I had the chance to read Mark Lundy letters published in
‘stuff’ news earlier in the week.
It brought home to me something extremely important in this
case which I hope I can clearly distil.
The Lundy case has been taken over by an argument in
science, ‘novel unproven science v accredited and regulated for forensic use
science.’ Of course, there is no doubt over which science should be allowed by
a conservative court for one reason - the crime scene into which strangers had
entered. Something, I think Mark Lundy has described to perfection.
It is lost to the conservative mind that the science
argument is down the list against the crime scene evidence, which
conservatively, perhaps, not even being no 2 on the list, more forthrightly
inadmissible.
Mark Lundy like any man, knew his own home. He knew the
signs of a break in but it was hidden from him and the Courts that there were
also fingerprints and footprints left in the scene that were never traced, and
which were highly unlikely to have been there after the home was cleaned by a
very thorough contractor just before the tragedy.
When Dr Teoh’s letter was belatedly released by the Crown it
was rightly seized upon as showing a miscarriage of Justice. However, the
potential proof that unknown males had been the house, their DNA found under
the nails of Christine and Amber has never been properly appreciated for its
true meaning supported by the reasons it was hidden. If it were not hidden, Mark
may not have been charged and was unlikely to have been convicted if he had
been charged, due to the Jury having tangible evidence of other offenders to
consider – the very reason the critical evidence was hidden. I think this must
be taken to the COA along with all the new data showing how DNA gets under the
fingernails and how long it may last.
I am 100% behind Mark on this. He was the man that lived in
the home and knew it inside out, he was the grieving father who became the
suspect as a matter of course. A course that when off target, away from actual
evidence and into the darkness of deciphering highly ‘weak for purposes’
evidence in a case where fingerprints, footprints, a break in, and stranger DNA
found under the deceased nails was secreted away.
Give him his chance for the truth to be heard in the right
order, crime scene first.
No comments:
Post a Comment