§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if the results of Dr. Clift's forensic examination in the case against John Preece were made available to the defence, including information on the blood group and secretor status of the murdered woman.
§ The Solicitor-General for ScotlandDr. Clift's name was on the list of Crown witnesses served on the accused as part of the indictment. This is done to enable the witnesses to be questioned on the accused's behalf prior to the trial. I do not know what questions, if any, the defence asked Dr. Clift at that stage.
Before it wasknown that the proceedings would lye in Scotland Dr. Clift prepared a statement in a form appropriate only for English procedure which included information about the murdered woman's blood group but not her secretor status. This was not loged in the Scottish court or copied to the defence. For the Scottish proceedings Dr. Clift prepared three separate reports which were lodged as productions in the case before the trial and as such they were available to the defence. None of the reports produced included information on the blood group or secretor status of the murdered woman. Two of these reports did, however, contain reference to the fact that blood samples had been obtained from her body and one mentioned that this was done for grouping.
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether Dr. Clift, in his first report on the case of John Preece, made reference to the secretor status of the murdered woman as well as to the blood group.
§ The Solicitor-General for ScotlandNo, he did not at any stage of the original proceedngs advise the Crown of the secretor status of the murdered woman.