would naturally expect or not? 22 A. I certainly wouldn't normally put a thumb in that 23 position walking out of a bathroom. You can make your 24 own minds up really. Would you? 25 THE CHAIRMAN: One of the things one has to bear in mind, page 31 1 it's possible we don't know when the mark was deposited 2 that there was a body lying on the floor. 3 A. I believe the body was inside the bathroom but I'm not 4 sure about that. 5 MR MOYNIHAN: If I can assist because that is what was 6 pixillated out for obvious reasons. 7 A. I see. 8 Q. So if I tell you very, very loosely, the body was behind 9 you on the floor with the feet coming perhaps to just 10 where your heels are approximately and it is a normal 11 bathroom door so not as wide as this. 12 A. No, making a few assumptions somebody might come and 13 look at it and turn away to leave the scene, leaving a 14 thumb there. I mean, why? Somebody's left a thumb 15 there having viewed a body, would you put your left 16 thumb on that side? Speculation really. 17 Q. We will take it no further than that. (Returned to 18 seats) 19 What I actually want to do next, Mr MacLeod, is just 20 complete this question of the right thumb, the left 21 thumb and the question of single movement or single 22 touch. 23 What I want to do is to play for you a video clip. 24 What we are going to do is play you a video clip. This 25 is a video clip prepared by Mr Zeelenberg and just so page 32 1 that you understand the context, Mr Zeelenberg is an 2 individual who believes that the mark was made by a 3 single contact. 4 A. Okay. 5 Q. So what he is demonstrating here is that the mark can be 6 made or one can end up with a similar pattern to Y7 even 7 with a single contact. So if I play the short video 8 clip, you will see the deposit of a fingerprint. 9 (Video clip, slide 31, played) 10 We will come back to that just in a second. So you 11 see there the manner in which he has deposited by the 12 tip being in contact first and then coming down to the 13 lower section second. That is clip 31. If I then go to 14 clip 32 ... 15 (Video clip, slide 32, played) 16 ... and he has done it for a second time to give 17 himself a second image. 18 If I move then on to slide 33, what Mr Zeelenberg 19 has produced as a consequence of those two video clips 20 are the images you see either side, I assume, of what he 21 describes as "normal". 22 What he has highlighted in particular with his 23 arrows on the left-hand side is that there is by this 24 particular experiment an area where the ridges are 25 compressed, by the upper arrow, compressed on the left page 33 1 and relatively more spaced on the right. 2 Do you see that? 3 A. I do, yes. 4 Q. Then if I roll that forward, the next slide is slide 34. 5 We will need to follow this through. Stop there. So 6 this is the final slide on his presentation, number 34. 7 What he has used is an image of Y7. It is not the one 8 you had, it was one that was done by Mr Wertheim. 9 If you see the bottom red arrow -- 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. -- in that area there is an area of marking, a striation 12 or whatever, which is damage that occurred by some 13 unknown means after Mr Kent's image was taken. 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. I would wish you just to be aware that is a damaged 16 image. Nonetheless, what Mr Zeelenberg is suggesting -- 17 and we can bring up Mr Kent's image. Perhaps if you 18 still have in front of you Mr Kent's image so that you 19 can look at an undamaged mark. What Mr Zeelenberg is 20 suggesting is that by the experiment which he has shown 21 in the earlier videos it is possible to achieve a 22 pattern similar to what is in Y7 by the form of movement 23 in a single contact without a necessary swivel 24 side-to-side. 25 I will just ask you to comment on that. page 34 1 A. Could I have the other images up? Number 34 in the 2 bottom of the screen. 3 Q. In that case you want Mr Kent's image? 4 A. No, if you look at the image above 34 -- 5 Q. Yes, do you want me to go back to -- 6 A. No, if you just hold it there. To orient Mr Kent's 7 image to equate to this one, the inner-most recurving 8 ridge, which is the ridge surrounding the core, that's 9 it just above your arrow, it would be in that position 10 (indicated) and the top would be 45 degrees to the top 11 here. So this particular image is not a good example. 12 Could you go back to the other ones, please? 13 Q. First of all, what we will do is -- because it is a 14 PowerPoint I have no ability to mark this. You say go 15 back to the other one, I will go one back to 33 -- 16 A. Thank you. While I accept what he's done it doesn't 17 equate to this image because of the orientation. The 18 inner-most recurving ridge on the three images here, 19 ridges go down roughly 45 degrees. On the top of the 20 print it's almost level, going slightly up to the left 21 on two of them. 22 If we orientate the inner-most recurving ridge here 23 to match these three, this is almost 90 degrees to the 24 slopes there. 25 Q. Let us try to put this then into some form of record. page 35 1 First of all, if I bring up Mr Zeelenberg's presentation 2 in a markable form -- so I will put the PowerPoint 3 off -- it is AZ0061 and we will go to slide 33 on that. 4 This now has it in a markable form. Perhaps we will 5 just use the one with his arrows on it just now. 6 Are you indicating that the flow of the inner-most 7 recurving ridge is generally in the manner that I have 8 described in the green line? 9 A. Exactly so, yes. 10 Q. That is what would give you an angle to the horizontal 11 of 45 degrees? 12 A. That's what happens here. 45 degrees and this is at 13 90 degrees (indicated) to this one. 14 Q. It is okay. It is just that I will come to Mr Kent's 15 image just in a second. 16 A. Sorry. 17 Q. You are indicating then that the core is generally at 18 angle of 45 degrees; is that correct? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Whereas the upper part is closer to the perpendicular as 21 we can see by the -- 22 A. Horizontal, the upper part. 23 Q. Closer to the horizontal, as we can see. Its 24 orientation is roughly the top red line? 25 A. Yes, 90 degrees to the red line -- the flow of the page 36 1 ridges. 2 Q. Sorry, the flow of the ridges is straight across the red 3 line? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Perhaps if I use a different colour, I will just use 6 blue again. Very roughly, (indicated) you are 7 indicating that the flow of the ridges as I've described 8 with the blue line? 9 A. Yes. Could I interject here? The image on the screen 10 appears to be a loop to the right, which could be a 11 right thumb. If this was done in the opposite direction 12 to indicate a left thumb, it would probably have a 13 slightly different effect but it still, I don't think, 14 would match up with this. 15 Q. First of all, if I save what I have on the screen and 16 then we will look at Mr Kent's image so that we can then 17 do the comparison. 18 MISS BAHRAMI: FI0910.04. 19 MR MOYNIHAN: If I could save that on one side of the screen 20 and then bring up TS0006 again, please. Just rotate it 21 for me. 22 What I will do, Mr MacLeod, is highlight or enlarge 23 the image -- try to enlarge the image from Mr Zeelenberg 24 that we have already made some markings on and I will 25 similarly enlarge Y7 so that we can now make a page 37 1 comparison side-by-side. 2 Can you then assist me just by telling me what you 3 would see as the approximate orientation of the core in 4 Y7. 5 A. Yes. That's roughly the core there (indicated). 6 Q. So if I put a circle that's roughly the core? 7 A. Yes, slightly left but near enough. 8 Q. It does not really matter because what I was going to 9 ask you was -- and my oval is not intended to suggest an 10 orientation at all -- how would you suggest that the 11 core -- which direction is the core facing? 12 A. Right, from that oblong -- 13 Q. What I will do is clear away the circle and you can now 14 have a line so that you can draw the approximate 15 orientation of the core. 16 A. Okay, taking it down 45 degrees to the left. In fact, 17 it might be easier if you go three or four ridges below 18 there and draw a line there. 19 Q. There is an ability now to draw a line. If you want to 20 draw a straight line just to indicate what you say is 21 the approximate flow. 22 A. There (indicated). If we could orientate the mark 23 90 degrees clockwise -- anticlockwise it would have the 24 green line and the blue line in a similar position. 25 Q. What we will try to do then is the image on the right, page 38 1 you want to be rotated 90 degrees anticlockwise? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. What I will do is simply then enlarge it for us again. 4 That is perhaps as good as I can get it enlarged but the 5 point is made. So you now have the blue line very 6 approximately lined up in the same way as the green line 7 on the left? 8 A. Yes. Approximately, yes. 9 Q. Do we now then see what you are indicating is the 10 contrast in the flow of the ridges of the upper part? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Again, if we just put in a line and make it on this 13 occasion perhaps for contrast -- do you want to just 14 mark what you see as the approximate flow of the ridges. 15 (Indicated) 16 The significance for you of the contrast between 17 those two images now that we have on screen is what? 18 A. This looks like a right thumb on the left and what's on 19 the right looks like a right thumb but the top from the 20 video clip hasn't gone round as far as I would expect. 21 It's certainly different. 22 Q. You say it hasn't gone round, bear in mind the video 23 clip has, one assumes -- we can look at it again -- is 24 simply the thumb going from the tip to the core just in 25 a rock from top and has not swivelled to the side. page 39 1 A. Okay. 2 Q. That was the point, I think, of the demonstration to 3 show that there could be compression of the ridges to 4 one side with the pressure associated with the finger 5 tipping from top to bottom without a swivel. 6 A. Yes, quite. 7 Q. Are you indicating by what you have marked on Y7 that 8 that does not appear to account for the pattern in Y7 9 because the orientation of the ridges on the top part 10 has changed relative to the direction of the core in the 11 bottom? 12 A. Exactly. 13 Q. Thankfully, that is recorded because I wouldn't be able 14 to say it again. Can we just save the images again, 15 please. 16 MISS BAHRAMI: That's saved as FI0910.05. 17 MR MOYNIHAN: What I want to do, in fact, with that is to go 18 back to your original report and carry through now your 19 comparison. In SG0635 if I move to page 12 and perhaps 20 bring up page 13 as well, in the second paragraph under 21 the section "Comparison made", do you indicate for us 22 that you were working with a Terry Kent image? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Also, to avoid confusion you used numbering that you 25 found in exhibit 5 from the Rudrud Zeelenberg report? page 40 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Again, you did it just simply for the purposes of 3 consistency? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Perhaps if I can then bring up on the right-hand side 6 the Rudrud and Zeelenberg report so that we can see 7 that, AZ0044, page 5. 8 Do you recognise that as exhibit 5? 9 A. I don't remember it but I recognise it. 10 Q. If I can then just highlight, you begin by talking about 11 the inner-most recurving ridge at the core and crossing 12 the next three ridges on the right. The next 13 characteristic is a clear ridge ending pointing up and 14 it is marked 5 on Y7. Perhaps if I just simply for the 15 moment highlight Y7 as you describe. 16 Are you taking Mr Zeelenberg's point 5? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. That is what you are referring to? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. As I continue on with this, you are saying it is clearly 21 a ridge ending? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. You say there is no corresponding characteristic on 24 Ms McKie's left thumb? 25 A. Yes. page 41 1 Q. If I carry on we will come back to that for a moment but 2 I will just carry on. You say: 3 "Crossing two ridges from characteristic 5 in Y7 4 towards 1.00 is a clear ridge ending pointing up and 5 slightly left. Crossing two from characteristic 5 on 6 Ms McKie's left thumb impression there is no such 7 characteristic. This is a significant difference. The 8 nearest characteristic is a bifurcation on the third 9 ridge marked 14." 10 In fact, what I have done is cropped the image on 11 the right just too finely. I will go back to it and 12 start again. 13 It is Ms McKie's print we want to look at. Point 5 14 is to be seen as a red dot, yes? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Roughly where my cursor is just now? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Point 14, if I follow the line down, is a green dot? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Highlighted. I will put in some arrows so I record 21 those. So number 5 is where the blue arrow is and 22 number 14, similarly, a blue arrow? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. There is a line inserted to facilitate a ridge count? 25 A. Yes. page 42 1 Q. If I bring up what you continue to say now I will move 2 to page 13 on the left-hand side. What you say is: 3 "Moving towards 2.00 across four ridges from 4 characteristic 14 on Y7 a clear ridge ending 15 is found 5 pointing up towards 11.00. A similar characteristic 15 6 is found in Shirley Ms McKie's left thumb impression. 7 Immediately to the left of the characteristic is a ridge 8 ending downwards, 16 on Shirley McKie's left thumb 9 impression. Immediately to the left of the 10 characteristic 15 on Y7 a ridge can be seen clearly to 11 go up from the side of the mark to the other." 12 So what you are interested in are 13 points 15 -- again, I will use a slightly different 14 colour for points 15 and 16. I will try yellow. 15 Point 15, am I indicating roughly? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. And 16 opposite? 18 A. Right. 19 Q. Again, very approximately. 20 Now, how would you describe that feature, which is15 21 and 16 in fingerprint terms? What description would you 22 apply to that? 23 A. The one on the left, I would say is a ridge ending up 24 and the one on the right is a ridge ending pointing 25 down. page 43 1 Q. We have heard a description that it could be described 2 as a ridge break and an American gentleman refers to it 3 as a handshake. Are either of these descriptions ...? 4 A. Handshake will do fine but I've never heard anything 5 like this described as a handshake but I can see where 6 he's coming from. 7 Q. You smile out of recognition that it makes sense but 8 it's not a fingerprint term of art. 9 A. I've never heard of it before. 10 Q. Just by sheer coincidence, 15 and 16 happen to be the 11 numbers that correspond to Scottish Criminal Record 12 Office chartings for us. Unfortunately, Mr Zeelenberg's 13 5 and 14 have a slightly different number for us. 5, 14 sir, for the record is SCRO point 6 and 14 is SCRO 15 point 5. 16 We change numbers from time to time, Mr MacLeod. 17 A. Okay, I understand. 18 Q. 5 is SCRO 6 and point 14 is SCRO 5. 19 If I look in the opinion section of your report, if 20 I take you now to page 14 for your opinion you say: 21 "None of the ridges or ridge characteristics have 22 clear sharp edges. The characteristics that at first 23 glance appear to be in sequential agreement require on 24 closer examination an excuse to try and make them match. 25 For example, characteristic 8", and you are, again, page 44 1 using Mr Zeelenberg's numberings, the characteristic 8 2 is a strong bifurcation above the core? 3 A. I'm sorry, could you go back? 4 Q. When you say go back ...? 5 A. To when you started quoting from the report. 6 Q. You tell me where you want to start? 7 A. I think you're going to talk about the two blue arrows; 8 is that right? 9 Q. Yes, I am coming to talk about two blue arrows. 10 A. Or do you want to talk about the yellow arrows? 11 Q. I was going to follow it in its natural order in your 12 report which I think starts with the two blue arrows. 13 A. Okay. 14 Q. If you do it yourself, please, it is your evidence -- 15 A. You carry on from your discussion of the blue arrows -- 16 slowly, please. 17 Q. I will do it slowly. First of all -- and I am sorry 18 what I was looking at was point 8, I was wanting to 19 identify point 8 I can mark for us with a red arrow; 20 that is point 8? 21 A. I've got that. 22 Q. Point 8 you are discussing appears to be a bifurcation. 23 "It appears to be approximately the same area as 24 characteristic 8 on the impression of Shirley McKie's 25 left thumb above the core and slightly to the right ..." page 45 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. "... but it's shape is different." 3 I appreciate I haven't brought up Y7. I will do Y7 4 in a moment. You say: 5 "Can the difference be explained [you say] perhaps 6 different pressure of movement across it. Crossing over 7 three ridges to the right and slightly up from 8 characteristic 8 in Y7 is a clear ridge ending. 9 Crossing over three ridges to the right from 10 characteristic 8 in the impression of Shirley McKie's 11 left thumb is a clear bifurcation. Can this difference 12 be explained? Again perhaps different pressure or 13 movement caused it." 14 So you are discounting so far a couple of potential 15 differences? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. We then come to characteristic 5 and that is my reason 18 for starting with the blue arrows: 19 "Characteristic 5 in Y7 is a ridge ending upward as 20 in 5 in Shirley McKie's left thumb impression. Two 21 ridges intervene between characteristic 5 and 14 in Y7 22 but three ridges intervene between the equivalent 23 characteristics in Shirley McKie's left thumb 24 impression. I cannot excuse this difference." 25 I will bring up another image now just in a moment page 46 1 because what I have to do is, first of all, I will save 2 what I have. 3 MISS BAHRAMI: FI0910.06. 4 MR MOYNIHAN: Mr MacLeod, what I have taken so far is what 5 you have written is perhaps back to what you said in 6 your opening observations. Two similarities at points 5 7 and 14 which, in fact, you are saying here on closer 8 examination with ridge counts are different; is that 9 correct? 10 A. Yes. Could I say something? 11 Q. Please do. 12 A. Sometimes a ridge ending can look like a bifurcation. 13 You've probably heard this before. Where the 14 bifurcation occurs and it's such an event it could go to 15 the right or the left or up or down depending on its 16 position and in many of these characteristics that is 17 the case. It doesn't really matter so long as the 18 bifurcation appears to be on the correct side in both 19 impressions. 20 Q. Again, I should stop leading you in the technical sense. 21 The point that you are trying to make though in relation 22 to points 5 and 14 in your report, can you explain that 23 just for me? We will bring up -- do you want the text 24 enlarged to make it easier to read? 25 A. No, so long as I can see the mark, point -- page 47 1 Q. If you give me just a second, what I am going to do in 2 that case is take down for the moment on the left-hand 3 side your report and bring up another copy, please, of 4 AZ0044.005. 5 What I am going to do on this occasion is just, 6 again, using the numbering, and if you want to use 7 Mr Kent's image to do the same thing, you just tell me. 8 What I am going to do is bring up Mr Zeelenberg's image. 9 If I understand it correctly, what he has highlighted on 10 Y7 -- and this happens to be the one with the striation 11 through it, hence I said if you want to use another 12 image, just say. 13 A. That's fine. 14 Q. He has highlighted point 5. 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. He has also highlighted point 14, again the red and the 17 green dots. I will put in, for consistency, the blue 18 arrows, 5 and 14 (indicated). 19 So far as 5 and 14 is concerned, can you explain to 20 his Lordship the point that you are making in your 21 report? 22 A. Without looking at the report, number 5, characteristic 23 number 5 on the left, is a ridge ending pointing up. 24 Characteristic 5 on the mark is a ridge ending which 25 appears as a bifurcation with the ridge on its page 48 1 right-hand side. From that, if you count it as a 2 bifurcation, one ridge intervenes between that and 3 number 14 and one ridge intervenes between it and the 4 ridge ending on the right. That's on the plus side. 5 On the negative side, characteristic number 5 is 6 just below the level of the inner-most recurving ridge 7 and characteristic number 5 on Shirley McKie's 8 impression is down to the a direction at 4.00 from the 9 core. In other words, the characteristic is in the 10 wrong place. 11 Q. Perhaps for me the point that was of interest was in 12 relation to the ridge count. 13 A. If you take it, a ridge ending to a bifurcation, the 14 count is two. If you believe it's two bifurcations, the 15 count is one. That's on Shirley's mark. 16 Q. So there would be, if there are two bifurcations, to be 17 understood as two bifurcations, then the ridge count is 18 there is only one ridge -- 19 A. Correct. 20 Q. -- which I can highlight with a line and I will make the 21 line red a bifurcation, sorry, the one ridge is the one 22 I have just drawn in in red (indicated). 23 A. Yes, assuming two bifurcations. 24 Q. Assuming two bifurcations. 25 What then would your view be of the ridge count on page 49 1 Y7 on the assumption that there are two bifurcations? 2 Is the ridge count one also? 3 A. The ridge count is one. 4 Q. Would the ridge again be very roughly in the area I have 5 marked as red? 6 A. No, that would be part of the bifurcation. It's the 7 ridge to the right of that one. 8 Q. I will leave the wrong one there and then I will put a 9 corrected one, perhaps, in green. Can you mark for me, 10 please, where the intervening ridge would be 11 (indicated). 12 So it is now the green line? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. For the upper point (that is Mr Zeelenberg's number 14) 15 to be a bifurcation which ridge, therefore, must it join 16 to form that bifurcation? 17 A. The one on the left. 18 Q. The one on its left? 19 A. On its left. 20 Q. Again, perhaps -- 21 A. Well, if you go back to characteristic number 5, if it's 22 a bifurcation on its right-hand side, with the ridge on 23 its right-hand side, the count is one. Looking at 5 on 24 Shirley McKie it's a ridge ending which could be 25 construed as a bifurcation, the count is one. But the page 50 1 ridge, it's out of position in relation to the core. 2 Q. If you will forgive me, I have heard you say that. 3 That's the second time -- we will come back to it. The 4 reason I am struggling in relation to the ridge counts 5 is what your report mentioned was a difference in ridge 6 counts in this area. 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. If I understand correctly, in relation to Y7, I am 9 looking at Y7, if one makes the ridge count as you have 10 drawn it with the green line as the intervening ridge 11 that one sees as the red line on Ms McKie's print, one 12 still has to form the bifurcation which is number 14. 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. The point is the green line is a point, point 14. Where 15 would the other limb of the bifurcation be? Is it where 16 the tip of my pen is just now? 17 A. It is, yes. 18 Q. So it would be the line that is coming down that is a 19 sort of a brown or a maroon colour; is that correct? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. What one is doing in that exercise is taking point 22 number 5 and am I joining it -- if I do this next part 23 in yellow -- am I joining point number 5 to the right or 24 to the left to form a bifurcation? 25 A. Could you move it away, please? page 51 1 Q. You do it yourself. What configuration are we assuming? 2 A. The bifurcation on 5 -- it's getting a bit cluttered 3 now -- is near the top end of the green line. 4 Q. So it would have to join as I've just done with the 5 yellow line? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. If one joins it in that manner, what does that do to the 8 light green line that was otherwise the intervening 9 ridge? 10 A. It's no longer the intervening ridge. It becomes part 11 of the bifurcation. I think the blue arrow on the 12 mark -- 13 Q. The blue arrow is incorrect. 14 A. Yes, I think they have been sort of altered when we 15 changed the image. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: I wonder would it help if we take the break 17 and let the witness then mark the points and then speak 18 to them after he has marked them as he wishes to have 19 them. 20 (To the witness) Do you understand? We normally 21 take a break now and we do that for 20 minutes and if 22 you would like to mark -- no doubt you will get 23 assistance if you need it -- the points you want to 24 speak to, then when we resume you can point them out to 25 us. page 52 1 A. Thank you very much, sir. 2 (Last image saved as FI0910.07) 3 (11.40 am) 4 (A short break) 5 (12.00 pm) 6 MR MOYNIHAN: I'm sorry, sir. I think I have come to 7 realise that if I am going to make the best use of 8 Mr MacLeod's time available today I'm better to pass 9 from his original report and move on to our comparative 10 exercise, being brief in relation to Y7, with apologies 11 to all concerned, including Mr MacLeod. 12 Mr MacLeod, what I wanted to do was turn briefly to 13 your Y7 comparative exercise charting, which for us is 14 FI0162A. If I have just the one image up on screen, 15 please. 16 We have had a conversation with you to understand 17 the charting which you have done. You have provided for 18 us a number of documents because, at least, as I look at 19 the image on the right-hand side -- that is the McKie 20 print -- there is a close similarity between the points 21 you have marked and the SCRO points of similarity? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. If I understand correctly, what you did when you 24 compiled this particular exercise is you attempted to 25 recreate the points that were to be observed in the page 53 1 original criminal productions? 2 A. That's correct, yes. 3 Q. Perhaps if I bring up on the TV monitor just for people 4 to see, have you given to us the original material you 5 had when you were working on this? 6 A. I did, yes. 7 Q. We will just show the quality of that material. That 8 just happens to have -- it's a sheet that says X77. If 9 you give me just a second. That may well be production 10 152, so if we just orientate it round 90 degrees. You 11 will see on the right-hand side the image of Ms McKie's 12 thumbprint? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. The clarity of which is reasonable clear? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. If I ask people to go on the left-hand side, that is the 17 image of Y7 that you were working from? 18 A. Yes, they actually had three similar photographs of 19 different quality. 20 Q. So that is EX77 which may be production 152. If we just 21 quickly go through the others in a similar manner, the 22 second one I have brought up is or has in manuscript 23 below the crest PROD, that's production, 180. So this 24 is the second one, production 180. Again, reasonable 25 clarity in relation to Ms McKie's thumbprint, perhaps page 54 1 relatively poorer clarity in relation to the mark Y7? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Finally production 189, if this is working correctly. 4 It has a code which is X76. X76 I understand is 5 production 189. Again, a similar problem: reasonable 6 clarity in Ms McKie's thumbprint; relatively poor 7 clarity in the mark Y7? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. The originals are here for people to study in due course 10 because obviously there is deterioration in what we are 11 bringing up on screen. 12 The three sheets which we have just shown for 13 reference are AL0001 but the quality of our digital 14 images is poor. 15 The main reason, Mr MacLeod, I am not going to work 16 through your own charting of Y7 is, at least for my 17 purposes, I found it difficult to directly correlate 18 what you have marked on Y7 as the points with what the 19 Scottish Criminal Record Office themselves have marked 20 as the points, as we now have them, 1 to 17? 21 A. As I did. 22 Q. In fact, the whole point of the comparative exercise was 23 to start with them recreating these points reliably 24 rather than work on very poor copies from the criminal 25 trial. page 55 1 A. Quite. 2 Q. So I am not going to ask you questions because it would 3 simply become an exercise in, perhaps, demonstrating 4 that you did indeed find it difficult from the 5 photocopies you had accurately to place the points on 6 the mark Y7? 7 A. I did, yes. 8 Q. So I will move on then in relation to QI2 which does not 9 have that particular complication. If I could bring up, 10 please, on screen Mr MacLeod's QI2 charting, FI0163A and 11 if I bring that up twice. 12 Bringing it up twice enables me to enlarge the 13 images. I also have available to you on your left the 14 photographic originals of your own chartings and those 15 of SCRO. 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. SCRO, I think above your chartings, so please consult 18 the photographic originals from time to time if it 19 assists you. 20 Before we get into the detail of it, we will just 21 clarify the numbering. If I begin with Miss Ross's 22 fingerprint, the numbers that you have marked as 23 points 1 to 6, can I understand that what you have 24 sought to do is to mark on a copy of QI2 what you would 25 understand to be the corresponding features in QI2 and page 56 1 you will discuss them as differences but you are trying 2 to identify the corresponding features? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. However, points 7 and 8 on Miss Ross -- that is 7 and 8 5 on the right -- do I understand that we should not 6 confuse them with 7 and 8 on the left. They are 7 intended to be stand-alone. 8 A. That's correct, yes. 9 Q. Similarly, points 9, 10 and 11 on Miss Ross -- that's 9, 10 10 and 11 on the right -- do we understand that those 11 are intended stand-alone to be points and not to 12 directly correlate to anything on QI2? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. Finally, for completeness, therefore, points 7, 8, 9 and 15 10 on the mark QI2 are independent points? 16 A. They are, yes. 17 Q. With that in mind then, what I will do is discuss the 18 points in that sort of sequence. I will begin with 19 points 1 to 6 where you are indicating that, in fact, 20 one should be comparing the right and the left in the 21 corresponding places. 22 Before we begin that exercise, if I start again in 23 the most simplistic manner, when you looked at QI2, did 24 you form a judgment on whether there was sufficient 25 detail of sufficient clarity to admit of a comparison page 57 1 with any prints? 2 A. I thought because the patterns were similar it was worth 3 looking at. That was my initial thought. I didn't as 4 you would normally -- once again it was a special 5 exercise. It wasn't a normal crime scene which would 6 have -- I would normally check out the characteristics, 7 the number of characteristics, before I did anything 8 else but in this case, as I say, it was a special 9 exercise and the comparison really needed to be done. 10 That's what I thought. 11 Q. So you did not go through the preliminary stage of 12 considering whether QI2 had insufficient detail for 13 comparison? 14 A. No, I didn't. 15 Q. Because, in fact, the special exercise was directly 16 asking you to compare QI2 with Marion Ross? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Your overall conclusion was, for the reasons which we 19 will proceed through, that you did not find the two to 20 match? 21 A. That's right. 22 Q. Before we proceed through all the points that you have 23 numbered, is there anything that you would suggest 24 stands out as a simple introduction to this that enables 25 you to say the two don't match? Because otherwise if we page 58 1 proceed through one would tend to think that each of 2 these points has equal weight? 3 A. I would say they have equal weight. 4 Q. Again, is there a way that you would naturally work with 5 this or are you content to work through them in a 6 numerical order? 7 A. Numerical order, yes. 8 Q. We will start then with points 1 and 2 and indicate to 9 us what the point is that you are seeking to make. 10 A. 1 and 2 in the mark indicate a plain ridge, a curved 11 ridge, which is one ridge out from the first recurving 12 ridge at 12.00. There's no features on it. 13 The equivalent ridge in Marion Ross's mark has a 14 very clear lake or an enclosure. So there's two 15 features immediately that are not present in the mark. 16 Q. So the lake, if I understand it correctly, you would 17 regard as two characteristics; that is each of the two 18 bifurcations forming the lake, each of the two counts as 19 a point? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. So you see a clear lake at 1 and 2? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. If we proceed then to point number 3, point number 3, 24 there is no narrative in your table for point number 3, 25 so tell us the particular point you are making with page 59 1 point number 3? 2 A. Point number 3 is the top end of a very short 3 independent ridge pointing up to 12.00 at the summit of 4 the first recurving ridge. 5 Q. And the position on the mark? 6 A. It's right in the middle of the core. It's very short. 7 Whereas number 3 in the mark you can't see the end of 8 it. It just seems a lot longer. It's just a black 9 smudge. 10 Q. So it's longer in the mark -- 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. -- than it is in Ms McKie (sic)? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Is the point you are making there? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. If I take these through, just again briefly and we will 17 come back to the detail of some of them in a moment, 18 point number 4, what is your point in relation to point 19 number 4? 20 A. If you could jump to 6 it might be easier to explain. 21 Q. Please do. 22 A. Number 6 is a bifurcation pointing down and the ridge 23 ending on the left that joins part of the bifurcation, 24 it carries on after touching the ridge on the right, it 25 carries on upwards to level with characteristic number page 60 1 3. 2 Q. So you are using number 6 in Miss Ross and you are 3 saying that that's a bifurcation -- 4 A. Sorry, it's number 5. This isn't very clear actually. 5 I will have to use my glasses. 6 Q. The photographic original is to the side. You can use 7 your glass if you wish, please? 8 A. I should be okay. (Pause) 9 If we go back to 4 from these pictures, number 4 10 here in Marion Ross's mark. (Indicated) 11 Q. If you give us just a second what we will do is ... 12 A. If we go to number 5, number 5 is a ridge ending 13 downwards. 14 Q. What we may do is, it may be better to move the stand 15 round a little. 16 A. You can't see it. 17 THE CHAIRMAN: I can see you now. 18 MR MOYNIHAN: We can see on the screens anyway. 19 A. Okay, we've covered 1, 2 and 3. If we now go to 4, it's 20 a ridge ending pointing up from the same ridge that 21 forms a bifurcation with the ridge on the right a little 22 lower down. That's on the known mark. 23 On the scene mark, there is no ridge ending up from 24 a similar bifurcation and the bifurcation is mark number 25 5. The ridge on the left of the bifurcation marked 5 page 61 1 continues up to a point level with the top of the ridge 2 and the core and that doesn't happen in the scene mark. 3 Numbers 7 and 8 show a short independent ridge which 4 is just not on the scene mark. That is the 7 and 8 on 5 the known mark. 6 Q. If I could stop you there while you are looking at the 7 original, I will indicate to you that there is a 8 difficulty I personally have had and, therefore, would 9 ask you to just discuss. 10 I appreciate this is working the wrong way round. 11 When I am looking at Miss Ross's print, I see as you 12 have mentioned the point number 3 at the very heart of 13 the core -- 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. -- with a ridge running around it -- 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. -- coming to the points which you have marked as 5, 7 18 and 8. 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Immediately to the right of those three points (5, 7 and 21 8) I see what appears to be a bifurcation which you have 22 marked as number 6. 23 A. That's right. 24 Q. Now, this is where I find the matter confusing. If I go 25 across to QI2, I have an inner core that I can discuss. page 62 1 I also have what appears to be a clear potential 2 bifurcation to the right, which is just roughly where my 3 pen tip is just now (indicated). 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. However, on your charting of QI2, what appears to be a 6 clear bifurcation, if I put an arrow in, it's a green 7 arrow (indicated), you seem to have marked as point 8 number 5, that bifurcation? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Whereas on Miss Ross's print you seem to have marked it 11 as 6? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. So there is a degree of confusion. 14 A. There is indeed, yes. I'm sorry about that. It should 15 be -- if 5 is correct, it should be 6 on the right-hand 16 side. 17 Q. But the problems then continue because, if I understand 18 it correctly, when you are looking at the bifurcation 19 which is point number 6 -- 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. -- what you are indicating is as it descends on the 22 right-hand side there's a relatively thick ridge, on the 23 left there is a thinner ridge -- 24 A. That's right. 25 Q. -- and your point number 4, what you are indicating is page 63 1 that that thin ridge does not stop at the point where it 2 forms a bifurcation. 3 A. That's right. 4 Q. It carries on to a point which is to the inside and 5 above the bifurcation. That is your point number 4. 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. However, as drawn on QI2, point number 4, which ought to 8 be in close proximity to the point which is highlighted 9 by my green arrow (indicated), ought to be close to 10 that, you have in fact drawn it to the left. 11 A. Characteristic 5 on the left is shown as 6 on the right. 12 That is a mistake on my part. From point 6 on the left, 13 having formed a bifurcation, the thin ridge on the left 14 continues up, which doesn't happen. 15 Q. If I'm trying to find a corresponding position for point 16 number 4, we'll just use the numberings on Marion Ross, 17 point number 6 -- 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. -- goes up in a ridge, just fractionally separated and 20 to the left is that small ridge ending that you have 21 marked as point number 4. 22 A. Yes. Point number 4 actually should be the thin ridge 23 that continues up and, in fact, it's not there. 24 Q. If I am looking, therefore, for the absent point on QI2, 25 I suggest if I draw a line and I will make it yellow. page 64 1 A. That's where it should be. 2 Q. Since that has completely obliterated everything, I will 3 take it away. The ridge comes from point 2 down and 4 around. 5 A. Yes, that should be a fraction to the left but that's 6 the -- 7 Q. Roughly? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. The point, therefore, that one ought to be looking at 10 for point 4 on QI2 is immediately adjacent to my yellow 11 line -- 12 A. Just to the left of it, between these two ridges. 13 Q. Just to the left? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Whereas what you have drawn is, I suggest to you, 16 significantly further to the left? 17 A. It is, yes. 18 Q. Therefore, it is not pointing to the same corresponding 19 location. 20 A. No, it should be to the right of the ridge that it 21 touches. 22 Q. That has been my problem with points 4, 5 and 6 on QI2 23 compared with Marion Ross. So far as 5, 7 and 8 are 24 concerned, the point is that 7 and 8 are simply not 25 shown in QI2. page 65 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. You are construing point 7 and 8 as a short ridge? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. If one allowed for the fact, as one looks right across 5 the whole of the picture, I suggest to you that Marion 6 Ross's print is of an unusual nature. It seems the 7 ridges seem to be, they almost appear broken up. They 8 are more or less a line of dots rather than a 9 straightforward straight line of ridge. 10 A. It's not a good mark. 11 Q. Therefore, it may be, I suggest to you, that points 7 12 and 8 are simply again a feature of the broken down 13 skin, that properly what one should have is a continuing 14 ridge down from the top, one continuous ridge, in which 15 case one could look at one of the inner ridges on QI2 16 and see a continuous ridge that would correspond to the 17 continuous ridge on Marion Ross. 18 A. Yes, there's a white area there that's not at all clear 19 to the left. 20 Q. Where's the white area? 21 A. Where your marker is, to the left of that in between 22 points 8 and 9, that white area. 23 Q. This area (indicated)? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. I will just mark that. This area? page 66 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. The problem is I suggest to you, Mr MacLeod, is that the 3 ridge that one is looking at that would have 5, as 4 marked on Marion Ross's, 5, 7 and 8, that ridge is 5 indeed to the right and between my red oval and the 6 yellow line -- 7 A. That's where it would be. 8 Q. -- and is to be seen as one continuous ridge in that 9 vicinity, an arching ridge? 10 A. Yes, there is an arching ridge whereas Marion Ross' mark 11 is broken. 12 Q. If we understand Marion Ross's ridge to be broken there 13 is one continuous ridge, very poorly drawn by me, in 14 that sort of vicinity? 15 A. That's spot-on. 16 Q. So that would be a possibility for 5, 7 and 8 but you 17 would query whether the feature which is number 5 is 18 present and that is the feature number 5 on Marion Ross? 19 A. Yes, it's not there. It's not there in the mark. 20 Q. If we go back to the original, the points that you have 21 marked as 5, 7 and 8 you plainly interpreted number 5 -- 22 and this is on Marion Ross -- as a ridge ending? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. With, beneath it, an independent ridge, 7 and 8? 25 A. Yes. page 67 1 Q. That is how you have seen it? 2 A. That's how I see it, yes. 3 Q. We will leave it really there. 4 Can I ask you in relation to points 1 and 2 -- we 5 will come back to those and deal with those -- first of 6 all if we can save my handiwork. 7 MISS BAHRAMI: That's saved as FI0910.08. 8 MR MOYNIHAN: What I want to do is to look at the points you 9 have marked as 1 and 2. Your interpretation of 1 and 2 10 is that there is a strong lake in that location. 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. If I use this as a point that I have had a number of 13 other examples of, whether even in a clear image such as 14 Marion Ross features are capable of interpretation, 15 might there be an interpretation that in that vicinity 16 there is simply a continuous ridge and no lake? 17 A. No, I wouldn't agree with that. The lake could be 18 interpreted as a short independent ridge. As I 19 explained earlier, a ridge ending can be looked on as a 20 possible bifurcation. 21 Q. If I show you and this is no more than to indicate a 22 contrast, if I bring up on the left-hand side -- so keep 23 the image on the right -- bring up on the left FI2409.06 24 and go to FI240907. 25 If I go back to FI2409.06, I have brought up a page 68 1 charting by Mr Zeelenberg (sic) and he has attempted to 2 concentrate on the area in the yellow circle which would 3 correspond to the area that has your lake? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Did I say Mr Zeelenberg -- sorry, it is Mr Wertheim. He 6 is looking at the area in yellow that has your lake. 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. You will see his drawings. These are just manuscript 9 drawings. He is telling us how he has interpreted that 10 area. 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. You will see that what he has actually drawn is an area 13 with continuous ridges with, peppered in it, some small 14 incipient ridges? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Would that be an alternative interpretation of the area 17 that you are looking at as a lake? 18 A. It could be but if you look at the image on the right, 19 above the small lake there are incipient ridges like 20 that, both between two solid ridges. 21 In the image, on the right of the image of the left 22 he's got six incipient ridges but not got two rows of 23 them anywhere. 24 Q. So you would not agree with Mr Wertheim's interpretation 25 of it? page 69 1 A. Well, I think he's missed out the second, the top row of 2 incipient ridges which is between the second and third 3 ridge up from the core. 4 Q. If I go and I will try again just on the left-hand side 5 to go to FI2409.07, there does seem to be some mistake 6 because I have quite a different picture with that code 7 number on it. 8 It is FI2409.08. To explain to you, Mr Wertheim, 9 when he was giving evidence, went beyond the manuscript 10 drawing that you see and, in particular, he drew, if I 11 just indicate even his interpretation of Marion Ross's 12 print, you will see that what he has drawn through the 13 area that you have identified as the lake he has 14 interpreted that as simply a continuous ridge with 15 incipient ridges being the yellows marked above; do you 16 see that? 17 A. Yes. His green line, in my opinion, goes right through 18 the lake both ends and the incipient ridges are correct. 19 Q. What is your comment -- I do not want to press this 20 unduly. All I want to do by bringing this up is to 21 demonstrate that two experts who happen to be of the 22 same overall conclusion can differ in their 23 interpretation of even a clear mark such as the mark of 24 Marion Ross. 25 Do you have any comment on Mr Wertheim's page 70 1 interpretation of that area as simply a continuous 2 ridge? 3 A. Well, to me its much, much thicker at either end of what 4 I interpret as being a lake and his line, if the green 5 line wasn't there I would imagine there's a white gap 6 between the ridge top and bottom to make it into a lake. 7 Q. So, in other words, you would disagree with him in 8 construing that as a continuous ridge because of the 9 white area between the -- 10 A. Top and bottom. 11 Q. -- top and bottom in the vicinity where my cursor is 12 just now? 13 A. Yes. It's not normal for a ridge to have a bulbous area 14 like that in such a short distance unless there is some 15 excessive pressure but the ridges above and below and to 16 the side appear, sort of, standard, if you like. 17 Q. If I bring up just on this side so we can see it a copy 18 of QI2. What is your view on what we can see on QI2? 19 You are simply saying there is no lake to be seen on 20 QI2? 21 A. That's right. 22 Q. We will leave that point there. If I then return in 23 your charting and I will bring it back because what I 24 want to do again, and I appreciate I am working the 25 wrong way round, on your charting I am going to now look page 71 1 at the points 9, 10 and 11. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. If I could bring up, please, again, a second copy on the 4 left of FI0163A, I am going to bring up on this occasion 5 an enlargement of QI2. 6 Is the point you are making -- because these are 7 independent points. They have no relationship to what 8 is to be seen on QI2 -- are you indicating that there is 9 simply no corresponding feature to 9, 10 and 11 in 10 Marion Ross to anything that's in QI2? 11 A. That's right. 12 Q. It so happens, and you may want to just look at this 13 very closely on the Scottish Criminal Record Office 14 charting, that what you have on Marion Ross, the 15 features that you point to on Marion Ross as 9, 10 and 16 11, they number as 13, 14 and 15. 17 Do you want to just check them one by one? If you 18 begin with your 9, your 9 on Marion Ross, they would 19 have as their number 13 on Marion Ross? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. That is 9. 10, your 10, is their 14? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Your 11 is their 15? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. That enables us then to carry out an exercise because page 72 1 what they suggest is that there are points to correspond 2 to the missing features that you have indicated. I will 3 just put them to you for your comment. 4 If I could bring up then, so that we can do the 5 exercise properly, a copy of the SCRO QI2 charting on 6 the left, FI0166A and I will highlight the SCRO charting 7 of QI2. Do not worry, because I will do the conversion. 8 Your point 9 on Marion Ross they suggest is to be found 9 at the point marked 13 on QI2? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Just look at the original of the image just to make sure 12 you are not being misled in any way by the reproduction 13 on the computer. 14 First of all, are you satisfied you can see point 13 15 correctly in QI2? 16 A. It's a lot easier to see up here, yes. 17 Q. You have seen it? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Can you comment on the proposition that the point you 20 have been searching for, your point number 9, is in fact 21 correctly to be located and matches with the feature, 22 the SCRO point, as numbered 13? (Pause) 23 A. I'm having difficulty with point 13 exactly where it is 24 in the mark. 25 Q. What I will do if I can help you, at least to this page 73 1 extent, I will put an arrow. This is where I have to 2 confess I'm looking at a digital image on the computer 3 so, therefore, you will want to look at the photographic 4 original. I understand point 13 -- and I will be 5 corrected if I am wrong because we are otherwise wasting 6 time -- I am just looking to Mr Holmes to correct me if 7 I am wrong because otherwise we will be wasting some 8 time about this. I understand on the computer point 13 9 to be the point of the pen just now (indicated), 10 roughly? 11 A. Could you move the pen down just a fraction? To me that 12 13 indicates a short distance below a ridge ending. 13 Q. It's okay. First of all, Mr MacLeod, I think what we 14 will try to do is just simply correctly identify where 15 point 13 actually is. I have taken the green arrow down 16 a peg, in a sense, to be clear, not to obliterate the 17 detail? 18 A. Yes, if you go above the red line with the green arrow, 19 keep going, stop there. To me there is a ridge ending, 20 yes. 21 Q. So you don't see a ridge ending between my two green 22 arrows. You only see a ridge ending at the top most 23 green arrow? 24 A. Correct. 25 Q. Just for the avoidance of any doubt, can you, please, page 74 1 now look at the photographic original SCRO charting and 2 tell me if the same point holds true looking at the 3 original? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. I am grateful. So you do not see point 13 as a ridge 6 ending in the location that they have drawn it? 7 A. No. 8 Q. That is okay. What we will do is save that particular 9 image. 10 MISS BAHRAMI: That's saved as FI0910.09. 11 MR MOYNIHAN: Can we do the same exercise with your 12 difference 10 or your point 10 in Marion Ross and the 13 suggestion that the hunt for the corresponding feature 14 to point 10, the answer is to be found in the SCRO 15 point 14. 16 A. Yes, it's approximately there. 17 Q. Point 14 in QI2 is in the approximate location of 18 point 10 that you have drawn in Marion Ross? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Finally, point 11 that you have drawn, SCRO would 21 suggest is their point 15 on QI2. Again, just looking 22 at them in isolation, would you accept that your 23 point 11 on Marion Ross corresponds, just simply in 24 location for the moment, corresponds to point number 15 25 in SCRO charting? page 75 1 A. Yes, in isolation. 2 Q. In isolation? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Forgive me, I will come back to them in combination in a 5 second. 6 The final point that enables us to sweep up some of 7 this is if on the right-hand side what I'm going to do 8 now is bring up your QI2 charting for a reason. If I am 9 correct, what you have marked on QI2 as your point 10 number 9 also corresponds to the point that SCRO have 11 marked as their point 15. So your 9 and their 15 -- 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. They are the same? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. So we now have, just for the record, your point 10 on 16 the Marion Ross print is SCRO point 14. Your point 11 17 on the Marion Ross print coincides with SCRO point 15, 18 it is suggested, and equally your point 9 on the mark is 19 in the same position as SCRO point 15? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. That is all looking at it in isolation. 22 What is it about the combination of points -- if I 23 use SCRO numbers because it is easier for me -- what is 24 there about the combination of the SCRO points 14 and 15 25 that you say mean that there is no match between QI2 and page 76 1 Marion Ross? 2 A. On the Scottish Criminal Record Office point 14 -- 3 Q. Sorry, we will move the microphone round so that it can 4 assist you. 5 A. On 15 it's either a ridge ending or a bifurcation and if 6 it's a bifurcation there's one ridge intervening. 7 Q. People at the back aren't hearing. If you start again. 8 A. The characteristic shown 15 on the Scottish Criminal 9 Record Office scene mark is either a ridge ending or a 10 bifurcation. If it's a bifurcation the ridge count -- 11 there's one ridge intervenes between it and a 12 bifurcation marked 14. Or it could be two ridges 13 intervening because the ridge that forms the bifurcation 14 could join either side. 15 Q. What I am going to do is to bring up a second copy of 16 FI0166A on the right-hand side for a reason. 17 Now that we know what the points are, the numbers 18 correspond, as I've said to you, just tend to use the 19 SCRO numberings. So we now have brought up QI2 and 20 Marion Ross with the one consistent set of numbers, the 21 SCRO numbers. 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. What I am asking you to do is to relate points 14 and 15 24 on QI2 to points 14 and 15 on Marion Ross. I understand 25 your position from your response in the comparative page 77 1 exercise that though you accept that there are features 2 in these locations, you do not see them as matching. Am 3 I correct? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. Can you explain to us what the mismatch is? 6 A. If we take characteristic 15 in Marion Ross's mark, on 7 this impression it is a clear ridge ending. One ridge 8 intervenes between the characteristic number 14, which 9 again to my mind is a clear ridge ending. So we've got 10 two ridge endings with one intervening ridge. 11 Characteristic number 14 on the mark looks like a 12 bifurcation with the ridge coming up the middle between 13 two ridges joining either right or left, and I slightly 14 favour the right-hand ridge it joins to, with two 15 intervening ridges from there to the characteristic 16 number 15, which could be a bifurcation or a ridge 17 ending, and I favour bifurcation with the ridge on the 18 left-hand side. So there's a difference. 19 Q. Why do you say on the left-hand side that there are two 20 intervening ridges if, for example, I take number 14. 21 Just allow me a second to have control of the mouse. If 22 number 14 I take as a ridge running approximately so 23 (indicated) and number 15 is a ridge again running 24 approximately so (indicated), there are two green lines 25 now drawn, I would have only one intermediate ridge. page 78 1 That's the black line that's between the two green 2 lines. So there's only one intermediate ridge on that 3 view? 4 A. I favour the view that on the short green ridge -- 5 Q. Give me a second. That is the right-hand most one? 6 A. Yes. I take the bifurcation to be halfway along the 7 green ridge on the right-hand -- 8 Q. If you allow me just a second, what I will do is save 9 the image that is on the screen just now. 10 MISS BAHRAMI: That's saved as FI0910.10. 11 MR MOYNIHAN: What we will do is bring up on the left-hand 12 side another image of FI0166A so we can have a clean 13 image to start that you can mark what is your preferred 14 interpretation of these points. 15 Can you mark just for yourself and use the tools at 16 the bottom. That is going to give you an arrow. 17 Is an arrow what you are looking for? 18 A. Yes. I think the green arrow is enough. The green 19 arrow, to my mind, points to a bifurcation. Where the 20 red line from 14 touches the ridge, which is slightly 21 lower than it should be -- sorry, forget that. The tip 22 of the green arrow points to where I consider it to be a 23 bifurcation (indicated). From that point to the tip of 24 the 15th characteristic, two ridges clearly intervene. 25 Q. Perhaps there reaches a point where I should not be page 79 1 doing too much of the representation of what the 2 Scottish Criminal Record Office position may be but the 3 point may be that what they are indicating -- if I just 4 take control of the mouse -- that they are already one 5 ridge to the left of you by where their point ends, that 6 there is a feature one ridge to the left and if one 7 moves the feature one ridge to the left, then the 8 intervening ridge count is then indeed reduced by one. 9 It becomes one rather than two? 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. What is your view on that, that there is a relevant 12 feature one ridge to the left of your green arrow? 13 I will just clarify. Point 14 is described by the 14 Scottish Criminal Record Office staff not as a 15 bifurcation. It's described by them as a ridge ending. 16 Do you see a ridge ending in the vicinity of point 17 number 14? 18 A. In the vicinity, yes. The ridge to the right and below, 19 just below the tip, the right-most edge of the line from 20 14, that could be a ridge ending or a bifurcation. It 21 could be a ridge ending. 22 Q. But would you still then see, because if you move it to 23 the right you are then indicating or bringing into play 24 a second intervening ridge, are you, between 14 and 15? 25 A. Even where it is, I don't consider the tip of the page 80 1 line 14 to be a ridge ending. The ridge ending is 2 beyond that, in my opinion. 3 Q. If you then mark just where the ridge ending would be? 4 A. On the left edge of the green straight line. 5 Q. So that is on the left edge of the upper most green 6 line? 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. If it is positioned there, how many intermediate ridges 9 do you then have to point 15? 10 A. If it's meant to be a ridge ending, there's two. If 11 it's a bifurcation, it's still two. 12 Q. It's still two? 13 A. Yes. (Image saved as FI0910.11) 14 Q. We will leave that there and that's perhaps as much as 15 we can do there. I don't have many -- I have your three 16 remaining points of difference that you identify in the 17 mark only and that will conclude my examination of you 18 so I trust I will not be too long after lunch, if that 19 assists others. 20 THE CHAIRMAN: Since we have sat a little longer, we will 21 sit, again at 1.55. 22 (1.05 pm) 23 (Luncheon Adjournment) 24 (1.55 pm) 25 JOHN NEIL MACLEOD (continued) page 81 1 Further examined by MR MOYNIHAN 2 Q. Good afternoon, Mr MacLeod? 3 A. Good afternoon. 4 Q. What I want to do is just to complete three points that 5 you have highlighted on the mark QI2 that we have not 6 covered. 7 In relation to QI2, if I start again with a fresh 8 image, your QI2 is FI0163A and if I bring it up twice. 9 These are points that you have highlighted on the mark 10 that you are indicating have no -- points on the mark 11 that have no corresponding position in the print? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. I will give us both and reverse them on this occasion. 14 The three that I have not yet discussed are 7, 8 and 15 10. I can take these relatively briefly. In relation 16 to point number 7, what I understand would be the 17 response to your contribution in relation to point 7 is 18 that point number 7 -- well, first of all, QI2 occurs in 19 an area where there is evidence of other interference, 20 either by other fingerprints or by smears or whatever, 21 QI2 in general? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. In particular, as one goes out from the core, there is 24 increasingly a risk of getting into an area that's 25 lacking in dependability because of the background page 82 1 noise. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. The point that I mentioned to you this morning that my 4 eye fastens on in QI2 and no-one else's eye seems to 5 fasten on is what I describe as the hook? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Just simply for the record, I will mark where the hook 8 is (indicated). No-one seems to accept the suggestion 9 from me that that is a correct fingerprint feature. It 10 seems to be an artefact of some description; is that 11 correct? 12 A. Yes. If you were to follow the ridge above the hook 13 which goes more or less horizontal, if you follow it 14 round to the left it would match up with a different 15 impression which is between 8 and 9, the core of what -- 16 well, between 8 and 9 there is a separate impression on 17 the same photograph. That ridge would appear to match 18 up with the ridges below, between 8 and 7. So that 19 could be part of another impression. 20 Q. I am grateful to you for that because then what I wonder 21 is what is the reliability of the feature that you have 22 as number 7, which is further out from the core of QI2 23 and into the area that may be affected by just 24 contamination by a number of other factors? 25 A. It could be but the ridge appears to go downward at more page 83 1 or less in a vertical slope to 6.00 as is similar to the 2 ridges on either side. I feel it is part of the mark 3 actually. 4 Q. I will leave it really there because what I was wanting 5 to do was simply to get your comment. If in a position 6 intermediate between the core to the upper right and the 7 point number 7 one finds an area that's unreliable, 8 perhaps, showing a superimposition of another print, the 9 only point was to suggest that it has not then 10 dependable or reliable to take other features in that 11 vicinity into account? 12 A. It could be. 13 Q. Mark number 8: again, I understand that those who have 14 commented from SCRO on your charting would have some 15 hesitation about the reliability of point number 8, 16 again, because it is verging to an area where the mark 17 QI2 is becoming unreliable. I just put that for your 18 comment. 19 A. It appears to me that the point I've marked 8 is a ridge 20 ending or part of -- there's a gap between the point 21 marked 8 and the ridge above it, slightly to the right. 22 If you take the mark on the left, the ridge on the left 23 of point 8, it appears to either -- it appears to 24 bifurcate with a ridge on the right and it appears to 25 flow as if it would join up with the ridges at 12.00 up page 84 1 from the core. 2 Q. So you are reasonably comfortable with that as a point? 3 A. Either where the point 8 is marked or just above that 4 bifurcation. It's not particularly clear and, again, 5 the second ridge from the left would appear to continue 6 or perhaps bifurcate with a ridge between the bridge on 7 the right. 8 Q. The final point again is the same sort of point, is 9 point number 10 which you have above the core. 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. In this particular instance, I have another image that 12 will help. On the left-hand side if I bring up on the 13 left FI2409.02. The computer started to misbehave 14 yesterday and it is actually not behaving itself. It 15 may not get some days off next week like the rest of us. 16 It has been brought up as FI2409.01. What I am 17 going to do is highlight one part of this charting for a 18 reason that will become evident just in a second. What 19 I have brought up is a charting done by Mr Wertheim. If 20 I show you there is a line going across the image from 21 left to right just in the vicinity of your point number 22 10, a straight line, a white line. Do you see that? 23 A. Yes, I see it. 24 Q. With rather peculiar arched white lines either side of 25 your number 10? page 85 1 A. Yes, I've seen that. 2 Q. We have since seen that beneath these markings on the 3 tin there's a picture of a Victorian carriage and this 4 is part of the metalwork of the Victorian carriage. The 5 only reason I mention that is it enables us with a 6 degree of confidence to compare what you are 7 highlighting as point 10 with what Mr Wertheim has drawn 8 on his image. 9 So on Mr Wertheim's image, if I show you, the area 10 that you are referring to for point 10 is roughly where 11 I've put now the red circle (indicated)? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. The significance of the -- it must be magenta, which was 14 Mr Wertheim's only colour -- the magenta oval which is 15 there is that Mr Wertheim used the magenta oval to 16 depict the area he regarded as sufficiently clear to be 17 dependable in the mark QI2? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. You will see that he has correspondingly sought to draw 20 in the ridges that he can see. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. It would follow from that that Mr Wertheim's image would 23 suggest -- and I put this only for your comment -- that 24 your point 10, since it must be somewhere within the red 25 circle, is in an area that, again, because of reasons of page 86 1 contamination, background noise and whatever else, is in 2 an area where one is beginning to doubt the reliability 3 of what may be observed. 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. You can see that point? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. I am grateful to you, Mr MacLeod. 8 If we save that image. 9 MISS BAHRAMI: That's saved as FI0910.12. 10 MR MOYNIHAN: Thank you, sir. 11 Thank you, Mr MacLeod. I have no further questions. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. Are there any applications? 13 MR SMITH: No, thank you, sir, not from me. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: Miss Grahame? 15 MISS GRAHAME: No, thank you, sir. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr Holmes? 17 MR HOLMES: Sir, I do have an application. I am pleased to 18 advise that it has been considerably curtailed as a 19 result of discussions I have had with my learned friend, 20 Mr Moynihan, so I have only four areas to cover with 21 Mr MacLeod. Those are: firstly, the issue of a single 22 as opposed to a double touch in Y7; secondly, his theory 23 as to the deposition of Y7; thirdly, his opinion on the 24 sufficiency of Y7 in his reports in 2004/2005; and, 25 fourthly, the preparation of those reports. page 87 1 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, very good. 2 Cross-examined by MR HOLMES 3 Q. Mr MacLeod, I start off asking you about the opinion 4 that you have given on whether Y7 is a single or a 5 double touch. 6 You say that it's in two distinct parts; is that 7 correct? 8 A. Yes, that's how I feel about it but it was probably made 9 at the same time within just the movement. 10 Q. Yes, I understand. What you are saying is that you can 11 see that it is clearly in two different parts and that 12 those parts are facing in different directions; is that 13 correct? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Would, in your view, any examination that proceeded on 16 the basis that the mark was in a single part therefore 17 be flawed? 18 A. Well, I would have to really. I feel there's a bit of 19 movement in the mark which was made by the thumb moving 20 however slightly. However, that might not detract 21 necessarily from the position of characteristics either 22 above or below. 23 Q. But in your view what the mark is certainly not is a 24 single touch with a continuous ridge flow; is that 25 correct? page 88 1 A. No, not exactly. Some of the ridges do continue to flow 2 from top to bottom but at an unusual angle. 3 Q. Can I ask about your theory as to the deposition of the 4 mark. Part of the reason you concluded it was a right 5 thumb was because of its position on the right-hand side 6 of the doorframe; is that correct? 7 A. No, not at all. When I looked at the mark I thought 8 it's a right thumb. The first time I saw it I thought 9 it was a right thumb. 10 Q. I'm sorry, but in your report you mention that it could 11 easily have been left by a left thumb? 12 A. It could have been, yes. 13 Q. You demonstrated earlier on some of the ways in which 14 the mark could have been deposited. I wonder if I could 15 ask would it make a difference if the door that you see 16 in the photographs of the hallway and the bathroom had 17 been removed? 18 A. Sorry, I don't understand ... 19 Q. If at the stage at which the mark was deposited would it 20 make a difference to your theory as to how that mark was 21 deposited if the door had already been removed by that 22 point? 23 A. Yes, it would have been much simpler I think to have 24 left that sort of mark at that angle if there was no 25 door there. page 89 1 Q. In relation to the sufficiency of Y7 for examination, 2 you have said that you did not feel it should have been 3 taken to court but is that only on the basis that you 4 could not see 16 points in sequence and agreement in it? 5 A. It's a bit more than that. At that time in Scotland I 6 understood that there was a requirement for 16 7 characteristics and now there's a non-numeric standard 8 which I think applies in Scotland now. I can't see 16. 9 You are quite correct; I can't see 16 clear 10 characteristics. 11 Q. I think you have already given evidence this morning 12 that under the non-numeric system the mark as you see it 13 would be sufficient to speak to in court; is that 14 correct? 15 A. It might be. 16 Q. Is it sufficient to examine? 17 A. It might be, yes. 18 Q. Finally, can I ask you about the preparation of your 19 reports, please. You prepared your first report for the 20 Scottish Executive in, is it, June 2004? Is that 21 correct? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. I think in that report -- and I will be corrected if I 24 am wrong -- you identified a relatively small number of 25 differences between the inked print and the mark Y7. I page 90 1 believe from recollection there were four identified in 2 your report. 3 In the report that you prepared in 2005, there were 4 a significantly larger number of differences identified. 5 What happened in between? 6 A. In between I spoke to the Scottish Executive who gave me 7 instructions in this matter and by the time I reached 8 four or five characteristics that I was not at all happy 9 with, I did a report on that. They then asked me to say 10 are there any more or words to that effect, "Could you 11 highlight any more". So I, in the second report, 12 highlighted a lot more what I would call discrepancies. 13 Q. We have heard a good deal about confirmatory bias. Is 14 this a concept with which you are familiar? 15 A. Sorry? 16 Q. Confirmation bias or confirmatory bias, it has been 17 referred to. 18 A. I know what you mean. I don't think it affects me. 19 Q. Do you not feel that that is something that could affect 20 a practitioner who has provided a report highlighting a 21 number of differences in a mark if he is asked whether 22 there are, in fact, more differences that he can 23 discover within that mark? 24 A. Well, I knew there were differences. I just didn't 25 mention them in the first report. I didn't think it was page 91 1 necessary. 2 Q. Why not? 3 A. Well, if you are comparing a mark from a scene with a 4 known mark and you get one discrepancy that cannot be 5 explained, that is enough to disqualify it from being an 6 ident. 7 Q. The reason that you have given for there being a larger 8 number of discrepancies highlighted in the 2005 report 9 is that you were instructed to go away and see if there 10 were any more? 11 A. That's right. 12 MR HOLMES: Thank you, Mr MacLeod. I don't propose to ask 13 any more questions. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have anything further, Mr Moynihan? 15 MR MOYNIHAN: I have no further questions, sir, thank you. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for giving us your time. 17 I appreciate it is a long time ago that you had to carry 18 out this examination. Thank you for coming back for us 19 today. Thank you very much. 20 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much, sir, may I be excused? 21 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, indeed. 22 MR MOYNIHAN: If you do not go too far because I will have a 23 word with you. 24 There is one point, sir, before we adjourn I should 25 have corrected a long time ago. I interrupted Mr Holmes page 92 1 when he was questioning Mr Mackenzie in relation to a 2 matter concerning Mr Swann's chartings and Mr Wertheim. 3 I have been asked to clarify that my intervention 4 was, in fact, incorrect. I said then we had received an 5 e-mail from Mr Wertheim in which he said there had been 6 an error in his evidence. That is incorrect. I did 7 receive an e-mail from Mr Wertheim in which Mr Wertheim 8 asked to look again at charts M for Michael and N for 9 Nicholas. In fact, that was the limit of what 10 Mr Wertheim had said. 11 When I went further and said that he had made a 12 mistake, that was me confusing two different matters. I 13 am glad to put the record straight and, therefore, the 14 question of Mr Swann's charts M and N remains to be 15 dealt with in the evidence in due course. I am sorry 16 for the error that has been introduced. 17 THE CHAIRMAN: You do not by any chance have the reference 18 in the transcript? 19 MR MOYNIHAN: I will find it, sir. I think it was Tuesday 20 afternoon. I will find it, sir. 21 THE CHAIRMAN: Very good. At least it is on the record now 22 wherever it occurred before. 23 Now we continue on Thursday. Is that right? There 24 is no further witness today. 25 MR MOYNIHAN: I am sorry, sir, there is no further witness page 93 1 today. The next scheduled witness is Mr McKie for 2 Thursday of next week, Thursday, Friday and, as matters 3 currently stand, subject to any change that anyone may 4 suggest, Mr McKie is the witness for Thursday and Friday 5 of next week, the only witness for Thursday and Friday 6 of next week. 7 I am open to suggestions if people feel that they 8 need to call another witness perhaps next week but he is 9 the only one we have arranged. 10 THE CHAIRMAN: I imagine that Mr McKie's statement is a 11 fairly long one. 12 MR MOYNIHAN: There are two parts. There is a first part 13 which is available to the legal representatives just 14 now. There is an unresolved question -- which I needn't 15 take up with you -- before that is made available even, 16 I think, to clients of the legal teams here. That same 17 question would then affect its publication on the 18 website on Monday. So that is part 1. 19 Part 2, I understand, is being completed and 20 Mr McKie's not in the hall today, the object being that 21 he will complete part 2 in the course of today. I hope, 22 but it is no more than a hope, to be in a position to 23 release that to legal representatives before close of 24 play today but I cannot guarantee that. It is not 25 within my control. page 94 1 Then we will take matters from there. I do not 2 myself know the content of part 2 but that is the 3 position we are making. We have requested part 2 by 4 close of play today with a view to transmitting it 5 probably either by e-mail or, if it is too large, in 6 paper form as soon as we receive it. 7 I do appreciate with Mr McKie giving evidence on 8 Thursday of next week that it places others under a 9 considerable burden of preparation if it is not 10 available by close of play today. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Very good then. Thursday at 10.00. 12 (2.23 pm) 13 (Adjourned until 10.00 am on Thursday, 15th October 2009) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25