Written Question · S2W-29649 · Session 2
Whether, following the previous Lord Advocate’s decision in August 2001 to take no criminal proceedings against the Scottish Criminal Recor…
The question
To ask the Scottish Executive whether, following the previous Lord Advocate’s decision in August 2001 to take no criminal proceedings against the Scottish Criminal Record Office experts in respect of their misidentification of the Shirley McKie fingerprint, those experts were granted immunity from prosecution or whether it would be possible to commence prosecution of the same experts for this misidentification if new evidence became available.
The answer
The decision not to take proceedingsagainst the four SCRO officers who identified print Y7 as being that of ShirleyMcKie, made by the Lord Advocate in 2001, is final and it would not be possibleto prosecute these officers at any point in the future in relation to their identificationof Y7.
The finality of the decisionis not, however, as a result of immunity granted by the Crown – no such immunityhas been granted. The decision is final because, in Scots Law, when a decision totake no proceedings has been intimated by the Crown to a person against whom a criminalallegation has been made, the Crown are held to it, and such intimation will usuallyconstitute a bar to any proceedings thereafter.
The finality of the decisionis not, however, as a result of immunity granted by the Crown – no such immunityhas been granted. The decision is final because, in Scots Law, when a decision totake no proceedings has been intimated by the Crown to a person against whom a criminalallegation has been made, the Crown are held to it, and such intimation will usuallyconstitute a bar to any proceedings thereafter.
In the Official Report
No contribution in the Official Report cites S2W-29649 by reference.