STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF MARK LUNDY
I have spoken briefly with Mr Lundy and outlined the 395 paragraph Court of Appeal decision dismissing his appeal against conviction. He now has a copy of the decision.
He is, of course, very disappointed at the outcome of the appeal. Mr Lundy has long argued that for whatever reason his case has become the testing grounds for novel science. It was the novel use of the IHC that lead to a successful appeal against conviction before the Privy Council back in 2013 and it was novel use of the mRNA evidence that was the primary focus of the 2017 appeal. The Court of Appeal has found that the mRNA evidence was wrongly admitted at his 2016 retrial.
The Court of Appeal have applied the proviso. It was only after the appeal was heard that the Crown confirmed that it would seek to rely on the proviso if its primary argument as to admissibility of the mRNA evidence was rejected. In a lengthy decision the Court of Appeal have concluded that notwithstanding the wrongful admission of evidence that was so strenuously contested both before trial and at trial, that allowing that evidence to be considered and accepted by the jury, has not given rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice and did not make the trial unfair.
That decision raises important issues and is inevitably one that Mr Lundy will ask the Supreme Court to review.
In those circumstances any further comment on behalf of Mr Lundy is not appropriate.
JHM Eaton QC
Counsel for Mr Lundy
9 October 2018