A TRIAL has heard of possible minor DNA matches between an accused murderer and two girls found dead in 1977.
The High Court in Livingston was told that Angus Sinclair "cannot be excluded" as a contributor of minor DNA taken from swabs from the bodies of Helen Scott and Christine Eadie.
Sinclair, 69, has been on trial at the court since the start of last week. He denies raping and murdering the teenagers, both 17, who were last seen at the World's End pub in Edinburgh on October 15 1977.
Sinclair is accused of carrying out the attacks along with his brother-in-law, Gordon Hamilton, who is now dead.
Forensic scientist Susan Ure, 42, said she analysed four swabs taken from Helen's body.
They matched the DNA profile of Hamilton, the court heard.
The jury then heard that one of those swabs also contained a minor DNA profile of another individual, present at a lower level.
Ms Ure told the court: "If you assume that this DNA is originated from one individual, Angus Sinclair cannot be excluded as a contributor of this minor DNA component."
Her analysis concluded that it was approximately 106 times more likely that Sinclair was the source of the DNA, compared with another individual.
The court was also told about three swabs taken from Christine's body.
Two produced full matches with Hamilton's profile, as well as "weak indications" of DNA from another individual.
Defence QC Ian Duguid has not yet had the opportunity to question Ms Ure.
Earlier, the court heard that Helen may have walked in the field where her body was discovered.
Jurors were told of "strong evidence" that she had likely stood or walked in the East Lothian wheat field where she was found dead.
The court has already heard that Christine's body was found at around 2.25pm on October 16 1977 at Gosford Bay, Aberlady, while Helen's body was discovered at around 6pm that day in a field near Haddington..
Sinclair denies the charges against him and has submitted three special defences: incrimination - blaming his brother-in-law; alibi - saying he was fishing at the time; and consent to sexual intercourse.
The trial, before Lord Matthews, continues.
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