§ Mr. WATTasked whether in the case of Robert Simpson, of Glasgow, convicted in 1907 of conspiracy to defraud certain newspapers, the handwriting expert, Henry Gurrin, on whose evidence the conviction mainly depended, was the same expert in 1049 handwriting on whose evidence Beck and Edalji were convicted, but were subsequently released?
§ Mr. UREI would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave to him on the 12th May last, in which I pointed out that the conviction of the accused did not rest upon expert evidence as to his handwriting.
The HON. MEMBERalso asked, has the right hon. Gentleman official information to the effect that since the conviction and imprisonment of Robert Simpson for conspiring to defraud certain newspapers, letters have been received by the judge who tried the case, by the "Daily Record" newspaper, and by the father of the prisoner, admittedly in the same handwriting as the incriminating telegram, which letters it was impossible for the prisoner to write?
§ Mr. UREIt was represented to the Secretary for Scotland, in a petition in 1907, that certain letters had been received by the judge who tried the case, by the "Daily Record" newspaper, and by the father of the prisoner, which were alleged to be in the same handwriting as the telegram referred to, but upon examination this allegation was not supported. It is not therefore correct to say, as is suggested in the question, that the identity of the handwriting in the telegram and in the letters was admitted.
§ Mr. UREI cannot recollect whether it was examined by that expert or not, but the particular telegram was spoken to by one of the conspirators.