justice for kevin lane
    Fingerprint Evidence
  • Kevin’s fingerprint was discovered on a bin liner that was recovered from the boot of a car the police suggest was used in the murder.

  • The bin liner was discovered inside a length of plumbing pipe that was claimed to have been used to conceal the alleged murder weapon. Although this evidence does not mean Kevin was responsible for the shooting he did give a perfectly innocent explanation as to how his fingerprint may have been deposited on the bin liner.

  • Kevin had borrowed the car over the period 7th – 10th October 1994 from Kevin’s partner’s uncle. This is supported by police reports concerning Operation Cactus that state Kevin’s partner’s uncle had possession of the car for a short period whilst carrying out repair work and from a witness statement from the uncle that confirms he loaned the car to Kevin.

  • Fingerprints that matched Kevin’s five year old son were also discovered in the car which further supports Kevin’s claim that he borrowed the car for family purposes after his car was stolen.

  • WPC Atkinson reported in her evidence that she had seen the car being driven by an unknown man on the 11th October 1994 but she stated that the man was not Kevin Lane.

  • Although Kevin accepts that he may have deposited his fingerprint on the bin liner during the period when he had borrowed the car there are a number of factors that would suggest that his print had been planted by a rogue police officer.

    Fingerprint Evidence and Rosaline Sharp (pdf)

  • Several fingerprints belonging to Roger Vincent were discovered on a separate bin liner that was also recovered from the boot of the car and he was never pressed at any time before his acquittal to give an explanation as to how his fingerprints were deposited on the bin liner.