Doctor Frank Skuse (born about 1934)[1] was a forensic scientist for the North West Forensic Laboratories based in Chorley in Lancashire, England. His flawed conclusions, eventually discredited, contributed to the convictions of Judith Ward and the Birmingham Six.[2] Others who claim they were wrongfully convicted on Skuse's evidence include Ann Gillespie, wife of MEP Pat the Cope Gallagher.[3]
Contents |
Skuse used the Griess test in which the presence of NO2− (nitrite ions) is detected in a sample by formation of a red azo dye. He used the extraction solvent ether.
Skuse analysed samples from Ward using thin layer chromatography in addition to the Griess test.[4]
Frank Skuse used the results of the Griess test to claim that Patrick Hill and William Power had handled explosives. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry tests at a later date were negative for Power and contradicted the initial results for Hill.[4]
Skuse's 99% certainty that Power and Hill had explosives traces on their hands was fundamentally opposed by defence expert Dr Hugh Kenneth Black FRIC (ex HM Chief Inspector of Explosives, Home Office)
Skuse's evidence was clearly preferred by The Hon. Mr Justice Bridge, the trial judge.[5]
In 1981 and 1982 line managers at Chorley forensic science laboratory referred to a deterioration in the performance of Skuse and in January 1983 he was removed from reporting cases to court.[6] In October 1985 a World in Action documentary In The Interests of Justice concluded that the real Birmingham pub bombers had gone free.[7] Days after the TV programme, the Home Office retired Skuse,[8] aged 51, from the Civil Service on the grounds of "limited effectiveness".[1] Throughout the following year all 350 of Skuse's cases, dating back to 1966, were examined by the Laboratory Director.[6]
On 1 December 1986 another "World in Action" documentary: A Surprise Witness made public the doubts about Skuse's methods.[6][9] Skuse was subsequently portrayed by David Ryall in the March 1990 docudrama Who Bombed Birmingham? [10]
In 1991 The Court of Appeal stated that the Griess test should only be used as a gateway or preliminary test and that:
Dr Skuse's conclusion was wrong, and demonstrably wrong, judged even by the state of forensic science in 1974.[11]
Caustic soda is used to break down the molecule of nitroglycerine to produce nitrite ions. The concentration is crucial to the test. If Skuse had used a dilute solution as he claimed, the test would react positive only on hands dripping with nitroglycerine,[12] which was an absurdity.[13] A stronger solution would react positive to any number of chemicals. Contaminants suggested included laboratory detergents used to wash the test containers and some soaps, as well as the nitrocellulose polymer used on playing cards.
In 1993 The Court of Appeal stated:[14]
| “ | there is...impressive...expert opinion...that Dr Skuse's tests...were of no value in establishing contact between the appellant and...explosives.... | ” |
Scientific evidence showed that the samples taken by Skuse were 57 hours after the last bomb, and as such there could be no suggestion of explosives on Ward's hands.[4] In addition Skuse had relied on one TLC test spot which was not pink, causing the judges to question his handling of the Griess test too.
The successful appeals ended sub judice issues and in March 1993 Skuse won an appeal allowing him to sue Granada TV for libel over the World in Action programmes. The action was partly funded by James Goldsmith.[15] Wishing to prove he had not negligently misrepresented to the court as claimed,[16] Skuse defence was that that it was possible for someone to be wrong without being negligent.[17] The libel action was dropped in October 1994 following attempts by scientists on both sides to reproduce the tests which Skuse claimed to have carried out. No damages or costs were awarded and Ian McBride, producer of the 1985 programme, stated "We stand by our programme".[15] Skuse's total legal bill was estimated at £290,000[18] and in May 1995 his solicitor, Peter Carter-Ruck, commenced proceedings for £130,000 in unpaid fees.[19]
Sir John May's inquiry accused other scientists of lies; Skuse's veracity was not in doubt, however, his competence was.