NO JUSTICE IN DOUBLE JEOPARDY
Victim’s dad calls for law review after failure to convict her killer
The parents of murder victim Amanda Duffy are calling for a thorough reexamination of double jeopardy legislation after the failure to bring her killer to justice.
Joe and Kate Duffy are also continuing to campaign to have the not-proven verdict scrapped which allowed Francis Auld to walk free when he was prosecuted for their daughter’s murder in 1992.
It follows Auld’s death from pancreatic cancer last month putting him beyond the reach of the courts.
The Duffys have now written to Lord Avocate James Wolfe QC about a catalogue of alleged blunders after the Crown tried to prosecute Auld after the abolition of Scotland’s double jeopardy law which prevented a suspect being tried for the same crime.
In the letter, they spell out how they have been let down by the justice system.
Joe told the Lord Advocate in the letter on behalf of the Duffy family: “Amanda has not and never will now receive the justice she deserves. It is remarkable, because it is clear to everyone that ever looked at this case that we all know who the guilty party is.
“The damning indictment on the Scottish justice system is that they failed Amanda at every level and it appears they continue to do so.
‘There is shame on the Scottish legal system who have failed to right a very damning wrong to Amanda.
“With the quality and quantity of evidence available at the original
trial, it is inconceivable to think that had that unique Scottish verdict of not proven not been available to the jury they could have found not guilty.’
Joe told the Advertiser this week Amanda’s family are to contact the First Minister, justice secretary and all MSPS to ask for their support to have a “full and detailed” re-examination of the Double Jeopardy Act.
He said: “We believe this is absolutely essential since the existing [Double Jeopardy] Act instead of providing a clear indication of what evidence can or cannot be submitted appeared to be based on a matter of conjecture and opinion. Quite frankly the matters the Act are supposed to address are far too important to be treated in such a manner.”
Drama student Amanda was brutally murdered at a night out in Hamilton in May 1992. She was last seen alive with Auld before her naked body was found on waste ground. The unemployed mechanic walked free from the High Court in November 1992. Joe and Kate were however successful in a 1995 civil case which found Auld responsible for Amanda’s death.
They had hoped the abolition of the Double Jeopardy laws would finally see Auld convicted in a criminal court, but these hopes were dashed in February 2016 when the Court of Appeal rejected an attempt submit new evidence.
The Duffys’ concerns outlined in the letter to the Lord Advocate include: the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service had failed to prepare properly before announcing their intention to use double jeopardy law to put Auld back on trial; it lost most of the original evidence from the 1992 trial and the transcript of the trial; failed to maintain continuity at the top of the double jeopardy investigation; changed the advocate in charge of presenting the plea for a new trial near the last moment.
Joe also pointed to the time taken to commission Scottish Government research into jury decsion-making and the ‘three-verdict system’ following a post-corroboration safeguards review issued in April 2015.
A Crown Office spokesman said this week: “We can confirm that a letter has been received from the family of Amanda Duffy.
“The Lord Advocate will give careful consideration to their letter before providing a full response.”
A Scottish Government spokesman said this week: “One of the recommendations of Lord Bonomy’s post-corroboration safeguards review was that research into jury reasoning and decision making should be undertaken to ensure that changes to the jury system are only made on a fully informed basis. This includes the ‘three verdict’ system.
“We have committed to taking forward this jury research, which is currently subject to a formal procurement process and once it starts is expected to take two years to complete.”