Argument in science - Visitor Comments - Lundy Truth

Go to content

Main menu:

Argument in science

Published by in Visitor Comment ·
Tags: Argumentinscience
Mark Lundy and the hidden secret evidence. I had the chance to read Mark Lundy letters published in ‘stuff’ news earlier in the week. It brought home to me something extremely important in this case which I hope I can clearly distil. The Lundy case has been taken over by an argument in science, ‘novel unproven science v accredited and regulated for forensic use science.’ Of course, there is no doubt over which science should be allowed by a conservative court for one reason - the crime scene into which strangers had entered. Something, I think Mark Lundy has described to perfection. It is lost to the conservative mind that the science argument is down the list against the crime scene evidence, which conservatively, perhaps, not even being no 2 on the list, more forthrightly inadmissible. Mark Lundy like any man, knew his own home. He knew the signs of a break in but it was hidden from him and the Courts that there were also fingerprints and footprints left in the scene that were never traced, and which were highly unlikely to have been there after the home was cleaned by a very thorough contractor just before the tragedy. When Dr Teoh’s letter was belatedly released by the Crown it was rightly seized upon as showing a miscarriage of Justice. However, the potential proof that unknown males had been the house, their DNA found under the nails of Christine and Amber has never been properly appreciated for its true meaning supported by the reasons it was hidden. If it were not hidden, Mark may not have been charged and was unlikely to have been convicted if he had been charged, due to the Jury having tangible evidence of other offenders to consider – the very reason the critical evidence was hidden. I think this must be taken to the COA along with all the new data showing how DNA gets under the fingernails and how long it may last. I am 100% behind Mark on this. He was the man that lived in the home and knew it inside out, he was the grieving father who became the suspect as a matter of course. A course that when off target, away from actual evidence and into the darkness of deciphering highly ‘weak for purposes’ evidence in a case where fingerprints, footprints, a break in, and stranger DNA found under the deceased nails was secreted away. Give him his chance for the truth to be heard in the right order, crime scene first.

Brian of Auckland


1 comment
Test Comment
2017-08-23 18:23:18
Test Post


Back to content | Back to main menu