A FORENSIC scientist has told a court how evidence recovered from the location where Elaine Doyle's body was discovered suggested she had became involved in a struggle before dying.
Keith Eynon, 68, was the head of Strathclyde Police's Forensic Support Unit when he was called to a lane off Ardgowan Street, Greenock, in June 1986.
A jury at the High Court in Edinburgh heard how a clump of hair was recovered close to where the 16-year-old's body was found on June 2 that year.
The court heard how Mr Eynon helped gather forensic evidence from where Elaine's remains were found.
Mr Eynon told prosecution lawyer John Scullion: "Certainly the clump of hair suggests a struggle."
He gave evidence for a second day at proceedings against John Docherty, 49, of Dunoon, Argyll, who denies murdering jeweller's assistant Elaine. He claims that, at the time he is alleged to have stripped and strangled her, he was at home with his parents, who are no longer alive.
Mr Docherty has also lodged a special defence of incrimination claiming the culprit might be among a list of 41 names taken from files of the police investigation into the alleged murder.
He faces a charge which alleges that, in a lane near Ardgowan Street, he seized her by the hair, struck her on the head and either removed or compelled her to remove her clothing.
The charge goes on to allege he forced Elaine to the ground, pushed her face to the ground, sat or knelt on the teenager then placed a ligature round her neck and strangled her. He also denies a charge of attacking another woman, Linda Hargie, on various occasions between 1990 and 1995 at an address in Anne Street, Greenock, by seizing her and pushing her on the head.
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