14:53KALI LINDSAY
'Important not to leap to conclusions'
“It is very important not to leap to conclusions from these DNA findings.
"There are a number of factors that must be considered. First, although this is the Y DNA profile of David Boyd could it be in fact from another male line relative of his? Or, indeed, from another, unrelated, male?"
14:54KALI LINDSAY
DNA because he was killer or innocent transfer?
“Second, how has the DNA come to be in these locations? Because he was her killer or by some innocent mechanism of transfer?
14:54KALI LINDSAY
Jurors continue to hear DNA evidence
“Third, over thirty years later and in a case where precautions in 1992 may not have been as strict as precautions in 2023, is it possible that the clothing has innocently been contaminated with his DNA?"
14:55KALI LINDSAY
DNA not only evidence in case
“We will look at each of these scenarios in some depth during the trial. At this stage I can do no more than summarise the arguments about each.
However, you will no doubt appreciate that the DNA is not the only evidence in this case.
You may consider that as a jury you will need to weigh this evidence in the light of all of the strands of the circumstantial case that we present.
Essentially asking yourselves, in the light of everything about Mr Boyd that it is relevant for you to know; what are the chances that the DNA of this man is seen consistently across two items of clothing in four sites, where he is a dead ringer for the artists impression, where he matches the age and description of the killer, where he knew this child well, where he knew the site of her murder well, where he has been inside that building on many occasions just as the killer must have been, where he saw her that very night just before she was taken, that he lied about where he was at the very time of the killing?
What are the chances that his DNA is represented in all of these places by some random freak act of contamination rather than because he was the man who murdered this little girl?
14:56KALI LINDSAY
Three scenarios
“Let’s look at those three scenarios then.
"Firstly, could it be some other male line relative of David Boyd that has managed to get his DNA onto the clothing a Nikki Allan on the very night that she was murdered?
"The police have investigated the Boyd family tree.
"He is not from Sunderland and neither are his family. He has no identified male line relatives living anywhere nearby and certainly not in Wear Garth.
"You may think that you can comfortably reject the notion that some other unknown relative swept in undetected on the 7th October 1992, murdered a child that he knew and had seen moments before she went missing and left leaving no other evidence behind.”
14:57KALI LINDSAY
DNA screening performed
“In addition, a massive DNA screening exercise has been performed by the police re-investigating this case.
"It is of course not possible to exclude every male person who may theoretically have been in the area of the Garths on the night of the killing.
"However, of the hundreds tested, no DNA profile other than that of Boyd, matches the male DNA profile obtained from the T-Shirt and cycle shorts.
"No other credible candidate for the murder, who fits the wider criteria that must apply to the offender has been identified.”
14:58KALI LINDSAY
Second scenario
“What then of the second scenario? An innocent mechanism of transfer of his DNA onto Nikki’s clothing worn underneath her coat. Well, we will invite you to conclude that an explanation would be required from the defendant as to how a man who had no admitted direct contact with the deceased at any time proximate to her disappearance and murder had contaminated multiple sites on her clothing with his DNA.
"It is significant that Margaret Hodgson, who observed Nikki from the MacFish compound described her as wearing her coat when she passed by with her killer.
"She was wearing the coat in the grounds of the Old Exchange Building because it was found there the next morning.
"The findings however are that Boyd’s DNA profile was found at four sites across two items of clothing that were under her coat.
"How did it get there? We will invite you to conclude that no sensible scenario of innocent transfer exists to explain those findings.”
14:58KALI LINDSAY
Third scenario
“What then of the third scenario?
"That there has been some contamination of these exhibits. Firstly, that would of course require an innocent source of the DNA of David Boyd to have been available and introduced to them at some point.
"There is no evidence of any innocent contamination and so the scenario is inevitably speculative.
"Might it be suggested that his DNA was in some way left on an exposed window sill when he entered that derelict building four days earlier and then found itself transported to four separate areas of her clothing?
14:59KALI LINDSAY
Post offence contact excluded
“We are able to exclude any post offence contact with David Boyd, and also trace the exhibits from their recovery at post mortem examination to the present day."
15:00KALI LINDSAY
Jurors told 'obvious explanation is the correct one'
“In any of these theoretical scenarios of innocent contamination you may think it an incredible coincidence that the clothing of this child would be contaminated with DNA matching the profile of a man who just happened to have seen Nikki that night at the right time, who was the last man in fact to see her alive, who matched the description of her killer, who knew the building in which she was killed very well and who lied about his whereabouts that night.
"You will have to consider ultimately whether we are descending into speculative theories or rather whether, as is often the case, the obvious explanation is the correct one.
"His DNA is in these areas in the context of all of the other evidence because he is guilty of murder.”
Stockton man David Boyd has denied the murder of Sunderland schoolgirl Nikki Allan, whose body was found in an abandoned building in October 1992
www.gazettelive.co.uk