Angus Sinclair Case

Part of the debate – in the Scottish Parliament at 2:54 pm on 13 September 2007.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour 2:54, 13 September 2007

I thank the Lord Advocate for coming to the chamber. She will be aware of the widespread concern throughout Scotland that these vile crimes have gone unpunished and that justice has not been done. My first concern is for the families of Helen Scott and Christine Eadie, who have suffered unimaginable torment over the past 30 years. I believe that the criminal justice system has let them down. I hope that the Lord Advocate appreciates the need for Parliament to scrutinise what went wrong in this case and to come forward with proposals to ensure that victims and their families are not let down in this way again.

Will the Lord Advocate provide details of when, and which, law officers were in contact with the advocate depute in the preparation and conduct of the trial? She made clear in her statement that the decision not to lead the DNA evidence was taken by the advocate depute alone. I ask her to confirm that. My understanding from what she said is that that was the appropriate decision. However, in such a complex and technical case, surely it would have been helpful for the advocate depute to have consulted one of the law officers.

Given that the trial ended on the decision of a judge and not a jury, does the Lord Advocate agree that there should be a right of appeal? Does she intend to make recommendations to the Cabinet on legislative and other changes to the criminal justice system? When her review is concluded, will she issue a full written report and return to the Parliament to explain the lessons that have been learned, so that we can address such issues in future.