Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.
Joe and Kate Duffy experienced profound heartbreak and confusion when Francis Auld, the man accused of murdering their daughter Amanda, was released from court. Amanda, 19 years old, was killed in Hamilton in 1992, and her parents had expected Auld to be convicted. However, the jury returned a “not proven” verdict—one of two possible acquittal outcomes in Scottish criminal trials. At the time, Joe and Kate did not fully grasp the legal meaning of that verdict, which has since fueled their decades-long campaign to abolish it.
Amanda disappeared after an evening out in her hometown during May 1992, with her body discovered the following day on a patch of wasteland. The violence inflicted upon her was severe, including multiple injuries and a bite mark on her breast that the defense conceded was caused by Auld. When the Glasgow High Court jury announced the “not proven” verdict, Joe and Kate were stunned and unaware that, legally, it was equivalent to a “not guilty” verdict. The judge then acquitted Auld, who was free to leave and protected from being tried again for the same crime. The shock overwhelmed Kate so much that she fainted and had to be taken to hospital.
From the outset, Joe and Kate had been reassured by police and prosecutors that the evidence against Auld was strong and would result in a guilty verdict. In Joe’s words, the “not proven” ruling felt like something fundamentally wrong, and Kate feared that the person they believed responsible remained free and capable of further harm. Unlike in other legal systems, there was no formal written definition of “not proven” in Scots law: judges only told jurors it meant acquittal, akin to “not guilty.” This verdict often led to misunderstandings, including the mistaken belief that the accused could face retrial, a notion legally permitted only under specific double jeopardy reforms introduced in 2011, which were unrelated to the verdict type.
Soon after the 1992 trial, the Duffys began petitioning against the not proven verdict, gathering tens of thousands of signatures urging its removal. Joe has expressed frustration over how “not proven” and “not guilty” essentially mean the same thing, questioning the need for two identical outcomes in law. Local MP George Robertson supported their cause by proposing legislation to end the verdict, although it did not succeed at the time. Despite this setback, the Duffys continued their advocacy and established a charity offering support to families affected by murder, culpable homicide, and suicide. They also opened a counselling centre in Hamilton named the Manda Centre, in memory of their daughter.
The campaign
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.