I can't believe there's anyone old enough to have experience who would be totally objective about the Bamber case and prejudice-free.
That may well be true but they work in pairs: leader and junior.
Trial: Leader - Rivlin, Junior - Lawson
1989 Appeal: I believe was the same trial team
2002 Appeal: Leader - Turner, Junior - Duck
So a possibility might be an oldie and a newbie comprising a male and female.
David Martin-Sperry and Isabelle Gillard did have some involvement with the case post 1989 appeal hearing and pre 2002 appeal hearing but in fairness to Turner who I have criticised for following Rivlin's strategy with the silencer they intended to pursue the same route. So adopting the one strike and you're out policy I would have to say it's back to the drawing board.
Turner most definitely shouldn't be let near the case again. His failings at 2002 were catastrophic and only in the legal world are they able to fall under the radar:
- Followed Rivlin's trial strategy of SC using the silencer with the blood comprising an "intimate" mix
- Failed to understand the pathological evidence and soc: pursued NB calling JB from kitchen phone having sustained gsw's upstairs with officers then using tel and removing blood. The soc shows NB was shot coming up the stairs and IMO had just made the call to JB.
- Overlooked the fact bloodstain test results for the bible were not disclosed to the defence. Missed an opportunity to win a point on the basis the bible was destroyed.