Menu:

Case 5

5. Kxxx and Axxx - Rape 15/07/84

Kxxx and Axxx missed the train northwards at 12:30 p.m. Both women were raped by two men.

From original statement of Axxx: "My impression at the time was he was black. Both dark skinned..."

"Small man said tall man living across the street..." This she repeated during trial as given evidence. Mr. David Mulcahy´s skin colour is white.

As standard practice samples from Kxxx´s person were taken. None of the samples showed results to Mr. David Mulcahy´s blood grouping.

When the trousers were originally tested on the 06th Sept. 1984 the expert at the time stated in the given report R/4748/84 that "no staining was present" and thus rejected the trousers as possible evidence. The trousers were not even recorded on the "material submitted for examination" form (Ref. No. 1). It is also note worthy if we have a look at (Ref. 2) all items listed for submission to the labratory for testing just before Mr. David Mulcahy´s trial those being: I. Mc M., P. Mc G., T. C., S. C., M. W. are all listed in the same order as they were on the original form from the time of the attacks. This is because the bags must not be opened so one has only the list of the exhibits bag as reference. Yet in the case of Kxxx/Axxx these items are not listed in the order on the original form. It was claimed by the officer DC Murphy that she had not opened the bag and had just decided to copy from the original sheet in this bazar manner it is going from item 1 missing 2,3,4,5 then putting 6 missing 7,8,9 then putting 10. Why it is only on this case that a rotation has been made? The question is; Where have these trousers come from as they were not in the original bag!

The notes of the original securing of forensic evidence in regards to the attack on Kxxx´s was "lost" when the doctor who took the evidence supposedly had her car broken into. Strangely enough it was only records in regards to this matter of Kxxx´s attack that were stolen.

In regards to the stolen records the doctor could offer no proof that such a theft ever occurred. Despite supposedly reporting the crime to the police (no crime report number was presented) and claiming on her insurance in regards to the theft. The legal team for Mr. David Mulcahy requested the sample from the Kxxx´s case so they could be independently tested in early 1999.

In reply the CPS informed that all samples in relation to this particular case had been destroyed!

In the meantime Mrs. Harris tested the trousers for DNA. And a supposed match of DNA was obtained from a stain on the crutch of Kxxx´s trousers. A "DNA match made in relation to Mr. David Mulcahy". Miss Harris is not qualified to make statistical claims in any way. Statistics are a recognised science and any person who does not have the requisite qualifications should not give evidence in regards to this field.

At present Miss Harris is under investigation for the above facts.

In total 6 extra components that don´t appear in Mr. David Mulcahy´s DNA structure are present in the sample used as court evidence from Kxxx´s trousers. For detailed analysis of this facts please read page 17 and 18 of the Synopsis in the "download area". All in all using Miss Harris´s method probably a match would possibly drop to 1 in 5000. Not such a convincing argument. Especially when compared to the 25+ million males within the UK.

Furthermore 3 different hairs of different origin were discovered in the victim´s underwear. These were as follows:

1 x negroid hair 1 x fine-stranded hair 1 x pubic hair

The only record of these pieces of evidence is in a forensic report held at the testing lab. By the time of the trial all actual items had been "lost" and the file was missing. All the evidence samples submitted during this trial period in this case were never put into the forensic lab via the main desk, as would be standard practice.

Miss Harris took possession of them personally in the lab´s reception after receiving a phone call from the Forensic Liaison officer - this was the officer who also happened to be the search officer on Mr. David Mulcahy´s home!

SENTENCED WITH A VERY DUBIOUS, CONSTRUCTED PROOF FROM A NON-SPECIALIST UNDER INVESTIGATION!