Trial On 27 August 2007, the trial of Angus Sinclair began in Court 3 at the
High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh. The presiding judge was
Lord Clarke. The prosecution was led by
advocate depute Alan Mackay, and the defence by Edgar Prais,
QC. The
indictment alleged that on the night of 15–16 October 1977, Sinclair and Gordon Hamilton (Sinclair's brother-in-law who had since died) persuaded or forced the girls into a motor vehicle and held them against their will, in St Mary's Street, near The World's End pub. It was alleged that he then drove Christine Eadie to Gosford Bay, Aberlady, and there or elsewhere attacked, stripped and gagged her with her underwear, and tied her wrists, before raping her and then killing her by restricting her breathing. He was further accused of raping and murdering Scott in the same way and driving her to a road near
Haddington, and in a field there or elsewhere in Edinburgh and East Lothian attacking her. Sinclair pleaded not guilty to rape and murder. No eyewitness evidence was led;
the Crown case was wholly circumstantial. On 3 September 2007, the
advocate depute led evidence from
Detective Constable Carol Craig, who noted that Angus Sinclair owned a
Toyota Hiace caravanette at the time of the murders, that he had since destroyed. As a result, she confirmed that police were unable to carry out forensic tests on any of the fabrics or seat upholstery inside the vehicle.
No case to answer submission On the afternoon of 7 September 2007, senior counsel for the defence, Edgar Prais, QC, made a submission under section 97 of the
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, that Sinclair had no case to answer in respect of the charges libelled, due to an insufficiency of evidence. In particular, he contended that the Crown had failed to lead evidence that Angus Sinclair had been involved in acting with force or violence against the girls and that the
advocate depute had not led evidence to prove that any sexual encounter between the panel and the girls had not been consensual. On 10 September 2007, following legal arguments on the matter, the trial judge
Lord Clarke upheld the defence submission of no case to answer and formally acquitted Sinclair before putting it to the jury.
Aftermath Following the conclusion of the trial it was revealed that Angus Sinclair was already a convicted murderer and serial sex offender, and was serving two life sentences at
HMP Peterhead when his case was brought forward in the World's End Murders. It was also revealed that Sinclair had previously completed a prison sentence for
culpable homicide. Sinclair was only caught for the 1978 murder after a cold case review by
Strathclyde Police revealed the presence of new
DNA evidence not uncovered during the initial investigation. News of the verdict drew widespread comment and criticism in the Scottish press. Such was the level of public and media interest in the outcome of the case, on 13 September 2007 the
Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament took the unusual step of allowing the then
Lord Advocate,
Elish Angiolini, to address the
Scottish Parliament on the matter. The Lord Advocate read a prepared statement to the chamber setting out the narrative of the Crown case and explaining her reasoning for deciding to prosecute. She is recorded in the official transcript of her address as saying that she was "disappointed" with the result, and that she "was of the clear opinion that the evidence that was made available to the court was sufficient to put before the jury to allow it the opportunity to decide on the case against Sinclair". In response, on 26 September 2007, the then
Lord Justice General,
Lord Hamilton, took the unprecedented move of publicly criticising the Lord Advocate's decision to address the
Scottish Parliament on the case. In an open letter, Lord Hamilton wrote, "the plain implication from your statements is that you were publicly asserting that the decision of the trial judge was wrong" and explained that her actions could be seen to "undermine public confidence in the judiciary". In the following weeks, several eminent former Scottish judges became involved in the debate. On 28 September 2007, former
Solicitor General and retired
Senator of the College of Justice,
Lord McCluskey, gave an interview to
The Herald stating that he believed Lord Hamilton had no grounds to accuse Elish Angiolini of threatening the independence of the judiciary. He is quoted as saying, "He's quite wrong. What he fails to see is that it is sometimes essential for a minister to comment upon a case. It happens all the time in parliament". Another retired Senator of the College of Justice,
Lord Coulsfield, gave an interview on
BBC Scotland's
Sunday Live programme, stating that "The real issue here is whether a decision of the magnitude that Lord Clarke had to take should always be taken by a single judge".
Legal consequences The furore surrounding the outcome of the case led to a far-reaching and systematic review of Scottish criminal procedure. On 20 November 2007, the
Cabinet Secretary for Justice,
Kenny MacAskill,
MSP, referred several issues arising out of
HMA v Sinclair to the
Scottish Law Commission for investigation. On 31 July 2008, the
Scottish Law Commission published its first report, on the issue of Crown appeals. On 2 December 2008, the
Commission published its second report, on the issue of
double jeopardy. The commission published its final report, on the admissibility of
bad character and
similar fact evidence in criminal trials, in late 2012. On 30 June 2010, the
Scottish Parliament passed the
Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010. Following on from the recommendations of the
Scottish Law Commission, sections 73–76 of the act make provisions for Crown rights of appeal against certain decisions taken by a trial judge sitting in
solemn proceedings (before a judge and jury). Amongst other things, it provides a mechanism for Crown appeals against rulings on no case to answer submissions. On 28 March 2011, sections 73–76 of the
Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 came into force. On 22 March 2011, in direct response to the Scottish Law Commission's findings on the issue of
double jeopardy, the
Scottish Parliament passed the
Double Jeopardy (Scotland) Act 2011. The act makes various provisions for circumstances when a person convicted or acquitted of an offence can be prosecuted anew. ==
HM Advocate v Sinclair (2014) ==