It dealt with the case of Alan McNamara (Scotland) who was wrongly convicted for murder on fingerprint evidence. A female police officer (Shirley McKie) was wrongly accused of perjury in the same trial - also on fingerprint evidence.
Personally I think that the police wanted to wrap the case up asap and when Shirley refused to say it was her print they just tried to bully her into agreeing. By the time it all came to court it was too late and they couldn't very well back down without losing face.
QUOTE
Fingerprints in the dock
For more than 100 years the identification of fingerprints has been fundamental to the solving of crimes.
A single fingerprint can provide enough evidence to send someone to prison for life.
Lawyers will advise clients to plead guilty if they cannot explain why their prints have been found at a crime scene.
But the case of a former Scottish detective whose prints were misidentified by the country's top fingerprint bureau has shaken this faith around the world.
Earlier this year, Shirley McKie was given three quarters of a million pounds in an out of court settlement with the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO).
She had been charged with perjury after telling a court that a fingerprint found at a crime scene could not belong to her because she had never been to the house.
Michael Jackson's lawyers cited the McKie case when questioning the validity of fingerprint evidence at the singer's trial.
International fingerprint experts tell Panorama about their concerns that the infallibility of fingerprints as evidence is now in question.
The Scottish Parliament has invited the four fingerprint experts from the SCRO, who wrongly put Shirley McKie at the murder scene, to be interviewed about their work in the next few weeks.
Source More info here.
Another link:
http://www.clpex.com/Articles/TheDetail/1-99/TheDetail41.htm
