Posted in Asia, Australia/New Zealand, Bite Mark Evidence, China, civil litigation, Compensation/Exoneree compensation, False confessions, Forensic Scicence, Hawaii, Legislation, Police conduct (good and bad)
Tagged Aboriginals, Bite-Mark Evidence, China, compensation, Compensation Cap, compensation legislation, exoneree compensation, false confession, forensic science, Hawaii Innocence Project, junk science, miscarriage of justice, new evidence, new trial, New Zealand, Prison Debate Team, wrongful conviction compensation
Roseanne Beckett, wrongly convicted for conspiracy to kill her husband in 1991, served 10 years of her 12 year sentence. She finally overturned her conviction in 2005. This month, 26 years later, she successfully sued the New South Wales (Australia) government for AU$2.3m for malicious prosecution after proving that it was the corrupt detective, Peter Thomas and his obsession with Beckett, that led to her wrongful conviction. In a lengthy ruling, the judge stated;
“Ms Beckett says that if she had not been prosecuted by Detective Thomas, tried and imprisoned for over ten years, her future might have been “like any other normal woman, mother, or member of a community,..The fact that the State has managed successfully to defend a substantial proportion of Ms Beckett’s claims in these proceedings ought not be permitted to disguise the fact that Detective Thomas’ determination to get square sullied his objectivity. In the ten years of her incarceration, Ms Beckett was denied the basic human right of liberty and she was separated from her family, her friends and her community. She was deprived of her role as a mother. She lost the opportunity to engage in social and romantic relationships. She was denied a valuable working life that may have brought with it not only pecuniary profits but also the intangible benefits of doing well in one’s occupation.The enormity of this loss is made still more staggering by the significant period of time for which that loss was suffered.”
For media coverage see here: Roseanne Beckett awarded $2.3 million for wrongful conviction over soliciting murder of husband
For a comprehensive review of the case with lots of links – see here: Roseanne Beckett: A Miscarriage of Justice
The case of Andrew Mallard (pictured here) will be well known to those in Australia – he was wrongly convicted in 1995 of the murder of two women in Western Australia, spending 12 years in prison before his conviction was overturned. Mallard was eventually awarded AU$3.25 for his 12 years wrongly imprisoned, but the litany of ‘errors’ during the police investigation continue to come to light.
The real perpetrator was never convicted of the murders, he committed suicide in 2006 after being named as prime suspect by the police subsequent to a cold case review. However, during this review, and other subsequent inquiries into the policing handling of the murders, many questions have been raised about the police handling of evidence and exhibits – with many being claimed to be “lost”, now appearing on exhibit lists during a police audit – at the same time the police claimed to have lost the exhibits. Is this incompetence of malfeasance?
The whole investigation, the police handling of the evidence, the wrongful conviction and the ongoing shambles – should leave all Western Australia police and judicial system ashamed. There is a wealth of material to read on the Mallard case, as there have been so many official inquiries into the case. For more on the media coverage of recent revelations read here:
Posted in Access to DNA testing, Australia/New Zealand, Canada, Capital punishment, Compensation/Exoneree compensation, death penalty, DNA, New Evidence, wrongful conviction, Wrongfully Convicted Women
Tagged capital punishment, compensation, Death Penalty, DNA, DNA testing, exoneree compensation, new evidence, police misconduct, wrongful conviction compensation
Since the high profile exoneration of Teina Pora (see here…) and lots of calls for reforms in New Zealand, including a body to look at miscarriages of justice, the newly created New Zealand Public Interest Project (NZPIP) has now started work. A charitable organisation, it plans to look into cases as well as wider concerns about the operation of the NZ criminal justice system. The body already has a queue of high profile cases in which a prisoner is claiming innocence. While good news…. it is not a government backed (or funded) body… which should have been the response to growing concerns about the justice system in New Zealand. One hopes that if they can bring attention, and overturn, further miscarriages of justice, the government will take the issue seriously and set up a funded body. Read more here….
Australia has seen another high-profile wrongful conviction hit the headlines this week with the release on bail of Henry Keogh after serving 19 years in prison for the apparent murder of his fiancee in 1994. Keogh had always maintained his innocence, claiming a litany of errors during the autopsy, resulting in the bizarre conclusion that he had drowned his fiancee in the bath by lifting her legs over her head. The motive was apparently financial, with his fiancee having several life insurance policies. The case has been back and forth to the South Australian courts and Governors over the years until the South Australian Court of Criminal Appeal finally ordered a retrial on Monday, permitted Keogh to be free until such time the DPP decides to bring another prosecution. Keogh, aged 59, was only permitted a further appeal to the courts after a change in South Australian legislation last year, allowing appeals on ‘new and fresh compelling evidence’. Read more on the news here….
Henry Keogh released on bail after 20 years in jail on Anna-Jane Cheney murder conviction
and a journalist who assisted with the case for years, Bob Mole, has a page dedicated to Henry Keogh’s case here….
Networked Knowledge: The Henry Keogh Homepage
It is starting to feel in the UK like ‘another day, another story of police lies’. In what feels like just a few months we have had media coverage of (to mention just a few) scandals where, for example, police have been caught falsifying reports of an altercation that they ‘witnessed’ when they were not present (see Plebgate scandal...). We have the ongoing revelations over police lies and their coercion of others to lie in the Hillsborough disaster cover-up (see Hillsborough inquiry...). It is suspected that these tactics were honed during the Miner’s Strike when striking miners were ‘fitted up’ (see Miners Strike….). Such tactics clearly have continued for years with many undercover police officers lies leading to convictions (see undercover policing....) as well as the recent revelation that high profile victim Stephen Lawrence’s family were put under police surveillance during the inquiries into the police failures after Stephen’s murder (to try and discredit the family and their campaign for justice). This all comes on top of the almost run-of-the-mill stories of police ‘collusion’ with one another after fatal police shootings, with the introduction of body-worn cameras to enable the police to be ‘more transparent’ about fatal shootings. In fact, the introduction of police body-worn cameras has been posited as a boon for police as it will cut down on false allegations from the public. However, is it perhaps more likely that police body-worn cameras may serve to make the police more honest? Will they be able to lie with camera footage of the real altercation readily available?
In Omagh, Northern Ireland, the introduction of CCTV cameras in the town has led to the uncovering of police lies leading to miscarriages of justice – with solicitors claiming that miscarriages may be ‘endemic’: increasingly, CCTC footage is being shown to demonstrate that the police account of events is unreliable – even untrue (see story here…) Of course this has not been a good week either for police south of the border in Ireland, having been found to have been illicitly tape recording phone calls made to police stations (see here…). The other side of the world, in New Zealand, they are calling police lies and false evidence which have led to convictions as ‘failings’ and ‘sloppy police work’ (see here…Police failures led to wrongful conviction).
We have all known for years that there are ‘rotten apples’ and that wrongful convictions have often had police misrepresentations, if not outright corruption and lying, at their heart. However, the question must surely now be asked: is lying among the police an endemic international problem? If so, what can be done about it? These questions are already beginning to be murmured in corners of the UK, I think it is now time to get such questions out in the open. These are challenging times for the police, and if we are not to lose trust in them completely, I believe some hard questions must be asked and answers demanded.
- The unintended consequences of compensating the exonerated
- Canada’s system for reviewing alleged wrongful convictions “failing miserably”
- West Virginia University Law Innocence Project pushes interrogation recording bill
- What does a record number of U.S. exonerations in 2013 tell us?
- ESPN video on the wrongful accusation against Richard Jewel for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bombing
- Ex-cop exonerated after 20 years in prison awarded $9 million
- Mexican lawyers turned filmmakers win civil suit against them brought by family of victim in wrongful conviction case they exposed through the documentary Presumed Guilty
- Planned changes in UK’s compensation laws for exonerees will make it nearly impossible to obtain compensation after wrongful conviction
- New Zealand Innocence Project re-ignites debate about the need for a wrongful convictions commission
- Idaho Innocence Project client Sarah Pearce may soon be released—settlement discussions ongoing
In light of this week’s decision at the Privy Council to overturn the murder conviction of New Zealand citizen Mark Lundy (see earlier post here….), ongoing debate surrounding the need for an independent review commission, along the lines of the UK’s Criminal Cases Review Commissions, has again been sparked. An earlier post here…. detailed how New Zealand authorities have long been contemplating the creation of a post-appeal review body, but they have so far resisted calls. See an interesting news piece here….
The Privy Council, sitting in London, has heard an appeal from Mark Lundy, a New Zealand resident serving a 20 year life sentence for murdering his wife and daughter. Mark Lundy has already served over 12 years in prison for the murder that he has always maintained he did not commit. The court has overturned the conviction and instructed the authorities in New Zealand to give Mr Lundy a new trial as soon as possible. Mr Lundy turned to the Privy Council after losing all appeal avenues in New Zealand. His appeal turns upon new ‘credible’ expert evidence that casts serious doubt over the original evidence used at trial, of stomach contents analysis, in order to determine the time of death of the victims. Mr Lundy has always had an alibi for when he claims the murders must have taken place, but the stomach content analysis put the deaths at a time when he could have committed the murders. If this evidence is proved flawed, then the whole case is thrown into doubt.
Read more here: