STORY: "Eastman denied second Inquiry," published in the Canberra Times on March 8, 2012.
GIST: " Among the matters those who had hoped that the application before Justice Marshall would have led to an inquiry had intended to raise were:
The jury was not told that the expertise of Robert Barnes, the primary ballistic ''expert'', whose findings about gunshot residue linked a particular rifle to the murder, had been questioned by the Victorian Supreme Court and his own forensic unit, nor that the conclusions he had drawn about the use of a silencer was contrary to evidence he had given at the inquest, and, in any event, directly contradicted by a witness who was positive he had heard the relevant shots but had not been called at the trial.
THE ENTIRE STORY CAN BE FOUND AT:
The jury was not told that the expertise of Robert Barnes, the primary ballistic ''expert'', whose findings about gunshot residue linked a particular rifle to the murder, had been questioned by the Victorian Supreme Court and his own forensic unit, nor that the conclusions he had drawn about the use of a silencer was contrary to evidence he had given at the inquest, and, in any event, directly contradicted by a witness who was positive he had heard the relevant shots but had not been called at the trial.
Hints of misconduct by police and the prosecution in not disclosing to defence counsel the doubts that had arisen about Barnes, and about his dismissal from the Victorian police forensic science unit.
Gunshot residue of a type similar to that found in cartridges by Winchester's body was found in Eastman's car. But fresh evidence has emerged from a witness who has produced a gun he said he had used rabbit shooting after borrowing Eastman's car."
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/eastman-denied-second-inquiry-20120307-1ukxb.html
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
I am monitoring this case. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments.
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 found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmithThe 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 found at:
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;
