Alyce
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 13,295
- Reaction score
- 54,501
It seems from the court transcripts that RM appears to be anything but clear about those specific details. If the prints are in a communal stairwell i suspect the defence will easily be able to argue the point i made in my previous post. If they were found on an internal staircase between levels two and three then yes that is quite different, BUT, is it possible the accused could have visited the house previously for another reason, or without RM's knowledge ?
It's an internal spiral staircase which goes from the back door on the ground floor to the door of the McPhail flat on the first floor.
Far as I know, there is only their flat on the first floor of the building, therefore that stairwell is private to them.
From the court transcript, the handprint was found between step 10 and step 14, on the chair rail.
However, if the main ground floor door was often left open/unlocked then I agree with you that Defence can argue that this handprint could have been left at another time. It is, apparently, very difficult to *time date * a handprint.
I also agree that RM was not clear about the detail re the accused and how much access he had ever had to the building.