HC Deb 26 January 1977 vol 924 cc1487-9
41. Mr. Fairbairn

asked the Lord Advocate if he will place in the Library a copy of the report by Assistant Chief Constable Arthur Bell and Detective Chief Superintendent John McDougall on the Meehan and Waddell cases.

The Lord Advocate (Mr. Ronald King Murray)

I do not propose to do so. At my instance Assistant Chief Constable Bell and Detective Chief Superintendent McDougall commenced a course of inquiries into the Meehan and Waddell cases and submitted several reports to me. In accordance with normal practice in the investigation of crime, such reports are not for publication.

Mr. Fairbairn

While I appreciate the Lord Advocate's position in giving that answer, may I ask him whether he agrees that those reports contain many facts that are still unknown to the public and that, in some form or another, in the interests of justice must eventually be made known to the public?

The Lord Advocate

The hon. and learned Gentleman is tempting me to make a reply that is not for me but for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, who has these matters very much under consideration.

Mr. David Steel

Will the Lord Advocate tell us when we may learn of any progress, either on his Hart or on the part of his right hon. Friend. in consideration of the Meehan case? It is now many months since Meehan was released from prison. An inquiry was promised, and the full compensation that is due is yet to be settled.

The Lord Advocate

Without accepting the comment that the right hon. Gentleman has just made, I stress that this is a matter for serious concern. He will appreciate that. It is not a matter in which a hasty decision can and should be made. I can say that my right hon. Friend has the matter under urgent consideration.

Mr. Rifkind

With regard to the question of compensation to Patrick Meehan, does the Lord Advocate recall that on Meehan's own evidence he was indulging in criminal activity elsewhere in Scotland on the night of Mrs. Ross's death? Can he give an assurance that this will be taken into account when the amount of compensation is determined, otherwise there will be great resentment?

The Lord Advocate

That is a matter not for me but for my right hon. Friend, who will have heard the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

Mrs. Winifred Ewing

Will the Lord Advocate take account of the considerable public disquiet and say whether, in the reports available to him, it is within his knowledge that a Crown medical expert is suffering considerable worry because, in the Waddell trial, he was not permitted to disclose the fact that he had a near-identical case of ammonia being thrown into the face of a woman victim, who was tied up, and that the suspect was "Tank" McGuinness? Is the Lord Advocate willing to say whether that information has been within Crown knowledge all this time? In the light of public disquiet, is it not time that we had a public inquiry?

The Lord Advocate

It would be inappropriate for me to make any comment, in confirmation or otherwise, on what the hon. Lady has said. The hon. Lady, as a practising lawyer, must be aware that there are such things as the rules of evidence. Unless courts are conducted according to the rules of evidence, it will be the end of British justice.

Mr. Robert Hughes

Referring to the original Question, can my right hon. and learned Friend say how many inquiries his Department has conducted into this matter over the years?

The Lord Advocate

I am not in a position to say how many inquiries there have been, but it may be of assistance to my hon. Friend if I disclose to him and to the House the extent of the inquiries that have been made by my Department.

In May 1974, shortly after I came to office, I meticulously examined all the documents in the Crown Office relating to this case. I reached the view that there was no ground for my reaching a different conclusion from that of my predecessor as Lord Advocate, who had investigated the matter on his own behalf in 1970 and 1973.

In October 1974 I instructed further inquiries into the case and certain persons were precognosced by the Crown Agent on my behalf. In January and February 1975 he made further inquiries of the same general type. In September 1975 additional inquiries were made after I had received a pre-publication script of Ludovic Kennedy's book.

In November 1975 the Strathclyde police were asked to undertake on my behalf certain detailed investigations.

From then until March 1976 a series of inquiries were carried out on my behalf, either by Strathclyde police or by the Crown Agent. All these inquiries led to inconclusive results until March 1976.