Gordon Wood; Australia; Bulletin: The Guardian reports on his civil law suit against New South Wales for malicious prosecution launched 3 years after his murder conviction was overturned. Expert witness - Physicist Rod Cross denies claim by Wood’s barrister that he ‘had no idea’ how to design an experiment to test trajectory of Caroline Byrne’s body from cliff."..."McClintock has alleged that Prof Cross was “prepared to fabricate evidence” because he was writing a book about the investigation into Byrne’s death. But the physicist told the court most of his book on the physics of falling was written in 2006 and he then put it aside, finishing it after the trial. “It was true to say you had been working on the book during the trial,” McClintock said. “Incorrect,” Prof Cross replied. The working title had been The Queen versus Gordon Wood but the book was ultimately published as Evidence for Murder: How Physics Convicted a Killer. McClintock suggested there would have been no book if Wood had been acquitted. “Regardless of the outcome of the trial I would have tried to find a publisher,” Prof Cross replied."

STORY: "Gordon Wood case: Expert witness stands by cliff fall evidence," published by The Australian Associated Press on March 7, 2017.

SUB-HEADING: "Physicist Rod Cross denies claim by Wood’s barrister that he ‘had no idea’ how to design an experiment to test trajectory of Caroline Byrne’s body from cliff."

PHOTO CAPTION:  "Retired University of Sydney physicist Associate Professor Rod Cross arrives at the supreme court in Sydney on Tuesday."

GIST:  "A scientist who carried out swimming pool experiments before concluding Caroline Byrne was “spear-thrown” to her death had no experience in investigating cliff falls, a Sydney judge has been told. But retired physicist Rod Cross, who had written articles on the trajectory of a lawn bowl and the “dead spot” of a tennis racquet, said this had not worried him. He was cross-examined in the NSW supreme court on Tuesday by Bruce McClintock SC, the barrister for Byrne’s then boyfriend Gordon Wood. Wood, 54, whose murder conviction was overturned in 2012, is suing the state of NSW for malicious prosecution, claiming millions of dollars in damages. Associate Professor Cross, a crucial Crown witness at Wood’s 2008 trial, carried out experiments involving strong men throwing women into pools, and women jumping and diving. He concluded the only way Byrne could have landed where she did at the bottom of the cliffs at Sydney’s notorious suicide spot The Gap was if she was thrown in a “spear-like” way from the top. He ruled out the possibility of her having jumped to her death. “I want to suggest you had no idea how to design an experiment involving real people so as to make it scientifically valid,” McClintock said on Tuesday. Prof Cross replied: “I am surprised you would say that and it is completely incorrect. He agreed he did not tell the jury his conclusions only applied if Byrne had not been struggling. Justice Elizabeth Fullerton asked: “Didn’t you think it was important that the court understand your conclusions were subject to the qualification that Ms Byrne offered no resistance to being spear-thrown?” “It was an important point,” the retired academic said, but he described his failure to mention it as “an inadvertent omission”. McClintock has alleged that Prof Cross was “prepared to fabricate evidence” because he was writing a book about the investigation into Byrne’s death. But the physicist told the court most of his book on the physics of falling was written in 2006 and he then put it aside, finishing it after the trial. “It was true to say you had been working on the book during the trial,” McClintock said. “Incorrect,” Prof Cross replied. The working title had been The Queen versus Gordon Wood but the book was ultimately published as Evidence for Murder: How Physics Convicted a Killer. McClintock suggested there would have been no book if Wood had been acquitted. “Regardless of the outcome of the trial I would have tried to find a publisher,” Prof Cross replied.

The entire story can be found at the link below;

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/mar/08/gordon-wood-case-expert-witness-stands-by-cliff-fall-evidence

See analysis of the law by Zeb Holmes and Ugur Nedim posted by  'Sydney Criminal Lawyers,' at the link below: "In a famous miscarriage of justice, Mr Wood spent more than three years in Goulburn prison after a jury concluded that he had murdered Ms Byrne by throwing her off a cliff at ‘The Gap’ on Sydney’s South Head in June 1995. His conviction was overturned by the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal (NSWCCA) in 2012. Mr Wood always maintained his innocence, and his belief that Ms Byrne committed suicide. Evidence was presented to the Supreme Court jury at his trial that Ms Byrne had previously attempted suicide and that, in the month preceding her death, she presented to her GP Dr Cindy Pan with severe depression. Ms Byrne’s suicidal ideation was so severe that Dr Pan arranged an appointment with a psychiatrist the very next day – but Byrne did not attend. During the appeal hearing, lawyers for Mr Wood criticised the way Crown Prosecutor Mark Tedeschi QC addressed the jury at the end of the trial. Chief Justice at Common Law Peter McClellan was also critical of Mr Tedeschi’s approach to the case. “The suggested evidence of a motive is so thin that it should never have been left with the jury”, the judge remarked. Mr Wood’s lawyers additionally attacked the trial testimony of retired University of Sydney physicist and associate professor, Rod Cross. They emphasised that the professor’s background in plasma physics (the behaviour of high temperature gasses) did not qualify him to act as an expert on the physics of bodily movement – specifically, to give an opinion on whether Ms Byrne jumped or was thrown off the cliff.
The NSWCCA accepted that submission, finding that the professor’s evidence had “little if any evidentiary value”. The barrister for Mr Wood’s claim for damages, Bruce McClintock SC, has told the Supreme Court that a “flawed and biased” investigation caused a miscarriage of justice. “It was always intended to find my client was guilty of murder, not to get to the actual truth,” McClintock submitted. He told the court that Mr Tedeschi was prepared to “bend the rules” by putting submissions to the jury without supporting evidence, and that the case against his client was fuelled by Ms Byrne’s jealous ex-boyfriend Andrew Blanchette, who was a police officer at the time. Mr McClintock claimed police detectives “poisoned the mind” of Professor Cross, telling the professor that Mr Wood was guilty before even asking him to write a report. The court heard that the head of the investigation team, Detective Paul Jacob, even told the professor that Wood had asked to see Ms Byrne’s breasts when her body was in Glebe morgue – information which was simply untrue and was designed to paint Wood in a bad light. McClintock further submitted that police the professor that another crown witness, artist John Doherty, saw two men and a woman arguing at The Gap at arounf the time Byrne died. “It’s obvious that police — whether intentionally or not — poisoned Professor Cross’ mind by putting these things into it,” Mr McClintock submitted, adding that such comments affected the professor’s impartiality. ‘ The barrister suggested that the professor was even “prepared to fabricate evidence”, and that he harboured a motive to see Mr Wood convicted because he was already in the process of writing a book titled “Evidence for Murder: How Physics Convicted a Killer”. McClintock remarked that if the book had been called “How Dodgy Data Failed to Convict an Innocent Man”, sales would not have as good."

 http://nswcourts.com.au/articles/gordon-wood-sues-nsw-government/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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/charlessmith. 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;