A6 Rebooted

[djw]

A copy of the Roger Matthews report has been located at the Ministry of Justice but they have exercised an exemption from disclosure according to this FOI request https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...opolitan_polic

[Sherlock Houses]

Episodes 2 and 3 of "Cold Case Forensics" are available for viewing on ITVX for anyone interested. They concern the murders of Lynette White and Stephen Lawrence.

[Sherlock Houses]

Four weeks ago, under the title "Cold Case Forensics" ITV screened a documentary [the first of several murder cases] about the 1992 murder of Rachel Nickell on Wimbledon Common. The original police suspect, Colin Stagg was charged with the murder and brought to trial in 1994. Stagg was proven completely innocent and the case against him completely collapsed.

In 2002 world-leading forensic scientist Dr.Angela Gallop and her team were brought in to try and find out the identity of the real killer, who turned out to be one Robert Napper.

Here is a transcription of an important part of that documentary.....

The process of taking tapings, where adhesive tape is applied to the skin to collect small items of evidence, had been used on Rachel's body. Angela asked her team to take a closer look at these........"When I carried out a review of the DNA results that had been previously generated from the body tapings I found that no DNA profile had been obtained from them." [Andrew McDonald, DNA Lead Scientist, Cellmark].

Not only was there no DNA from any attacker there was no trace of Rachel's own DNA, despite the fact that the tapings had been taken from intimate areas of her own skin. "The fact that we obtained no profile at all was an unexpected finding to me." [Andrew McDonald].

"When we were faced with a sample that hadn't given any DNA results at all, when it really should at least have given the result from Rachel herself in this intimate part of her body, then we knew that something was very wrong because you can't have that sort of finding without finding a proper explanation for it. You can't have a loose end like that. Forensic scientists don't like loose ends." [Dr. Angela Gallop].

So what had gone wrong, and could it have caused the police to miss the real killer ?. A decade after Rachel Nickell was brutally murdered on Wimbledon Common, forensic scientist Dr. Angela Gallop was on the hunt for the killer. Angela and lead examiner, April Robson, had gone back to the original forensic test results and got a surprise. Previous reports showed that tapings taken from Rachel's body had found no DNA at all - not even Rachel's own. "This immedately set off a concern in our minds because what they were looking for was these tiny traces of the offender, but also captured on the taping would have been a lot of skin flakes from Rachel herself, and they certainly should have got a DNA result from Rachel's DNA, but in the event they got absolutely nothing. So this told us that there was very likely to be something wrong with the technique they used or the way in which they used it." [Dr Angela Gallop].

The original tests on the tapings from Rachel's body had been carried out using the best option available to scientists at the time. This was a DNA profiling test called Low Copy Number or LCN. But more recent prominent cases have revealed LCN to be a technique with severe limitations. In 2007, after three-year old Madeleine McCann went missing while on holiday in the Algarve an LCN test appeared to show traces of Madeleine's DNA in the boot of a hire car used by her parents, Gerry and Kate. The discovery meant the couple spent some time under the suspicion of the police and the international media. But the LCN test result had been unreliable. The test had found components which were part of Madeleine's DNA, but these were far from unique to her. In fact they were so common they were even shared by some of the forensic scientists brought in to review the evidence.The LCN test could clearly lead to suspicion falling upon innocent people. But could it also lead to a murderer remaining free ?

Back in 2002, as they began their review of the Rachel Nickell case, Angela Gallop and her team were already suspicious of the LCN test. They wondered if the technique used by the original investigation had "swamped" the DNA, so that no traces had been found. "We repeated some of this work on the tiny amount of extract that was left from these tapings that the original scientists had made. And we discovered the same thing, that if you use the most sensitive technique then you get absolutely nothing. But if you start diluting the amount of DNA that you're using then you started to get results." [Dr. Angela Gallop].

Angela and her team abandoned the LCN method and retested the tapings using the standard technique. For the first time two DNA profiles began to show up.

[djw]

The Times reference James Hanratty as a miscarriage of justice (among others) today

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scandal-over-miscarriages-of-justice-rf0t0ht2b

A leading criminal barrister has called on the government to end the “scandal” that has denied compensation to victims of miscarriages of justice for almost a decade, saying that they “effectively have to prove their innocence” to receive a payout.
Henry Blaxland KC, from Garden Court Chambers in London, has acted in many prominent miscarriage of justice cases, including those involving Sam Hallam, Derek Bentley, James Hanratty, and the Bridgewater Four.
Blaxland, who is representing Hallam in his challenge to the present position in the European Court of Human Rights, said in a meeting in parliament last week that several people who should get compensation had been denied it.

[moste]

Remember Natalie ,one of her favourite subjects was the Mathews investigation and report ,and the obvious conspiracy of why it was stifled. I fear we’re wasting our time here.Mathews will take all he knows to the grave.

[Sherlock Houses]

Norma Buddle line of country, does she not mention it in your book

???? Don't quite get what you've posted here, Moste.

[moste]

Norma Buddle line of country, does she not mention it in your book

[djw]

Would the Matthews Report be contained within the court Appeal documents held by National Archives?

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/results/r?_q=%22james%20hanratty%22&_dss=range&_sd=1995&_ed=2000&_ps=60

e.g. one box example is

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C17023310

[moste]

Exactly

[Sherlock Houses]

Ok, using a different iPad Iâll try and correct these confounding characters.

There is ânoâ freedom of information. There is information available, but only if they choose to make it so.

Anything pertaining to the A6 killing is A very hot potato, thatâs why itâs mostly locked away for 75 yrs.

Itâs got nothing to do with âprotecting the innocentâ.

I can't disagree with anything you say here, Moste. We just don't live in a free society and never have done, the pompous 'ruling elite' have seen to that. The status quo must be maintained.
Joe Public is not classified as being a member of the privileged few club who decide amongst themselves what important information can or cannot be disclosed.
All in the interests of 'national security' you must understand, bla bla bla etc., LOL, and to the hell with truth and justice.

[moste]

Ok, using a different iPad I’ll try and correct these confounding characters.

There is ‘no’ freedom of information. There is information available, but only if they choose to make it so.

Anything pertaining to the A6 killing is A very hot potato, that’s why it’s mostly locked away for 75 yrs.

It’s got nothing to do with ‘protecting the innocent’.

[moste]

Found this while perusing.: Awaiting the truth about Hanratty. Paul Foot.

url wouldn’t copy for pasting.

[moste]

Yep Sherlock, a sour taster, for sure.

[Sherlock Houses]

Here's a taster of the sort of mentality Home Secretaries often adopt. This is from a Commons debate in May 1975 [How dare you ask such a question of me Mr Evans !!]........

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1975-05-02/debates/d22978ad-cd47-478f-a336-b1dc8cc469e6/JamesHanratty(CaseDocuments)?highlight=james%20hanratty#contribution-1525d28b-b1ca-4cb4-8fb1-06006385547e

[Sherlock Houses]

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1996-04-30/debates/479d8d1e-f2d3-4f1e-8b6d-86d4dc787184/JamesHanratty?highlight=james%20hanratty#contribution-d65cdea3-f943-485d-8332-055b80e78a1e

Can anyone help us get the Matthews Report by making their own FOI request and if they get refusals like I did, can they raise it with the Information commissioner within the required time period? I think the ICO required a maximum of 21 days from the refusal.
Previous FOIs are;
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...t_on_the_a6_mu
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_matthews_report_on_the_a6_mu_2
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_matthews_report_on_the_a6_mu_3
Lord Howard remembers the report so it definitely existed.

Yes, it definitely exists [or existed !] and was debated [very briefly] in the House of Commons in April and then October 1996.....

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1996-04-30/debates/479d8d1e-f2d3-4f1e-8b6d-86d4dc787184/JamesHanratty?highlight=james%20hanratty#contribution-d65cdea3-f943-485d-8332-055b80e78a1e

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1996-10-16/debates/5ecc84f0-c47f-45fc-b58c-32d9373a8512/JamesHanrattyCase?highlight=james%20hanratty#contribution-772be28f-79c5-480a-bd0d-7006ddb15ce2