In 2002 the Court of Appeal, in London, proclaimed that James Hanratty's guilt, in the infamous A6 Murder case, had been proven by the DNA evidence from the now disbanded Forensic Science Service; thereby finally, after 40 years of controversy, hoping to have put an end to the doubts in the case.
However, this didn't remove the inconvenient fact that tireless campaigners such as Paul Foot and Bob Woffinden, had fully documented the copious evidence pointing to Hanratty's innocence, which had persuaded the Criminal Cases Review Commission to bring the case back before this court.
This book is the first to review this court's worrying deliberations and subsequent events and will no doubt prove unpopular with our political and judicial authorities. As you will see the controversy remains far from over.
There is no escaping that if the FSS evidence is correct the case for his innocence must be wrong, but which is the more likely?
How had the court undertaken its duty to balance these conflicting narratives, when arriving at its damning verdict? Had it decided all the evidence of innocence was mistaken, or lies? Or had it just ignored it? Equally, how had it assessed the veracity of the FSS scientific evidence put before it?
The answers, as this work details, are woeful and should be widely known, as they impact, not just on this tragic case, but on the way our courts are still treating forensic DNA evidence.
Be warned, this is not a light read, but our authorities and anyone who practices law in this country should consider it carefully, as it has stark implications for our criminal justice system and those who find themselves being judged by it.
