The one thing that appears to be missing from Russell's observations is the lack of a name who he believes would be suitable to provide Expert advice to the Inquiry.
Perhaps you would be so good as to give us the name or names of any Experts who you believe would be suitable to be brought in??
I am wondering of there are any Experts who can be brought in that Russell and the SCRO Experts would agree to?
I know that Fiona McBride at Justice 1 appeared to have some faith in Bruce Grant, but given he has already seen the marks, and he knows it is a misidentification he must be ruled out. I only hope when under oath at the Inquiry he is able to tell the truth, and not like Justice 1 where he did a massive body swerve to avoid admitting anything!
Many readers ,might be unaware, but the Inquiry are currently looking at getting the "best" image of Y7, and are going to ask every expert who has given an opinion on the print, to physically mark the points in "agreement" and resubmit to the Inquiry. The best image of Y7 appears to be one taken by Terry Kent, formerly of the Police Scientific Development Branch.
So finally the SCRO Experts will have their day in court. And the evidence they are to produce will allow them to demonstrate their identifications in front of the Inquiry Team.
Truly wonderful. No excuses and certainly no hiding places. And individually without the comfort of safety in numbers.
Finally everyone will get to see what they are seeing. And without the lame excuse of everyone looking at “different” material.
I applaud the Inquiry for their initiative, and look forward to each and every single SCRO Expert and supporter to stand up under oath and deliver their findings….
Do you also applaud this initiative daktari?
Can you confirm the SCRO Experts welcome this approach?
Can you also let us know who you think should be brought in to assist the Inquiry?
I particulary look forward to the presentations of Robert Mackenzie and Alan Dunbar. Unbelievable to think that when producing his evidence for the Civil Case, Mackenzie was only able to find 13 charecteristics in agreement! A long way short of the 45 he found on 2000! And no sign of any chart by Dunbar.
And Dunbar's (who has chosen to represent himself, without the aid of a lawyer) findings will be very interesting. Given his comments in 1999 regarding his actions, and the total farce of a blind test, I would have thought he would definitely have needed some kind of legal representation. But perhaps he knows best. Or perhaps he is a weak link??? Perhaps he will finally tell the truth and betray his colleagues? Given his oral evidence alone at Justice 1 destroys Peter Swann.
And let us not forget Fiona McBride who for some strange reason does not appear to have prepared a new chart for the Civil Case.
I hope the charts will be made public through the Inquiry to allow Experts worldwide to examine in close detail. If not you can be guaranteed they will have been closely analysed and scrutinsed prior to individuals giving evidence!
And the world can sit back and watch battle commence, judgement day is coming.......