The Bain murder retrial jury was yesterday told bloody sock prints found on the carpet in the Every St house were more likely to have been made by Robin Bain than David Bain.
Continuing his intensive cross-examination of former Detective Senior Sergeant Jim Doyle, defence counsel Michael Reed QC accused Mr Doyle of allowing misleading evidence about the prints to be given at the first trial.
He said the prints were measured at 280mm and Robin's empty sock at 240mm, and the first jury was told Robin could not have made the prints.
But Robin's foot was measured in the morgue and was found to be 270mm long.
The foot expanded slightly when walking so that meant the footprints had been made by Robin, Mr Reed said.
Mr Doyle said he was not an expert on such matters but took advice from the ESR.
He agreed David Bain had allowed various tests in the days after the shootings but his feet had not been measured.
And he agreed he had become aware, some time after the first trial, that David Bain's foot had been measured. It was 300mm long.
Mr Doyle was also questioned about the substance under four of Bain's fingerprints found on the rifle.
At the first trial this was said to be human blood.
But it was now known there was no human DNA present in the substance and the substance tested was not actually from under the fingerprints but from an adjacent site on the rifle, Mr Reed said.
Crown counsel Kieran Raftery said the question of human DNA was in dispute and Mr Reed should not be questioning Mr Doyle on the matter as it if was established fact.
