I thank the Lord Advocate for her detailed and clear statement. Lord Clarke in his opinion stated:

"There was no forensic evidence linking the accused with acts of violence said to have been the cause of death. There was no evidence that the accused had been the actor in the case of the rape or murder of either of the girls."

Given that, can the Lord Advocate explain why DNA from skin that was present in the centre of the knot in one of the ligatures that were the murder weapons that killed Christine Eadie and Helen Scott was not produced in evidence? Why was the case not prosecuted by the Solicitor General, given its complexity and the fact that it was prepared during his time as procurator fiscal in the Lothians, which meant that he had great knowledge of all the evidence?