Ross appeal day two – judges decision to rule out psychologist’s evidence under fire

Lawyers trying to overturn Orkney man Michael Ross’s conviction for murder have attacked the trial judge’s decision to rule out evidence from a psychologist.

Counsel acting for Ross claimed yesterday, Wednesday, during the second day of an appeal hearing in Edinburgh, that the judge’s decision had led to a “lost opportunity” for lawyers defending Ross.

The 33-year-old decorated Army veteran is seeking to overturn his conviction for murdering restaurant manager and waiter Shamsuddin Mahmood in June, 1994.

The appeal heard that evidence from a psychologist would have been to the effect that a 15-year-old committing such a murder would have displayed signs of defective personality traits, but from her assessment she had seen no such signs.

Defence counsel Margaret Scott QC told the Court of Criminal Appeal: “What we are concerned with here is the necessity for the defence to have proper opportunity to lead evidence in support of their case in meeting an attack made by the Crown.”

She said the move to lead evidence from the psychologists was in the context of defence lawyers saying there had been an attack on the character of Ross and a suggestion he had “a personality defect of some kind”.

Miss Scott said the consequence of the judge’s ruling was to limit the defence to relying on character witnesses — later colleagues from the Army — and to leave them without the proper chance to address the attack.

The hearing before the Lord Justice General, Lord Hamilton, sitting with Lord Carloway and Lord Bonomy continues.