‘Human error’ to blame in Shirley McKie fingerprint case

Published on Wednesday 14 December 2011 15:33

A public inquiry into the Shirley McKie fingerprint case has found that “human error” was to blame in the scandal which saw the former police officer falsely accused of perjury.

The inquiry, chaired by former Northern Ireland appeal court judge Sir Anthony Campbell, said there was “no conspiracy against Ms McKie in Strathclyde Police”.

He said it was “human error” that fingerprint experts had identified the print as hers.

Forensic service chiefs have made a public apology to Ms McKie, who was accused of perjury for insisting that a fingerprint found at the home of murder victim Marion Ross did not belong to her.

Tom Nelson, director of forensic services at the Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA), said the organisation had apologised directly to Ms McKie and her family for the “errors that took place” and the “subsequent pain” it had caused them.

Mr Nelson issued the apology after a public inquiry into the affair found that Ms McKie, a former detective constable with Strathclyde Police, had not made the disputed mark.

Mr Nelson said: “As an organisation, we accept the findings of the inquiry and we expect all of our staff members to do the same. We accept that Shirley McKie did not make the mark known as Y7. We have today apologised directly to the McKie family for the errors that took place in the late 1990s and for the subsequent pain that has caused them.”

The inquiry was set up to examine what steps were taken to identify and verify the prints involved in the case.

Ms McKie, from Troon in Ayrshire, was later cleared of lying under oath and in February 2006 was given £750,000 in an out-of-court settlement with the then Scottish Executive.

Following Mr Nelson’s apology Iain McKie, Ms McKie’s father, said: “He just apologised on behalf of the SPSA. He accepted the recommendations of the report in full. He apologised to Shirley and myself and our family for the mistakes that were made in the past.

“Its an extremely important apology because it’s the first time I have ever heard anyone say sorry. This is the first real apology that has been made in 14 years.

“I feel I can move forward myself now.”

Comments

There are 10 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

10

Tartancult

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 11:54 PM

Good point dgg but I'm waiting for Lachie's 'reveal'.

• Report Unsuitable

9

dgg

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 10:37 PM

Perhaps this is surmise, but as soon as lawyers get involved no-one can admit fault or apologise, or rather as soon as the insurance company liable to pay for this hears about it they insist everyone clams up. Therefore it goes to court, then an apology is, of necessity, forthcoming. It's a sad commentary on our litigious society and the way insurers and their lawyers have reacted in recent years. Having a court record, Ms McKie couldn't continue in the police and was pretty much unemployable. No doubt had there not been a settlement, part of the award would have been punitive, but part would be compensation for the damage done to her career. The authorities wouldn't have settled unless they reckoned it would have cost them more by continuing the case. No-one 'conspired' to prosecute Ms McKie, but police procedures were such that it was inevitable. And the implication is that police procedures were such that she couldn't easily clear herself. That's true in many organisations and businesses when unfair dismissal cases go to court.

• Report Unsuitable

8

Tartancult

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Why don't you reveal the real truth now, Lachie - save us the wait - unless that was pure conjecture?

• Report Unsuitable

7

Lachie Mhor

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 08:46 PM

One day the real truth about this case will emerge. The real victims will be exonerated

• Report Unsuitable

6

Simonsaid

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 07:09 PM

~#4 Tut tut - you obviously have not been following this case. The so called fingerprint experts refused to acknowledge that they had made a mistake - 15 years later an apology has been given but not from those whose egos prevented them from admitting that they were wrong. It is significant that those who made the mistake havestill not apologised and it has been left to their bosses to do so.

• Report Unsuitable

5

Exiled Leither

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 07:06 PM

I have always thought that the compensation payment in this case was unusually large? Prisonners released after twenty years for miscarriages of justice dont get as much.

• Report Unsuitable

4

Tartancult

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 06:34 PM

So, you don't actually know that it was 'human egos' - this was an error on your part - but I see no need for you to apologise.

• Report Unsuitable

3

Simonsaid

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 06:27 PM

#2 How long does it take to acknowledge a mistake one year, two, three, ten? I have made many mistakes in my time. Most of them I have recognised as mistakes within a day or two. Others I have only relalised they were mistake when they werer pointed out to me - depanding on the circumstances this took up to a week or two due to operational reasons.

• Report Unsuitable

2

Tartancult

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 05:54 PM

Thats strange, SimpleSimon - in the story above it says it was human error - do you actually know something the rest of us do not?

• Report Unsuitable

1

Simonsaid

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at 05:22 PM

This was not about human error it was about human egos. Those responsible for misindetifying the fingerprint refused to admit they got it wrong

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.