The offender's convictions for robbery and grievous bodily harm were safe as fresh evidence from an arboriculturalist, which suggested that a finger print lift relied upon by the Crown was not taken from a door of the crime scene, was not admissible as the arboriculturalist lacked the relevant experience or expertise, and the evidence would not have affected the jury's verdict.

[2005] EWCA Crim 1158

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar