BACKGROUND: Nicole Byrne: O'Brien Solicitors: November 27, 2024: In September 1988, the brutal murder of 20-year-old Janine Balding shocked Australia, drawing parallels to the earlier case of nurse Anita Cobby. Janine, a bank teller from Wagga Wagga, was abducted from Sutherland railway station in Sydney, subjected to horrific sexual assaults, and ultimately drowned in a dam at Minchinbury. The crime was perpetrated by a group of five individuals: Stephen ‘Shorty’ Jamieson, then 22, and four teenagers aged between 14 and 16. Janine Balding’s Murder" In 1990, all five were convicted of Janine’s murder. Jamieson, identified as the ringleader, received a life sentence without the possibility of parole. The severity of the crime and the youth of some perpetrators led to widespread media coverage and public outrage. Over the years, Jamieson has consistently maintained his innocence, asserting that he was not present during the crime and that his conviction resulted from mistaken identity. His claims have gained renewed attention due to the emergence of new forensic evidence. A black bandana used to gag Janine was retested, revealing five unidentified male DNA profiles. Notably, none of these profiles matched Jamieson’s DNA. Did Stephen kill Janine Balding? Peter O’Brien, our Principal Solicitor, has represented Jamieson pro bono for nine years. Peter has expressed serious concerns about the investigative and judicial processes that led to Jamieson’s conviction. He calls for a thorough re-examination of the evidence and procedures involved. There are issues such as the conditions under which Jamieson’s confession was obtained. This suggests that he was in no state to be interviewed by police, and the failure to test the newly discovered DNA against other potential suspects. The New South Wales Supreme Court is currently considering whether to reopen the case in light of these developments. This potential inquiry underscores the importance of ensuring that convictions are based on reliable evidence and that the rights of the accused are upheld throughout the judicial process. The future of the Janine Baldin case: The case of Janine Balding’s murder remains a poignant reminder of the devastating impact of violent crime. While the pursuit of justice for Janine and her family is paramount, it is equally crucial to ensure that the legal processes leading to convictions are fair, transparent, and based on sound evidence. As the legal system revisits this case, it must balance the need for justice for the victim with the imperative of safeguarding the rights of the accused.
People who appeared to be supporters of Jamieson audibly gasped and some raised their hands to their mouths after the comment.
SUB-HEADING: "Gasps as notorious killer is 'excluded' from DNA evidence."
GIST: "Onlookers have gasped in court as one of the men convicted of murdering bank teller Janine Balding was excluded from matching key DNA evidence."
"Stephen Wayne "Shorty" Jamieson is serving a life sentence for leading a gang of five youths in the 20-year-old woman's 1988 abduction, rape and murder, which stunned the nation.
Despite signing a confession, the 58-year-old convicted killer has long protested his innocence, pointing to a bandana used to gag Balding as proof.
Results of DNA retesting of the bandana detailed in the NSW Supreme Court today seemed to help Jamieson's case that he was wrongfully convicted.
"He is excluded," NSW Forensic and Analytical Science Service expert Clint Cochrane told the court.
People who appeared to be supporters of Jamieson audibly gasped and some raised their hands to their mouths after the comment.
Supporters of Balding, including her brother David, were unmoved.
The exclusion came from comparing Jamieson's full DNA profile to a partial profile lifted from the bandana involving 11 genetic markers, Justice Ian Harrison heard.
Assuming the sample from "area eight" came from one person, the partial DNA profile was expected to match about one in five million individuals, Cochrane said.
Jamieson was also excluded from a weaker DNA profile, turned up with a different technique, that matched about one in 10 males.
Cochrane said he could not make a scientific determination about whether the partial profiles constituted multiple people, but there were no clear indications more than two were present.
While giving evidence, the forensic biologist was also asked to compare the "area eight" results to the known DNA profiles of Jamieson's co-offenders.
Bronson Blessington and Matthew Elliott, aged 14 and 16 at the time of the murder, each received life sentences.
"[Blessington] is excluded from being a contributor to this profile if it's assumed to be a single contributor," Cochrane said.
"[Elliott] is also excluded."
This left open the identity of the person or persons behind the "area eight" DNA.
Elliott was a major contributor to DNA found elsewhere on the bandana, the court heard earlier.
This left open the identity of the person or persons behind the "area eight" DNA.
Jamieson, who was also excluded from matching that DNA profile, contended in his murder trial and ever since that he was a victim of mistaken identity.
He said he was confused with another "Shorty" and applied to the court to allow the other man's DNA profile to be tested against the bandana samples.
Queensland authorities have the profile from Mark "Shorty" Wells on file, but there is a dispute over the legality of NSW authorities using it for this purpose.
Wells has denied any involvement in the rape or murder and has never been charged over the crime.
Justice Harrison acknowledged some in the community believed the contemporary inquiries were "inappropriate and should not be given a moment's thought by this court or otherwise".
"I am alive to the sensitivities [this case] raises," he said.
"That includes for those who investigated and prosecuted the original tragic case.
"My concern, independently of the merits of this case, is that justice should be served and seen to be served (including whether) there is a possibility - however remote or nonexistent ... that an injustice may continue."
The hearing continues."
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;