A FORENSIC pathologist whose flawed evidence was criticised in an official inquiry is facing legal action over a case in which two Scots were wrongly jailed for murder.
Expert testimony given by Dr Michael Heath in a case against Victor Boreman and Malcolm Byrne, from Ayrshire, and their co-defendant Michael Byrne, has been described as "discredited" by an appeal judge.
The prosecution claimed the three had murdered Jonathan Reid, 51, in his London flat and had then set the room alight in a bid to hide evidence of their crime. They were said to have killed Reid during an argument in April 1996.
Heath, a Home Office pathologist for 14 years, said the victim had been unconscious after the assault and may have "drowned in his own blood" because of injuries to his face. But at an appeal earlier this year, it was ruled there was clear evidence that, while the three had assaulted Reid, he had died accidentally in a fire several hours later. The appeal led to the convictions being overturned.
Last night Boreman said: "My lawyers are putting together a civil case now, but this is not about money. We spent 10 years in jail for a crime we did not commit and there is evidence they knew the case was suspect from the beginning.
"I want Heath and others involved in this case to have a taste of what they put me through."
In January, Heath withdrew from police work after concerns were raised about him. Last month, he was criticised in a Home Office disciplinary tribunal examining his conduct in two other cases, following complaints by his peers.
The first involved Steven Puaca, who was found guilty of smothering his partner. Two other pathologists concluded she had died from a drugs overdose.
In a second case, Heath concluded that Kenneth Fraser had killed his girlfriend by hitting her over the head. Four other pathologists decided she had died falling downstairs.
A decision is expected this month on whether Heath, 58, should be struck off.
On Tuesday, a number of families who claim their relatives have been wrongly jailed because of Heath's evidence will gather for a conference in Kent. It is expected they will call for dozens of cases involving Heath to be re-opened.
Heath's position as a Home Office pathologist has led to him being involved in hundreds of post-mortems and criminal cases, including that of mother and daughter Lin and Megan Russell, murdered by Michael Stone in Kent, and Stuart Lubbock, who was found drowned in Michael Barrymore's swimming pool.
Boreman is to travel to the meeting on Tuesday to speak about his case.
Maslen Merchant, Boreman's lawyer, said Boreman's case was a "serious" miscarriage of justice. He confirmed he was preparing a civil case, but could only proceed when the formal appeal court judgment became available.
"You can have an isolated incident that is a mistake, but there are serious questions to be asked here. This is not someone who got it slightly wrong. How many more are out there?
"It is horrendous that the state prosecuting authorities can bring evidence into court without, apparently, any sense of quality control."
He added that a senior pathologist who looked at the Boreman case had warned that if it had been set as a student exam question, Heath would not have passed.
John McManus, of the Miscarriage of Justice Organisation in Scotland, which is supporting Boreman and his two coaccused, described the case as "deeply worrying".
He added: "We need a full and transparent review of every case in which Heath was involved. We need to ensure no innocent man or woman is in jail."
The Home Office would not comment.
NEED TO KNOW
THE FACTS Lawyers acting for two Scots who were wrongly jailed for murder in 1996 are considering taking a civil action against a forensic pathologist who gave evidence at their trial.
BACKGROUND Concerns were first raised in January about the reliability of evidence given by Dr Michael Heath in court. A Home Office disciplinary tribunal could lead to him being struck off the register. Earlier this year, he withdrew from police work.
NEED TO KNOW MORE?
www. mojoscotland. com Miscarriages of justice organisation.
www. homeoffice. gov. uk The Home Office website.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article