The Emma Caldwell public inquiry could be expanded amid fears an official cover-up which allowed her killer to walk free for over a decade will not be scrutinised. Active discussions over the terms of reference of the probe are under way, the Sunday Mail has learned, after concerns were raised by several parties including the victim’s family.
Background of the Case
Iain Packer was convicted of murder in 2024 – 19 years after Emma’s body was discovered in Limefield Woods, Lanarkshire, in May 2005. Even after the Sunday Mail published his picture on the front page in 2015 – branding him the “Forgotten Suspect” – Police Scotland launched illegal surveillance operation on our sources rather than pursue the killer.
A huge body of evidence points to a cover-up at the highest level after a botched prosecution of four innocent Turkish men collapsed in 2008. There are fears Packer was allowed to continue to terrorise and rape women for years to avoid the professional embarrassment of properly reopening the case.
Inquiry Scope Concerns
A public inquiry was ordered after Packer’s eventual conviction in 2024 in the wake of a relentless campaign from this newspaper. But it emerged the terms of reference had been framed to only investigate the actions of the now defunct Strathclyde Police during the initial bungled investigation, rather than the period after when Police Scotland was formed.
A source said: “The terms of reference are under discussion. It would need the intervention of Justice Secretary Neil Gray to change the wording as the Scottish Government is responsible for setting the parameters. It would be an utter disgrace if he failed to act. It is clear there has been lobbying to restrict the inquiry because very powerful people will face difficult questions otherwise. But if this public inquiry is to be worth anything it needs to get to the bottom of why an abundance of evidence that Packer was the killer was ignored for years. It is also open to the inquiry chair Lord Scott to make clear he will be adopting a wide interpretation of the terms of reference, but this will leave room for the true scandal to be avoided.”
Family Demands
Last week, we revealed Emma’s mum Margaret, of Erskine, Renfrewshire, has demanded the Scottish Government and inquiry chair Lord Scott take urgent action to avoid the probe becoming a multi-million pound whitewash. She’s been joined by her lawyer Aamer Anwar, former Sunday Mail editor Jim Wilson and MSP Pauline McNeill to demand the terms of reference are expanded.
Margaret said: “I do not want to be insulted or patronised further. Those officers who sabotaged the investigation have for too long remained in the shadows, but if you stop this inquiry at 2013, those officers will always remain hidden rather than answer for their betrayal. I plead now to [First Minister] John Swinney and Lord Scott: we want the truth, I have fought too long for the cover-up to continue.”
Packer's Conviction
Packer was jailed for 36 years in February 2024 after being convicted of Emma’s murder and 32 charges, including 11 rapes, involving 22 other women. He was first spoken to by police in June 2005 before admitting taking a prostitute to woods outside Glasgow. In March 2007 Packer gave a fifth statement and took police to the woods where Emma’s body had been found. Despite this, four Turkish men were instead pursued and it took another 16 years for Packer to be convicted.
Margaret’s lawyer Mr Anwar said: “A culture of misogyny and corruption meant police failed Emma and 22 women who came to speak against Packer. Instead of receiving justice and compassion, for nearly two decades they were humiliated, dismissed and in some cases arrested, whilst the police gifted freedom to an evil predator to rape and rape again. Margaret believes police sabotaged the case against Packer until they no longer could. Officers lied to her dying husband William and have blood on their hands. So, whilst Margaret has trust in the chair Lord Scott, she has none in police who lied to her, spied on journalists and honest police, and covered up the truth until it was impossible to do so.”
The inquiry said: “Lord Scott stated was satisfied the terms of reference allowed for a thorough investigation. The chair will publish his interpretation of the terms of reference. The terms of reference were set by ministers and only they have the power to vary these.”
