In 1982, as a young attorney representing Lindy and Michael Chamberlain, I was confident that Australia had the best legal system in the world, protected by the golden thread requiring the prosecution to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt, the jury system, and the presumption of innocence.
In the decades since, I have seen this belief disproved too many times, with junk science and biases based on the behaviour of an accused playing a substantial role in police investigations, prosecutions and juries.
The cases of Lindy Chamberlain and Robert Farquharson share important similarities.Credit: Artwork: Jamie Brown
Robert Farquharson was convicted of murder in 2007. Like the Chamberlains, he was convicted in the court of public opinion well before his trial began. There are important similarities between these cases. They show that lessons have not been learned, and our legal system is still in need of radical reform.
Having reviewed the medical, traffic reconstruction and sinking vehicle evidence relied on to convict Robert Farquharson, I am in no doubt that this conviction needs to be reviewed.
The trial against the Chamberlains was an epic battle of forensic scientists and eyewitnesses testifying Lindy was the perfect mother versus the Crown’s case that Azaria had been brutally murdered.
The prosecution could not suggest a single motive as to why Lindy would kill her baby. Her every act and every word she spoke was analysed and interpreted to her detriment, to........