"We have to remember that really the prosecution case that was put together, the investigation after the first inquest had exonerated the Chamberlains, was a wonderfully arranged affair. You'll remember all the so-called scientific evidence was kept secret until it was delivered from the witness box. So, everyone was trying to pick up and understand pieces of this case as it progressed. And mostly its progression was through the selective leaking of information to favoured journalists. So it was all understanding on the run, even during the trial."
"EVIL ANGELS" AUTHOR JOHN BRYSON TO ABC INTERVIEWER LAETITIA LEMKE; AUGUST 20, 2010; STATELINE;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: WIKIPEDIA): Michael and Lindy Chamberlain's first daughter, Azaria, was born on June 11, 1980. When Azaria was two months old, Michael and Lindy Chamberlain took their three children on a camping trip to Ayers Rock, arriving on August 16, 1980. On the night of August 17, Chamberlain reported that the child had been taken from her tent by a dingo. A massive search was organised, but all that was found were remains of some of the bloody clothes, which confirmed the death of baby Azaria. Her body has never been discovered. Although the initial coronal inquiry supported the Chamberlains' account of Azaria's disappearance, Lindy Chamberlain was later prosecuted for the murder of her child on the basis of the finding of the baby's jumpsuit and of tests that appeared to indicate the presence of blood found in the Chamberlains' car. This forensic gathering convicted her of murder on October 29, 1982, and sentenced her to life imprisonment; the theory was that she slit the child's throat and hid the body. Michael Chamberlain was convicted as an accessory to murder. Shortly after her conviction, Lindy Chamberlain gave birth to her fourth child, Kahlia, on November 17, 1982, in prison. An appeal against her conviction was rejected by the High Court in February, 1984. New evidence emerged on February 2, 1986 when a remaining item of Azaria's clothing was found partially buried near Uluru in an isolated location, adjacent to a dingo lair. This was the matinee jacket which the police had maintained for years did not exist. Five days later, Chamberlain was released. The Northern Territory Government publicly said it was because "she had suffered enough." In view of inconsistencies in the earlier blood testing which gave rise to potential reasonable doubts about the propriety of her conviction and as DNA testing was not as advanced in the early 1980s it emerged that the 'baby blood' found in her car could have been any substance, Lindy Chamberlain's life sentence was remitted by the Northern Territory Government and a Royal Commission began to investigate the matter in 1987. Chamberlain's conviction was overturned in September, 1988 and another inquest in 1995 returned an open verdict. In recent years there have been fatal dingo attacks on children, one famous instance being at the holiday resort at Fraser Island.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: It's hard to imagine a more reasonable request than Lindy Chamberlain's bid for a new death certificate which will record the truth - that Azaria was killed by a dingo. To lose a child in those circumstances is bad enough. To be branded as her killer on the basis of ignorance, fear-mongering, faulty police investigation, erroneous expert evidence and a wanting court process, makes matters all the worse. This is compounded by an oppressive prosecution in which Lindy Chamberlain did not have the opportunity to access and conduct tests on key pieces of forensic evidence before her trial. A refusal by the authorities to take such a simple, warranted step, would only be seen as furthering the injustice inflicted on Lindy Chamberlain and her family. It is no answer to say she has been pardoned or that her conviction has been quashed. There will understandably be no closure from the legal process and its dreadful consequences for her until the public record - the death certificate - is corrected. That can't happen soon enough.
HAROLD LEVY; PUBLISHER; THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAETITIA LEMKE, PRESENTER: In August 1980 nine and a half week old Azaria Chamberlain disappeared from a campsite at Uluru. Her mother Lindy Chamberlain made headlines around the world, claiming a dingo took her baby. She was convicted of murder, but eventually exonerated. Now, 30 years on, the publication of jury notes has seen the Chamberlain family again thrust into the spotlight. Former lawyer John Bryson wrote the book Evil Angels and knows the story inside out. I caught up with him earlier today to get his take on the Territory Government's decision to open another chapter in the case.
LAETITIA LEMKE: John Bryson, welcome to Stateline.
JOHN BRYSON, AUTHOR: Thank you.
LAETITIA LEMKE: Is this story ever going to go away? Do you think we're seeing the final chapter play out now?
JOHN BRYSON: I don't think so. It's now a fascination through the nation for precisely the opposite reasons that played out when it began. We should remember that when it did begin it was not Lindy Chamberlain who was the first and prime suspect, it was Pastor Michael. And it only became a witch hunt for Lindy Chamberlain when it was realised that Michael Chamberlain himself couldn't possibly have done it. And think the story has changed its methodology of fascination as it goes along. Now it's a fascination with, how on earth did we get it so wrong.
LAETITIA LEMKE: We've seen a media frenzy this week following the publication of confidential jury notes from police files. The Chief Justice has come out and questioned, firstly, why those notes weren't destroyed at the time, as per protocol; and, secondly, how they found their way into Police files. Do we need to see an explanation from Police on this?
JOHN BRYSON: I think so. Love them though I do, the Northern Territory are fairly good at this. You'll remember that with the first outrage at the jurors' verdict in the Chamberlain case, it wasn't long before the Law Department trotted out two jurors to explain their position. I really think that was illegal, just as the brandishing of the notes now is not lawful.
LAETITIA LEMKE: And what do the notes themselves say to you?
JOHN BRYSON: Oh, the confusion. We have to remember that really the prosecution case that was put together, the investigation after the first inquest had exonerated the Chamberlains, was a wonderfully arranged affair. You'll remember all the so-called scientific evidence was kept secret until it was delivered from the witness box. So, everyone was trying to pick up and understand pieces of this case as it progressed. And mostly its progression was through the selective leaking of information to favoured journalists. So it was all understanding on the run, even during the trial.
LAETITIA LEMKE: There've been some very strong headlines that we've seen over the past two weeks that really put into question Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton's character. Is the media continuing to vilify Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton?
JOHN BRYSON: Very much certain parts of it. We have to remember that law enforcement is very skilful at annexing the loyalties of certain people in the media and I'd have no doubt that that's what's happening now, as well.
LAETITIA LEMKE: One of the major developments to come out is an open letter from Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton, calling for Azaria Chamberlain's death certificate to be changed to recognise that she was killed by a dingo. Surely this is something that should have happened earlier?
JOHN BRYSON: Most people think so. The third Coroner declined to go in the direction that the Morling inquiry, and later the Appeals Court, had suggested happen. Both of those tribunals were of the opinion that a definite verdict, a definite finding, that a dingo was responsible for the death was warranted.
LAETITIA LEMKE: Why do think that hasn't happened then?
JOHN BRYSON: Oh, home town pressure - same as always.
LAETITIA LEMKE: The Attorney General, Delia Lawries, says she'll launch an investigation. There've been investigations in the past. What would make this one any more successful?
JOHN BRYSON: Hindsight, I think. More than any other case involving miscarriages of justice, this case has been wonderfully dissected, and most of that done by the Morling inquiry. I think that really, there is nowhere to go now, except that road.
LAETITIA LEMKE: How important is it who carries out this investigation?
JOHN BRYSON: Very important that it is not part of law enforcement, that it is outside of those pressures. It's interesting that in every state and territory in the Commonwealth one can still find police who will tell you that Lindy Chamberlain was guilty, and who will tell you that the prosecution had more evidence against her than ever would see the light of day. Those sorts of prejudices are wonderfully virile.
LAETITIA LEMKE: John Bryson, thank you so much for your time.
JOHN BRYSON: Thank you.
The interview can be found at:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/08/20/2989356.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=120008354894645705&postID=8369513443994476774
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
