Before he triggered the process that would be the point of no return, Jeff needed Ros Hammond’s assessment on the handling and integrity of the forensic exhibits. He held his breath.
Ros started from the premise of the ‘worst case scenario’, as she put it. She assumed, when examining the history of every significant exhibit, every handling, every movement and every scientific process that if there was a chance of inadvertent transfer of forensic material, it happened. She would then look to prove, one way or another, whether it actually had.
She looked at how the Pinto was seized, its packaging, how it was stored, when it was shown to Jenny Johnson and what happened to it at the police station and the lab. She scrutinized Dr West’s 1986 procedures in taking forensic samples from the girls’ bodies. She checked whether items, stored or transported together, could have rubbed up against one another. She inspected photographs, statements, packaging, case notes and the items themselves.
Crucially she showed that the girls’ clothing and the Pinto were never both in unsealed packaging in the same building. It was impossible that they had ever come together, except at the murder scene.
While she could not go back in time to watch the testing take place, assuming that the scientists, pathologist and SOCOs followed the procedures of the day, Ros could tell from the records and findings whether anything had happened that should not.
One thing did bother her. Scientists’ and police training teach that when opening a sealed exhibit bag, you cut the bag in a previously uncut place, do what you need to do, then reseal it with a label to show who has made the opening and when.
As she ploughed through the statements, she could not correlate the number of times the Pinto bag had been opened with the number of cuts in it. They should have matched. She went back and looked at some other items Dr Peabody had examined over the years, and there lay the answer.
Previously, scientists were taught to cut open the original seal rather than make fresh cuts. So however many times he and his colleagues opened a bag, they would break the same seal. It is easy to see why practice and training changed but old habits die hard and, once again, Ros was satisfied that there had been no malpractice at play.
After hours of checking, rechecking and peer review she was able to deliver her verdict. For each item she examined there was either no possibility of inadvertent transfer or the probability that if it had happened it was minute and could be discounted.
Finally, Jeff had the new, compelling and, crucially, reliable evidence he needed to seek the Director of Public Prosecution’s consent to arrest, interview and take samples from Bishop. It was time to make their move.