Michael Ross' lawyer hopes The Orkney Assassin documentary will 'encourage new witnesses'
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info
Michael Ross' lawyer is optimistic that the new Prime Video documentary The Orkney Assassin: Murder In The Isles will unearth "new evidence".
It's been three decades since the appalling murder of 26 year old Shamsuddin Mahmood, who was shot dead while working at Mumtaz Restaurant in Kirkwall, Orkney.
The masked assailant entered the restaurant and swiftly left after firing the fatal shot, leaving onlookers in shock.
Ross, who faced questioning at age 15, managed to avoid arrest for 14 years until his 2008 conviction.
To commemorate the anniversary of Mahmood's murder, Prime Video has launched the documentary, featuring insights from journalists, ex-police officers, Ross' family, and eyewitnesses.
(Image: PRIME VIDEO)
Ross' legal representative Aamer Anwar shared the main motivations for participating in the Prime Video production.
"The basis for us taking part in this was one, to ensure it was a balanced documentary," he explained.
"I appreciate at the end of the day that Michael is a convicted killer and of course, this is not a case of no documentary would be doing its job if it simply presented all one side unless you could provide completely overwhelming evidence, as has happened in the past. This is not one of those cases.
"But we were very much of the view that the passage of time either means that there's somebody on the island that knows more than they said at the time.
(Image: PRIME VIDEO/ORKNEY PHOTOGRPAHIC)
"There are people who were scared at the time, the passage of time might have taken that away or people who have a guilty conscience that they didn't come forward.
"And one hopes that those people would at this stage. That would strike as new evidence, that would be people who didn't come forward, to explain what happened, who saw what happened, who knew what happened, who knew exactly who it was that pulled the trigger."
In the time since his conviction, Ross has remained adamant that he isn't guilty of murdering Mahmood when he was 15.
'You still have someone who claims he is innocent, who has never given up that he is innocent, who is still fighting to prove his innocence.', Anwar added.
'He could have made his life a lot easier by saying 'I did it.' A lot more chance of parole then, a lot more chance of getting out earlier.'
The Orkney Assassin: Murder In The Isles is available to watch on Prime Video.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
a day ago
- Daily Mirror
Parents of baby decapitated during birth horrified as graphic photos published
Jessica Ross and Treveon Taylor Sr. filed a lawsuit against a pathologist who posted footage of their son's decapitated body on Instagram, and the couple has now been awarded millions The parents of a baby who was decapitated during childbirth have been awarded $2.25million after a doctor posted graphic footage of their son's autopsy on social media. Jessica Ross was due to give birth to her first child on July 10, 2023, but the baby got stuck behind her pelvic bone after being in labour for hours. Ms Ross and her partner Treveon Taylor Sr. did not get to see their son (whom they named Treveon Isaiah Taylor Jr) and doctors and nurses did not tell them the child's head had been severed during efforts to deliver him, according to court documents. The couple then hired a pathologist to carry out an autopsy - but he posted a graphic video of the child's body online. Ms Ross hired pathologist Dr. Jackson Gates after a funeral home told the couple about the condition of his body. Gates posted a video of the child's dead body on his Instagram showing "graphic and grisly detail of postmortem examination" and his "decapitated, severed head", according to the couple's lawyers. The pathologist deleted this video but posted two more of the autopsy just a few days later and all of these videos were uploaded without the couple's consent, according to their complaint. A lawyer for the couple, Cory Lynch, told Fox 5 Atlanta: "For him to post these images and videos without permission was insane to us. "And especially with the nature of the posts... of the grisly details of the autopsy examination and also pictures of the child's head. It was baffling that he would do something like that." Ms Ross and Mr Taylor filed a lawsuit in September 2023 against Dr. Gates and Gates Rapid Diagnostic Laboratory of Atlanta. Dr. Gates did not respond to the lawsuit so this left the State Court in Fulton County, Georgia, to decide. Dr. Gates' lawyer Ira Livnat, who was hired after the court's decision, claimed this meant the case ended in favour of the couple, saying: "The plaintiffs got the absolute best case." The jury, on Wednesday, awarded Ms Ross and Mr Taylor $2.25million (£1.6million). The couple's attorney in a statement said: "While we are pleased that a jury punished Dr. Jackson Gates for his reprehensible behavior, nothing can ease the pain that the parents, Jessica Ross and Treveon Isaiah Taylor Sr., have experienced in losing their baby boy in such a horrific way." "After the decapitation of their baby, Gates poured salt into the couple's already deep wounds when he betrayed them. "This young couple trusted him with the remains of their precious baby. Gates, in turn, repaid this trust by posting horrific images of their child for the world to see." Dr. Gates' attorney said he "deeply, deeply regrets any harm" but in a Facebook post, that has since been deleted, the pathologist called the outcome "a complete miscarriage of justice" adding that he intended to file an appeal. Gates said he still pots autopsies on social media, according to Atlanta News First.
NBC News
2 days ago
- NBC News
Jury awards $2.25 million to parents of decapitated baby whose autopsy was shared on social media
A jury in Fulton County, Georgia, awarded $2.25 million in damages to the parents of a baby who was decapitated during delivery and whose autopsy was posted on social media without his parents' consent. The parents, Treveon Taylor and Jessica Ross, will receive $2 million in compensatory damages and an additional $250,000 in punitive damages against the pathologist who posted the video, Dr. Jackson Gates, and Medical Diagnostic Choices in Atlanta. The parents sued Gates in September 2023 for alleged invasion of privacy, fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress. "While we are pleased that a jury punished Dr. Jackson Gates for his reprehensible behavior, nothing can ease the pain that the parents, Jessica Ross and Treveon Isaiah Taylor, Sr., have experienced in losing their baby boy in such a horrific way," attorneys for the family said in a statement Wednesday. Gates did not immediately immediately respond to an NBC News request for comment. The baby was deceased at the time of his delivery on July 10, 2023, the lawsuit stated. On July 12, Ross contracted Gates to conduct an autopsy for $2,500. Ross and Taylor did not permit Gates to share images of the autopsy, through the contract or verbally, according to the lawsuit. Gates uploaded multiple videos to his Instagram account that month showing "in graphic and grisly detail a postmortem examination of the decapitated, severed head of Baby Isaiah," as well as the baby's body, the suit stated. At the time, Gates' social media account showed a history of posting photos and videos of other autopsies. That account has been taken down but he has at least one other account on YouTube. 'After the decapitation of their baby, Gates poured salt into the couple's already deep wounds when he betrayed them,' the family's attorneys said. Gates told NBC News in March 2024, after he was initially found liable in the case, that he had not violated the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) due to a clause that allows physicians to inform the public when there are safety concerns in health care. 'I have not violated HIPAA, it is not required by a physician to get consent to report a crime or some sort of health issue to the public,' Gates said at the time. 'I've been doing this for 15 years, publishing my autopsy cases to explain to the public the victimization of those persons who have died.' The parents sent a cease-and-desist letter in August 2023 for the videos of their child to be immediately removed; they filed a lawsuit against Gates the following month. Ross and Taylor also sued the facility where the delivery took place, Southern Regional Medical Center, and obstetrician Dr. Tracey St. Julian — who is a member of a private practice and not the hospital — for "ridiculously excessive force" used during the delivery of their son. The baby did not properly descend during labor, likely due to shoulder dystocia, a condition that occurs when a baby's shoulder is caught behind the mother's pubic bone, according to the lawsuit against the medical providers. St. Julian tried to deliver the baby vaginally using different methods, including excessive traction resulting in decapitation, skull and facial bone fractures and other injuries, the suit states. Ross asked for a Cesarean section "while the baby was viable," the parents' attorney Roderick Edmond said at a news conference in 2023, and instead was told to keep pushing for three hours. The baby was ultimately delivered through an emergency C section, which the lawsuit alleges St. Julian failed to perform in a "timely and proper manner" and resulted in the child's death. Southern Regional Medical Center denied the "allegations of wrongdoing" at the time and said in a statement, "This unfortunate infant death occurred in utero prior to the delivery and decapitation." In February 2024, the Clayton County Medical Examiner's Office ruled the baby's death a homicide caused by 'actions of another person,' stating his death resulted from a fracture of cervical vertebrae in the spine. St. Julian's practice and lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did Southern Regional Medical Center.
Daily Mirror
4 days ago
- Daily Mirror
Man thought he'd beaten the TV licence system - then a letter turned up
Lee Stewart cancelled because he did not watch any live television but after a conversation with a TV Licence inspection officer Lee was shocked to find he was facing a hefty fine A man is celebrating after a court case about his TV licence was thrown out by magistrates. Lee Stewart decided to cancel his TV licence because he did not watch any live television. However after a conversation with a TV Licence inspection officer, where he explained that he did not watch live telly, Lee was shocked to find a letter saying he was in breach of licence requirements and was facing a hefty fine. A license is needed to watch or record live TV, including live programmes streamed fro sites like ITV Hub, All 4, YouTube, or Amazon Prime Video. You also need a license to watch BBC iPlayer. Mr Stuart was visited by a TV Licensing inspection officer in September last year. He said he saw the visit as an opportunity to explain his viewing habits in person. He said: 'I told him I didn't pay for a TV licence because I didn't think I needed one because I don't watch live TV." 'I don't even have an aerial installed in my TV, and I invited him to do his checks. He was a bit apprehensive, but he looked at everything and asked me what I used the TV for. "So I told him I just watch Netflix and Amazon Prime through the PlayStation, and he asked me if I used BBC iPlayer and I said, 'no'.' Mr Stuart said the officer confirmed he was not in breach of licensing requirements following the inspection, the Liverpool Echo reports. Mr Stuart, from Kirkby, described how the officer documented their conversation and read back the main points, including that no live TV was being watched and no BBC iPlayer account was used. He added: 'It was official, and I agreed with what he had said, so when I was presented with the big white signature box, I just signed it, and then he left. To be honest, I was really made up with myself, thinking I'd beaten the system and proved I didn't need a licence.' However, in January this year, Mr Stuart received a Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN), which covers those who are alleged to have watched TV without a licence. Lee explained: 'It said if I pleaded not guilty, the fine would be larger and I may have to pay court costs. So I'm not sure what's going on at this point. 'I looked through it all, and at the back was the inspector's statement. Straight away I clocked the question, 'May I come in to inspect the TV receiver?' and it said 'no' in the answer box, so that was wrong because I did. 'The next point was saying I admitted to watching the news last week. So I've refused him entry and then admitted on the step I watched live news last week? It didn't make any sense.' Mr Stuart chose to contest the notice and represented himself at Sefton Magistrates Court. He said: 'I can see why people just accept it, but I knew I was innocent and I wasn't paying for a TV licence that I didn't need so I fought it.' "I'll be totally honest, I was surprised by the outcome and I thought it might be good to share my experience.' The court dismissed the case due to insufficient evidence. A TV Licensing spokesperson said: 'This was reviewed by TV Licensing following the court hearing in April 2025 as is standard practice, and no failings were highlighted.' The spokesperson added that while both the officer and Mr Stuart gave credible in-person testimony, the magistrates could not find the case was proved beyond reasonable doubt. Mr Stuart, initially pleased with the outcome, later received a further letter from TV Licensing advising of the licence requirement. He has since submitted a formal complaint and a No Licence Needed (NLN) declaration. He added: 'The form asks at the end, 'What outcome do you want from this?' and I just put 'All I want is to be left alone, but an apology wouldn't go amiss'.' TV Licensing confirmed it has now received Mr Stuart's NLN declaration. A TV Licensing spokesperson said: 'If a property we believe should be licensed is unlicensed, letters are sent to that address advising of the requirement for a TV Licence if the occupant watches live TV or other licensable content. This stops for one year when the occupant declares they don't need a licence, when letters will resume to check if circumstances have changed.'
