THE Government bowed yesterday to pressure to reopen the case of
George Beattie, 20 years after he was convicted of the murder of
Margaret McLaughlin, a young Carluke woman.
Scottish Home Affairs Minister Lord Fraser of Carmyllie has written to
Clydesdale MP Jimmy Hood, Beattie's MP, informing him that the Scottish
Secretary has agreed to refer the case to the Court of Criminal Appeal
to decide whether Beattie has suffered a miscarriage of justice.
The move follows a prolonged campaign to establish Beattie's
innocence. Among those who have played a prominent part are Mr Peter
Hill, former producer of BBC's Rough Justice programme, Beattie's lawyer
Mr Joe Beltrami, Mr Hood, and the late Lanarkshire MP, Dame Judith Hart.
Mr Hill was involved in a Rough Justice programme proclaiming
Beattie's innocence in 1983 and, over the past two years, has written a
series of articles in The Herald's law page, alleging that vital blood
grouping evidence which could have cleared Beattie was suppressed at his
trial.
Mr Hill claims that the authorities have been guilty of a cover-up in
Beattie's case and alleged in an article that a speck of blood found on
Beattie's handkerchief, the only forensic evidence against him, was not
the blood of the victim.
It is likely that the referral to the appeal court will concentrate on
the blood-grouping aspects of the case.
Rough Justice also alleged that the murder had taken place some hours
later than the prosecution alleged, a time for which Beattie had a
cast-iron alibi.
Beattie, then 19, served 13 years after being convicted of the
stabbing of 23-year-old Margaret McLaughlin in Carluke Glen in 1973. A
jury at the High Court in Glasgow took just 35 minutes to convict him by
a majority verdict.
Now 39, Beattie was released in 1986 and was working as a bus driver
in Lanarkshire when he was recalled on licence in April last year after
being accused of kicking his social worker on the leg.
He was admonished on a breach of the peace charge at Lanark Sheriff
Court but is still languishing in Edinburgh's Saughton prison with no
release date, a state of affairs Mr Beltrami describes as a disgrace.
Mr Hood, who has described the police investigation against Beattie as
a disaster from start to finish, said yesterday that although the letter
from Lord Fraser contained just two paragraphs, they were the most
pleasing two paragraphs he had ever read in his life.
''It's fantastic news. I have just spoken to his mother and she is
delighted. She had her son taken from her 20 years ago.
''She is seeing him tomorrow morning and I will let her break the news
to him. It will be the first time in 20 years that she's had any good
news to give him.
''It's been a long campaign but it's like running a marathon and, like
a marathon, you forget all the pain and anguish if you win.''
Beattie's brother, Jim, 49, said: ''We are overjoyed, obviously. We
will have to wait and see what happens now and take it from there. We
don't want to build up our hopes too much and then have them dashed.''
Mr Beltrami said he was delighted with the referral back to the appeal
court but added: ''It's a disgrace that he is still in custody as a
result of a minor breach of the peace for which he was admonished.''
He is also sure that Beattie is not a killer. ''Having met and talked
to him many times, I am convinced that he was incapable of carrying out
this brutal murder.''
Mr Beltrami said evidence of blood grouping was the key to the case
and he was reasonably confident that Beattie's appeal would succeed.
The appeal is expected to be heard in the early part of next year.
There have been a number of referrals to the appeal court by the
Secretary of State in recent years.
One of the best known involved Stoke-on-Trent lorry driver John
Preece, who had served seven years of a life sentence for murder until
the evidence of Home Office forensic scientist Dr Alan Clift was
discredited.
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