In 2005, Victorian woman Carol Matthey was charged with the murder of her four children, with the Crown alleging, as in the Folbigg case, that they had died as a result of deliberate suffocation.
In 2007, the Supreme Court of Victoria excluded a number of pieces of evidence on which the Crown had sought to rely, and pointed to the “arguably doubtful probative value of much of that remaining”.
The court said at the time that “it will be necessary for the Crown to reassess the viability of this prosecution”. The charges against Matthey were subsequently dropped, and she has always maintained her innocence."
In 2007, the Supreme Court of Victoria excluded a number of pieces of evidence on which the Crown had sought to rely, and pointed to the “arguably doubtful probative value of much of that remaining”.
The court said at the time that “it will be necessary for the Crown to reassess the viability of this prosecution”. The charges against Matthey were subsequently dropped, and she has always maintained her innocence."
SUB-HEADING: "Folbigg supporter indicates doubt on sentence ahead of final inquiry hearing...Tracy Chapman says Kathleen Folbigg is optimistic following delivery of counsel assisting’s report."
GIST: "Barristers assisting the inquiry into Kathleen Folbigg’s convictions over the deaths of her four young children have submitted in writing that evidence before the inquiry casts doubt on her convictions, in an early sign that Folbigg may be freed from prison after 20 years.
The submissions, which have yet to be released publicly, are not the decision of former NSW chief justice Tom Bathurst, KC, who is presiding over the inquiry. However, they provide an indication of the views of the trio of barristers assisting the inquiry, including silk Sophie Callan, SC.
Bathurst has yet to hear final submissions from each of the parties in the inquiry, including the Director of Public Prosecutions, NSW Police and Folbigg’s own legal team. Oral submissions are expected to be delivered in Sydney from April 26 to 28.
Tracy Chapman, Folbigg’s childhood friend, told The Sydney Morning Herald that she had not seen the submissions from counsel assisting, which were due to be filed by April 3 and circulated to the parties. However, she had spoken to Folbigg, who had received a copy. “I’ve always felt that the standards of motherhood that Kath was held up to were unrealistic; in fact, wrong. They were too high,” Chapman said. “This submission clearly appears ... to acknowledge that. It seems that they’re acknowledging that there [were] unrealistic standards that she was expected to meet.” Chapman said she understood there was a “clear statement” to the effect that counsel assisting the inquiry believed the evidence before the inquiry pointed to reasonable doubt about Folbigg’s guilt. “It clearly says there is a reasonable doubt,” she said."
Other parties are expected to file written submissions to the inquiry by April 19.
Chapman said that, should Bathurst find reasonable doubt, this would only be “the start of the journey for vindication”.
She said Folbigg was “really happy” with the written submissions of counsel assisting the inquiry.
“She’s finally feeling validated; she’s finally feeling heard.”
Chapman said she was not pre-empting the findings that Bathurst might make, and she had “a great deal of respect for his honour and the process that we’re going through”.
“All I can say from Kath’s and my perspective is that we feel that Kath’s been heard and validated [by counsel assisting],” she said.
She said that she believed the psychological and psychiatric evidence before the inquiry about Folbigg’s diaries was as significant as the scientific evidence about a rare genetic mutation Folbigg shared with her two daughters.
Chapman stressed that the submissions were not Bathurst’s findings “but from our perspective we’re feeling finally she’s being heard”.
“To have it in writing now ... is priceless.”
The inquiry did not release counsel assisting’s submissions on Thursday.
In 2005, Victorian woman Carol Matthey was charged with the murder of her four children, with the Crown alleging, as in the Folbigg case, that they had died as a result of deliberate suffocation.
In 2007, the Supreme Court of Victoria excluded a number of pieces of evidence on which the Crown had sought to rely, and pointed to the “arguably doubtful probative value of much of that remaining”.
The court said at the time that “it will be necessary for the Crown to reassess the viability of this prosecution”. The charges against Matthey were subsequently dropped, and she has always maintained her innocence."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. 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;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------
