STORY: "Forensic flaws from case against David Eastman should have been uncovered 17 years ago," by reporter Christopher Knaus, published by the Camberra Times on August 22, 2014.
GIST: "Flaws with the forensic evidence that damned David Eastman at
trial could have been revealed 17 years ago, according to his one-time
lawyer and former ACT Attorney-General. Eastman mounted a series of appeals following his 1995
conviction for the assassination of the ACT's police chief Colin Stanley
Winchester. The first took place in the Federal Court in 1997, which then acted as the ACT's court of criminal appeal. Lawyer Bernard Collaery represented Eastman in that case, and
now believes an opportunity to expose flaws with the forensic evidence
and achieve justice was lost all those years ago. Mr Collaery and his team were fighting to introduce new
evidence during the appeal that would undermine the credibility of the
work of the key forensic expert used against Eastman, Robert Collins
Barnes. Mr Barnes' evidence was critical in linking Eastman to the
murder scene, and was instrumental in damning him before the jury at
trial. The Eastman inquiry, which delivered its findings this year, has now uncovered deep flaws with Mr Barnes' work. Mr Barnes' reliability and accuracy were devastated under the
scrutiny of a range of other experts, including Dr James Wallace and Dr
Hilton Kobus. Yet, way back in 1997, Mr Collaery was fighting to have
evidence from those same two forensic experts put before the Federal
Court during Eastman's appeal. The two experts were in the middle of conducting tests in Adelaide they believed would seriously challenge Mr Barnes' evidence. Prosecutors opposed that new evidence being put before the
court and, in what is now clearly a significant decision, the Federal
Court agreed, refusing to accept Dr Wallace's affidavit in 1997. Mr Collaery told Fairfax Media the justice system must
learn from that decision, particularly in cases like Eastman's, where
an accused is representing himself in a disrupted, chaotic criminal
trial. "The lesson for our Court of Appeal is not to adopt the
stilted 'no new evidence' approach when there are clear and compelling
grounds to make an exception to the rules," he said.""
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/forensic-flaws-from-case-against-david-eastman-case-should-have-been-uncovered-17-years-ago-20140822-106zjc.html
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I
have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses
several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of
the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this
powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and
myself get more out of the site.
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/charlessmith
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
I look forward to hearing from readers at:
hlevy15@gmail.com.
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;
