Saturday, May 23, 2009

David Bain trial is an insult to our intelligence

"Fingerprints can last a considerable amount of time. It depends where you leave it."

SHOOT: Here you have the murder weapon with the killer's prints on it, plus the killer's prints on the washing machine, plus evidence that the killer - David Bain - had entered each and every room of the victim. Yet there is a 'case' that he didn't do it, his father did it with no fingerprints, no bloodstains of any other victim and no evidence that he had entered any other room. Utterly ridiculous!
clipped from

Prosecutor Kieran Raftery put to Mr Lloyd that the defence case had previously been that Bain's fingerprints had been placed on the rifle in animal blood, to which Mr Lloyd repeated there was no blood in the fingerprints.

Mr Jones has stated that if these prints were left months before the murders, they would have dried out and become "flaky", and subsequent handling of the rifle would have destroyed them. Mr Lloyd disagreed with this.

Once left to dry, fingerprints could stay in place on an item for years if undisturbed. Mr Lloyd knew of one murder case in Britain where a fingerprint had lasted seven years.

Prints in blood had been known to last two or three years after being created.

Mr Jones also held the view that if the fingerprints had already been on the rifle, they would have been "dramatically destroyed or certainly smudged" when the killer carrying the rifle was involved in a violent struggle with Bain's brother Stephen, 14.

 blog it

No comments: