Search

"Unspeakably vicious": Judge hands down verdict to Justin Stein

After a lengthy trial into the murder of nine-year-old Charlise Mutten, 33-year-old Justin Stein has had his fate read in court. At the NSW Supreme Court in Sydney on Monday, Stein was sentenced to life in jail without parole after he was found guilty of fatally shooting the schoolgirl in the face before dumping her body in a barrel. Justice Helen Wilson delivered the sentence and unleashed on Stein, saying he was "completely without remorse" and "without humanity or morality". Justice Wilson said the shooting that took place at Stein's lavish family home in the Blue Mountains in January 2022 was "unspeakably vicious and murderous", saying, "These were deliberate acts, and the second shot was an execution shot. He undertook these actions intending to kill her." "He sought to blame Charlise's mother for his own indecent conduct. Charlise was not just a child; she was a very young child at nine years and five months of age." "Charlise had come to refer to the offender as 'Daddy'. This crime represents an egregious breach of that trust." Wilson explained that Charlise was murdered after she was drugged with Stein's schizophrenia medication, as she said, "She would have been in a state of pronounced drowsiness; she had even less capacity to defend herself and flee from danger." Justice Wilson described Stein's supposedly tearful account of Charlise's death during the trial as "false" and said the tissue he used was dry. "From where I sat I could see very clearly, he was completely dry-eyed and did not shed a single tear," Justice Wilson said in disgust. "It might have been called theatre if it wasn't so calculated." "Some instances of murder are so grave that the maximum penalty is the only appropriate penalty." In a recent hearing, Charlise's mother Kallista Mutten broke down in tears and told her former fiancé, "I hate myself for trusting you." Ms Mutten read a victim's impact statement via audio video link as she told Stein. "[Charlise] just longed for you to be her dad. I just hate myself for being so wrong about you." "I am forced to live with fact I trusted someone and because of my trust I put my daughter in harm’s way." Image credits: Facebook / NSW Supreme Court

Legal

Families of murdered campers finally break silence after Greg Lynn verdict

The families of Russell Hill and Carol Clay have issued an emotional statement following the shocking <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/shocking-verdict-in-trial-of-murdered-campers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">verdict</a> in the murder trial against former Jetstar pilot Greg Lynn. On Tuesday, the jury found Lynn guilty of murdering Carol Clay in March 2020, but was found innocent on charges of murdering Russell Hill. The jury came to their shocking split decision after seven days of deliberation following the five-week trial. After the jury made their decision, the families of the two late campers issued an emotional statement. “Russell Hill and Carol Clay’s families are both relieved and devastated at the verdicts in the trial of Gregory Lynn,” a joint statement from the pair’s loved ones said. “We thank the jury for their verdict of guilty in the murder of Carol Clay. It was an extremely difficult task given that the accused destroyed so much evidence." “The verdict of not guilty in relation to the murder Russell Hill is devastating. There was not enough evidence to be sure of how he died.” The families said they understood the prosecution had an “enormous job putting a case together with limited evidence”. “The accused was the only person who saw and experienced what happened,” loved one said. “He was also the only person who emerged alive.” The statement thanked Victoria Police and its missing persons squad for their hard work in the case, volunteers who spent weeks searching for their loved ones, and Hill and Clay’s friends and family for their “support throughout this harrowing experience”. “We are heartbroken at the loss of our loved ones. It will take time to absorb the verdicts, put this behind us and set about healing and getting on with our lives,” the family said. Victoria police assistant commissioner Martin O’Brien said the Hill and Clay families had endured a difficult four years. “Their courage and resilience in the face of their grief, amidst enormous public attention, has been nothing short of extraordinary,” O’Brien said. “We will continue to support them in every way possible following this decision.” Throughout the trial, Lynn maintained his innocence, saying he did not kill the two campers, but admitted <span style="caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;">to destroying their bodies and the crime scene. <span style="font-size: 16px; caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #ffffff;">However, both prosecutors said he killed both of the campers intentionally and then tried to cover up his crimes. Following the jury's verdict on Tuesday,<span style="caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> Lynn was taken back to prison where he awaits his sentence. <span style="caret-color: #212529; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;">Image credits: Victoria Police

Caring

Shocking verdict in trial of murdered campers

The jury have been split during Greg Lynn's trial, where he was accused of murdering campers Carol Clay and Russell Hill in March 2020. The 57-year-old faced a five-week trial in the Supreme Court, in which he pleaded not guilty to both counts of murder. During the trial, Lynn said the deaths were accidental, and admitted to destroying their bodies and the crime scene. However, both prosecutors said he killed both of the campers intentionally and then tried to cover up his crimes. The 12 jurors began their deliberation on June 17th and emerged seven days later with a shocking verdict. Lynn was found guilty of the murder of Carol Clay but found innocent of killing Russell Hill in a startling decision. When asked for a verdict on Hill's murder, the jury's foreperson told the court today "not guilty", and when asked about the murder of Clay, the foreperson replied "guilty". Lynn was physically shocked by the verdict, raising his eyebrows and remaining silent after the two verdicts were read aloud. Justice Michael Croucher dismissed the jury before Lynn was taken back to prison, where he will await his sentence. Image credits: Nine

Legal

Donald Trump facing jail after guilty verdict

Former US president Donald Trump is facing the possibility of jail time after being found guilty on all 34 counts of a hush money trial in New York. Trump was found to be unanimously guilty by the jury on Thursday afternoon, making him the first former US President with a criminal conviction. In the New York courtroom, he was accused of 34 counts of fraud by falsifying business records to cover up payments of $200,000 ($US130,000) to adult star Stormy Daniels. It was reported that Mr Trump wanted to buy her silence about an alleged extramarital sexual encounter which was in danger of becoming public knowledge in the run up to the 2016 US Presidential election. While paying hush money to cover up a potentially damning story isn't illegal, Trump's falsifying of business records to bury the payments is a criminal offence in the state of New York. Mr Trump, 77, denied a sexual encounter with Ms Daniels took place and denied all the charges. After the guilty verdict was handed down, Trump spoke to reporters outside the courtroom, saying the trial was “rigged” and a “disgrace”. “This was a rigged trial by a conflicted judge who is corrupt,” he said. “The real verdict is going to be November 5 by the people and they know what happened here and everybody knows what happened here.” He insisted “we didn’t do anything wrong”. “I’m a very innocent man and it’s OK, I’m fighting for our country, I’m fighting for our Constitution,” he said. A sentencing hearing has been set for July 11th, just four days before the Republican National Convention, when the party will officially nominate him for President ahead of the election in November. He faces a minimum of probation and a maximum of up to four years in prison. Image credits: Justin Lane/UPI/Shutterstock Editorial

Legal

Verdict delivered over fatal Rust shooting

The armourer on the set of the film Rust has been charged with involuntary manslaughter over the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. Halyna Hutchins, who was 42 and a mother to a young son, died after being fatally shot by Alec Baldwin on the set of the Western movie in October 2021. Baldwin has repeatedly denied responsibility, insisting he did not pull the trigger. Now, armourer Hannah Gutierrez has been found guilty, with the jury hearing that Gutierrez, 26, had been ultimately responsible for the use of live rounds on set. Over a 10-day trial in New Mexico, the court heard how she had repeatedly failed to adhere to basic safety rules by leaving guns unattended on set, and allowing actors — including Baldwin — to wave the weapons around. “This is not a case where Hannah Gutierrez made one mistake and that one mistake was accidentally putting a live round into that gun,” prosecutor Kari Morrissey told the jury in her closing argument Wednesday. “This case is about constant, never-ending safety failures that resulted in the death of a human being and nearly killed another.” The judge remanded her in custody ahead of her sentencing, which is not expected before next month, as she faces up to 18 months’ prison. Despite Baldwin long claiming his innocence over the shooting, ballistics experts have dismissed the claim, saying the gun could not have discharged any other way. His own involuntary manslaughter trial is expected in July. Image credits: Getty Images

Legal

Sitcom star jailed for 30 years

That ‘70s Show star Danny Masterson has been sentenced to 30 years in prison for raping two women who were in the Church of Scientology with him in 2003. Masterson, 47, who was found guilty of raping victims Jen B and N Trout in his Hollywood home in June, received his sentence on Thursday, California time. The actor remained silent in court as he received 15 years for each count, which will be served consecutively. “One way or another you will have to come to terms with your prior actions, and their consequences,” Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charlaine Olmedoe told Masterson, according to the New York Post. The victims testified that they passed out after Materson gave them drinks, then he proceeded to violently rape them. Prosecutors claimed that Materson raped N Trout so violently that she threw up in her mouth. Prior to the sentencing, N Trout read out her victim statement, where she slammed the actor for his violent actions, but also forgave him and hoped that he would do better in prison. “You relish in hurting women. It is your addiction. It is without question your favourite thing to do,” she said, according to court reporter Meghann Cuniff. “Life is precious and fragile. Find your heart … Learn something. Read books. Listen to the brightness of nothing and get well. I forgive you." Jen B, on the other hand, reiterated the fact that there was no conspiracy to take down Materson or the Church of Scientology. This comes after the defence had previously argued that the sexual acts were consensual, accusing the women of co-ordinating their stories to discredit former Hollywood star. The victims also told the court that Scientology officials told them not to report the crime because Masterson was a high-ranking member of the church, and instead they were put through an ethics program. After an initial deadlock vote, the jury found Masterson guilty of two counts of rape, but could not reach a unanimous verdict on a third count alleging that the former star also assaulted his ex-girlfriend Christina Bixler. However, he was not charged with any counts of drugging as there were no toxicology evidence to back up the women's statement, which will likely play a role in Masterson’s plan to appeal the verdict. The Church of Scientology also released a statement, criticising the notion that they tried to silence the complaints, claiming that the women's testimony were “uniformly false”. “The Church has no policy prohibiting or discouraging members from reporting criminal conduct of anyone — Scientologists or not — to law enforcement,” “Quite the opposite, church policy explicitly demands Scientologists abide by all laws of the land.” Image: Lucy Nicholson - Pool/Getty Images

Legal

“What a disgrace”: Grace Tame slams footy star’s child abuse verdict

Content warning: This article includes mentions of child sex abuse (CSA) and child exploitation material. Activist Grace Tame has slammed the Australian legal system after former NRL star Brett Finch avoided jail time for sharing child sex abuse (CSA) material. Finch, a former halfback, pleaded guilty to one charge of using a carriage service to transmit, publish or promote child abuse in August, but was sentenced to a $1000 two-year good behaviour bond on Wednesday. The 41-year-old was under the influence of drugs when he left a series of messages on a gay chat-line expressing a desire to perform sex acts on young boys. In Sydney’s Downing Centre District Court, Finch admitted to feeling disgust at himself for making the calls, saying his intention behind them was to obtain cocaine. Ms Tame shared her outrage in a series of posts on social media on Wednesday night, describing the verdict as a shame on Australia. “This pathetic verdict is a shame on our nation. The fact that Judge Phillip Mahony accepted the distorted narrative alleged by Brett Finch that his production of child abuse material was a means of scoring drugs shows just how undervalued children are in Australia,” she wrote over a screenshot of a news story about Finch’s sentencing. “The buck continues to stop with innocent lives. What a disgrace. “Let’s be real here: of all the avenues to score cocaine, a paedophile ring is probably THE LAST PLACE you’d need to look. In the words of Robin Williams, ‘that’s like getting chemotherapy because YOU’RE TIRED OF SHAVING YOUR HEAD’.” The 27-year-old said that whether his story was true or not, the outcome of his actions remains the same. “It does not change the fact that he produced child exploitation material,” she continued. “It does not change the fact that he engaged with convicted paedophiles, therefore aiding and enabling the cycle of abuse culture and providing the social cue of legitimacy to a crime against humanity.” In response to his claims that the messages were just “s**t talk”, Ms Tame said it served to “dehumanise and objectify” children. “Yeah, that’s all it ever is, isn’t it, just “s**t talk?” she wrote. “It’s just “s**t talk” to dehumanise and objectify an underage member of your own species.” During Finch’s sentencing, Judge Phillip Mahoney described the content of the athlete’s messages as “highly depraved” and “morally reprehensible”. While the maximum penalty for the offence is 15 years, the Crown had asked that Finch be sentenced to full-time custody. Judge Mahoney found that there were some exceptional circumstances surrounding Finch’s offending, accepting that he had been motivated by a “patently absurd” attempt to source drugs rather than out of sexual interest in children. He noted that Finch hadn’t created or shared any images and had acted alone and while under the influence, with the offending being “entirely unsophisticated”. “I accept that he is genuinely remorseful for his offending conduct,” the judge said, noting Finch’s lack of a criminal record and his involvement in junior football coaching and charity work. The court heard that Finch was at the height of his drug use at the time, which had started in 2013 and peaked with his use of 12 to 25 grams of cocaine a week. There was evidence that he failed to adapt to life after his NRL career, and that he was ashamed of his actions and had been abused in public, prompting him to rarely leave his home following the arrest. Under his release order, Finch must be of good behaviour, not travel interstate or overseas without permission, and must undergo drug testing and treatment. If you or someone you know have been a victim or affected by child sexual abuse, support is available. You can contact Bravehearts on 1800 272 831 or Blue Knot on 1300 657 380 for support. Images: Instagram / Getty Images

Legal

The verdict: Full fat versus low fat milk

The idea of full low milk being healthier for us began circulating in the 1950s. It was shown that saturated fat increased blood cholesterol levels, with certain statistical evidence leading to the assumption it resulted in higher rates of heart disease and obesity. This idea is not totally wrong. Full fat milk does indeed have a high saturated fat content, about 65 percent in fact. <a href="http://www.simoneaustin.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Simone Austin</a>, accredited practising dietitian and spokesperson for the <a href="http://daa.asn.au/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dietitians Association of Australia</a> addresses the claims that saturated fat should be avoided when it comes to weight management. “We are still recommending saturated fat should be kept to a minimum as there is still a link between saturated and plasma cholesterol levels, however full cream milk is only 4% total fat and is therefore not a high fat product, depending on quantity of course.” Health and nutrition coach and whole foods chef, Lee Holmes, believes that low-fat milk is a great option for those trying to lose weight. Even though the fat is skimmed, the milk itself still contains an abundance of calcium and protein, and these are essential to weight loss. “Low-fat milk is better for overall weight control and maintenance as it only contains 0.15% fat as opposed to full-cream milk which contains 3.8% fat” she explains. The New Zealand Ministry of Health recommends enjoying mostly low and reduced fat milk and milk products, as it can reduce the total daily kilojoule intake to aid with weight management. This is generally believed to lead to weight loss and reduced risk of heart disease. However, Simone explains why it is not quite that straight forward. “Fat can give some feeling of satiety. If you are having less milk overall, and it is more filling to have full cream milk, then this might decrease overall volume of food consumed and therefore not be detrimental”. This approach is supported by recent research conducted by <a href="../%20http:/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26746178">Swedish researchers</a>, looking at the dairy consumption of a group of middle aged men. If found that those who ate full fat dairy products were less likely to become obese over a period of 12 years, compare with men who rarely ate high- fat diary. This is because the weight-loss effect of reducing saturated fat depends on what replaces it in the diet, which is usually sugar and carbohydrates. Unfortunately, most of us are susceptible to consciously or unconsciously replacing a larger reduction in calories with something else. So, if you drink low-fat varieties of milk in order to reduce calorie intake, you must ensure you are not making up these calories elsewhere for this approach to be effective. However, in your quest for a slimmer waist line, it is important not to overlook other important health factors. Milk is a primary source of nutrients, and according to both Simone and the <a href="http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2032&context=sspapers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ABS</a>, most over-60s simply aren’t getting what they need. “In New Zealand the annual per capita consumption of milk has declined by 30% in the last 20 years, and 20% of the New Zealand population has an inadequate intake of calcium”. Simone stresses that simply aiming to meet serves is the priority. “Milk also provides a valuable source of protein and as we age our efficiency at using protein reduces, so we need to have a little more”. Lee Holmes echoes this, stating that ideally, people over 60 years of age should be having two to three glasses of cow’s milk daily to absorb the necessary amounts of calcium. If you don’t want to consume that much milk, are lactose intolerant or prefer to opt for non-cow’s milk (such as almond) you need to make these nutrients up elsewhere. “You may want to consider a quality, natural supplement to ensure you are giving your body all the nutrients it needs." So whether it be low-fat or full-fat, say cheers to milk and manage your weight loss in accordance with other health factors. Image: Getty Images

Food & Wine

Stunning developments in rape trial of Bruce Lehrmann

The jury in the rape trial of Bruce Lehrmann has been dismissed with no verdict after a juror accessed material that was not admitted in court. Mr Lehrmann has pleaded not guilty of raping former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins in Parliament House after a night out drinking in March 2019. The trial ran for 12 days with 29 witnesses taking the stand before the jury was asked to deliberate on the evidence. A few days after the trial ended, the jurors could not reach a verdict but were urged by the judge to go back and come to a conclusion. Chief Justice Lucy McCallum then notified the court on October 27 that a juror had accessed evidence that was not presented in court. All 12 jurors were called into the ACT Supreme Court and questioned after an academic paper that reported on how often false rape accusations were made was found. "During routine tidying of the jury room by three sheriff's officers after the conclusion of proceedings yesterday, one of the officers accidentally bumped one of the juror's document holders onto the floor," she said, ABC reported. She said she had no other choice but to dismiss the jurors despite warning them “at least 17 times” to only discuss the points said in court. "You must not try to undertake your own research," she said she told them. "You must rely exclusively on the evidence you hear in this courtroom. "If you are learning something about this trial, and I'm not there, then you should not be doing it." Despite dismissing the jurors, Justice McCallum thanked them and told them that their time was not wasted. "This may come as a frustration to you after the hard work you all put in, and I want to convey my extreme gratitude," she said. "I don't want you to leave court thinking this has been a waste of time." Mr Lehrmann was granted bail until the new trial which is scheduled for February 20, 2023. Outside the court, an emotional Ms Higgins then delivered a tearful speech in which she said she “chose to speak up” to help others who were in a similar situation. As a result, Mr Lehrmann’s lawyers are now seeking urgent legal advice from police over whether Brittany Higgins' speech outside the ACT Supreme Court could constitute contempt of court. Mr Lehrmann’s defence barrister Steve Whybrow later confirmed In a statement that he had referred the matter to police. “When we left Court this morning, I indicated to the gathered media that given this matter was ongoing and a date of 20 February 2023 had been fixed for any retrial, it would be both inappropriate and irresponsible to make any further comment at this stage,” the statement read. “I understand the complainant and other members of her support team were all seated in Court this morning when the Chief Justice discharged the jury and made strong comments about people making statements or comments that could prejudice a fair trial. “Notwithstanding Her Honour’s admonition, the complainant proceeded to give what appears to have been a pre-prepared speech to the media outside the Court.” “We have brought these comments to the attention of the Court and the Australian Federal Police, and it is not appropriate for Mr Lehrmann or his lawyers to make any comment as to whether the complainant’s statements might amount to a contempt of court offences against the ACT Criminal Code. “I urge all media to show restraint in reporting this matter and in particular in republishing the statements made by the complainant. “Neither Mr Lehrmann nor his lawyers will be making any further comment on this matter at this stage.” Images: ABC

News

Chris Dawson tries to overturn guilty verdict ahead of tell-all interview

Chris Dawson has lodged the paperwork to begin the process of overturning his guilty conviction for the murder of his wife Lynette 40 years ago. The 74-year-old has spent the last five weeks in Sydney's Silverwater Jail, as he awaits his sentencing day in court on November 11. Despite the high-profile case producing a guilty verdict, Dawson has always maintained his innocence over the disappearance of Lynette, whose body still hasn't been found. Sources told <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11279117/Chris-Dawson-lodges-appeal-against-conviction-murdering-wife-Lynette-daughter-breaks-silence.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daily Mail Australia</a> last month that Dawson's legal team had recently lodged a notice of intention to appeal with the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal. Nine News also reported on Tuesday night the paperwork flagging Dawson's intention to appeal his conviction has now been formally submitted, as the network prepares to air an interview with one of his daughters. Shanelle Dawson is preparing to open up about growing up without her mother, along with the torment and confusion that arose form her disappearance in a tell-all interview with 60 Minutes. Shanelle, who was just four years old when her mum Lynette vanished in 1982, said she was always told by her father that her mother left because she didn't love her and her other sisters. "I feel a lot of rage and anger towards him," Shanelle says in the 60 Minutes preview. "It was manipulative and gaslighting us." "Whatever he said or threatened me kept me quiet for the next 40 years." Image credits: Getty Images / 60 Minutes

Legal

Karl Stefanovic's brutal verdict on Meghan Markle's emotional funeral display

Karl Stefanovic has shared his brutal thoughts on Meghan Markle's emotional display at Queen Elizabeth's funeral. Covering the Queen's final farewell in London, the Today host couldn't resist taking a swipe at his least favourite royal as the coverage of the high-profile event started rolling in. As the Duchess of Sussex was seen wiping tears from under her eye, Karl made the outlandish claim that she wasn't actually crying. Stefanovic made clear his verdict on Meghan's public display of emotion, emphasising the word "apparently", which didn't go unnoticed by his co-host Allison Langdon. The moment occurred while Stefanovic and Langdon were speaking to royal photographer Chris Jackson outside Buckingham Palace as the day of the funeral drew to a close. Karl noted how several photos from the funeral were open to interpretation, particularly in regard to whether certain members of the royal family were crying, going on to imply that pictures of Meghan wiping away tears were perhaps misleading. "There's been lots of photos around and interpretations of photos and reading into photos [meanings] that may or may not be true," he said. "There's a couple of Meghan, um, with a tear running down her face - apparently - and also even one of Princess Charlotte that everyone was saying she was crying, and we don't know if it was true or not." As Stefanovic cast doubt on Meghan's tearful display with the word 'apparently', Langdon smiled nervously then offered him a knowing look. Meghan wept as she watched Queen Elizabeth II's coffin being carried out of Westminster Abbey in London on Monday evening, as she stood alongside other members of the royal family. Image credits: Today show, Twitter

Lynette Dawson's family responds to guilty verdict

Lynette Dawson’s family have called for one final request from Chris Dawson after he was <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/news/news/stunning-chris-dawson-verdict-handed-down" target="_blank" rel="noopener">found guilty of murdering his wife</a> after she “disappeared” 40 years ago. Justice Ian Harrison found Chris Dawson guilty of Lynette’s murder - 40 years after she went missing from the family home in Sydney's Northern Beaches in January 1982. The trial, which gained worldwide traction thanks to the podcast Teacher’s Pet, saw the incredible decision handed down following a seven week trial and a marathon four hour ruling. Lynette’s brother, Greg Simms has said justice has finally been served after she was murdered by someone who loved her. “I’m a little emotional - after 40 years, my sister has been vindicated,” he said. “This verdict is for Lyn. Today her name has been cleared. “The court has found what we believed to be true for so many years: Chris Dawson took the life of our beloved Lyn back in 1982.” Unfortunately, Lynette’s parents and other brother passed away in the years following her murder, not knowing what would come out of the case. Mr Simms has since called on Dawson to do the right thing and reveal where he buried Lynette so she can finally rest in peace. “We would also love to remember those who loved Lyn who are not here to see this judgement,” he said. “She is still missing, we still need to bring her home. “We would ask Chris Dawson to find it in himself to finally do the decent thing and allow us to bring Lyn home to a peaceful rest, finally show her the dignity she deserves.” When the case reopened, Dawson requested a judge-only trial due to the popularity of the Teacher’s Pet podcast, stating that the jury would have their decisions impacted by it. This required Justice Harrison to outline the reasons behind his decision also saying that the prosecution had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Lynette was dead, that Dawson had killed her with the possible involvement of assistance of others, and that he disposed of her body. The Supreme Court justice shared several findings to support his decision and weighed in on evidence presented during the trial, including ruling that Lynette had died on the date alleged by the prosecution and dismissing claims from Dawson that he contacted his wife as “lies”. Justice Harrison said it was “simply absurd” and defied “common sense” that Lynette would be in contact with the person “who was the reason for her departure” from her home. He also ruled that Lynette didn’t leave home voluntarily, with the prosecution providing multiple reasons that were “strongly persuasive” when considered together, including that she adored her children, hadn’t taken any clothing or personal items with her, was mentally stable, and was dependent on her husband to drive her everywhere. “Lynette Dawson is dead … she died on or about 8 January 1982 and she did not voluntarily abandon her home,” he told the court. Justice Harrison dismissed claims from the defence that Lynette was spotted after January 8. He found that Dawson told JC, “Lyn’s gone, she’s not coming back, come back to Sydney and help look after the kids and live with me”, when he picked her up from a camping trip at South West Rocks with friends between January 10 and 12. However, he said that he disagreed with claims that Dawson was motivated to kill his wife because of financial reasons, nor that he had in his mind that he would kill her when he left with JC. “That decision was made following their return and after the teen had left for South-West Rocks,” Justice Harrison said. He said that he was “satisfied” that Dawson resolved to kill Lynette while JC was camping. Following the verdict, Dawson was taken into custody, with his lawyer, Greg Walsh, telling Justice Harrison that Dawson would likely apply for bail before his sentencing hearing, a date for which hasn’t been set yet.

News

Stunning Chris Dawson verdict handed down

Former rugby player Chris Dawson has been found guilty of murdering his wife, Lynette Dawson, 40 years after she disappeared. After a four-hour reading, Justice Ian Harrison delivered his verdict on Tuesday afternoon, bringing <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/chris-dawson-to-stand-trial-over-wife-s-murder" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the two-month trial</a> to an end. “Chris Dawson I find you guilty of the murder of Lynette Dawson,” he told the accused. According to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2022/aug/30/australia-news-chris-dawson-covid-isolation-politics-anthony-albanese-skills-summit-tax-cuts#top-of-blog" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Guardian</a>, gasps were heard in the courtroom where Justice Harrison was delivering his verdict. The courtroom next door, where the trial was being live streamed, erupted into applause. Dawson was alleged to have killed his wife to be with the family’s teenage babysitter, referred to as JC. Lynette was last seen on January 8, 1982, after she spoke to her mother on the phone. Her body was never found. Since Dawson successfully applied for a judge-only trial - due mainly to the publicity generated around the case by the Teacher’s Pet podcast - Justice Harrison was required to outline the reasons behind his decision. Justice Harrison said the prosecution had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Lynette was dead, that Dawson had killed her with the possible involvement of assistance of others, and that he disposed of her body. The Supreme Court justice shared several findings to support his decision and weighed in on evidence presented during the trial, including ruling that Lynette had died on the date alleged by the prosecution and dismissing claims from Dawson that he contacted his wife as “lies”. Justice Harrison said it was “simply absurd” and defied “common sense” that Lynette would be in contact with the person “who was the reason for her departure” from her home. He also ruled that Lynette didn’t leave home voluntarily, with the prosecution providing multiple reasons that were “strongly persuasive” when considered together, including that she adored her children, hadn’t taken any clothing or personal items with her, was mentally stable, and was dependent on her husband to drive her everywhere. “Lynette Dawson is dead … she died on or about 8 January 1982 and she did not voluntarily abandon her home,” he told the court. Justice Harrison <a href="https://www.oversixty.co.nz/finance/legal/i-had-visual-contact-with-lyn-dawson-court-hears" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dismissed claims</a> from the defence that Lynette was spotted after January 8. He found that Dawson told JC, “Lyn’s gone, she’s not coming back, come back to Sydney and help look after the kids and live with me”, when he picked her up from a camping trip at South West Rocks with friends between January 10 and 12. However, he said that he disagreed with claims that Dawson was motivated to kill his wife because of financial reasons, nor that he had in his mind that he would kill her when he left with JC. “That decision was made following their return and after the teen had left for South-West Rocks,” Justice Harrison said. He said that he was “satisfied” that Dawson resolved to kill Lynette while JC was camping. Following the verdict, Dawson was taken into custody, with his lawyer, Greg Walsh, telling Justice Harrison that Dawson would likely apply for bail before his sentencing hearing, a date for which hasn’t been set yet. Images: @poppymasselos (Twitter) / @Kangaroo_Court (Twitter)

News

Verdict reached in Depp versus Heard trial

A verdict has been reached in the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard defamation trial in Virginia, USA. Coming out largely in Depp's favour, Heard must pay him a total of $US15 million ($20.8 million) in damages, the jury have decided. However, as a result of her counterclaims, the jury said Depp must pay Heard $US2 million ($2.78 million). The jury unanimously found that Depp was defamed by Heard's op-ed titled, "I spoke up against sexual violence – and faced our culture's wrath. That has to change". They found the op-ed was about Depp despite him not being named in the piece. An exert read: "Then two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out." The jury also agreed that Heard acted with malice and further stated that she also made a defamatory statement when she said, "I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse." The jury then addressed Heard's countersuit, and supported one of her claims of defamation. In total, Heard was found to have been defamatory to Depp in all three of his claims, but Depp was only found to be defamatory in one of Heard's three counterclaims. The verdict was read out in the Virginia courtroom about 3:20 pm on Wednesday (5:20 am on Thursday AEST) but prior, after they first reached a decision, the judge asked for them to leave the court and fill out a form. Heard was present in the courtroom, and showed little to no reaction as the verdict was read out. Depp was not present at the time of the verdict. Depp's awarded damages total to $US15 million (approx. $20.8 million), but are comprised of $US10 million (approx. $14 million) in compensatory damages and $US5 million (approx. $7 million) in punitive damages. Under state law in Virginia, however, the maximum amount of punitive damages that can be paid is $US350,000 (approx. $490,000), which means Depp's ultimate monetary award is $US10.35 million (approx. $14.4 million). Image: Getty

News

Wearing shoes in the house is just plain gross, says the verdict from scientists who study indoor contaminants

You probably clean your shoes if you step in something muddy or disgusting (please pick up after your dog!). But when you get home, do you always de-shoe at the door? Plenty of Australians don’t. For many, what you <a href="https://sfamjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jam.13250">drag in on the bottom of your shoes</a> is the last thing on the mind as one gets home. We are environmental chemists who have spent a decade examining the indoor environment and the contaminants people are exposed to in their own homes. Although our examination of the indoor environment, via our <a href="https://www.360dustanalysis.com/">DustSafe program</a>, is far from complete, on the question of whether to shoe or de-shoe in the home, the science leans toward the latter. It is best to leave your filth outside the door. <h2>What contaminants are in your home, and how did they get there?</h2> People spend up to 90% of their time indoors, so the question of whether or not to wear shoes in the house is not a trivial one. The policy focus is typically on the outdoor environment for soil, air quality and environmental public health risks. However, there is growing regulatory interest in the question of <a href="https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/sites/default/files/resources/2021/Handbook-Indoor-Air-Quality.pdf">indoor</a> <a href="https://www.euro.who.int/en/media-centre/sections/press-releases/2021/new-who-global-air-quality-guidelines-aim-to-save-millions-of-lives-from-air-pollution">air quality</a>. The matter <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09603123.2018.1457141?journalCode=cije2">building up</a> inside your home includes not just dust and dirt from people and pets shedding hair and skin. About a third of it is <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es9003735">from outside</a>, either blown in or <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/how-the-dust-in-your-home-may-affect-your-health/2019/07/19/9f716068-a351-11e9-bd56-eac6bb02d01d_story.html">tramped</a> in on those offensive shoe bottoms. Some of the microorganisms present on shoes and floors are <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/mechanisms-for-floor-surfaces-or-environmental-ground-contamination-to-cause-human-infection-a-systematic-review/37BF6318BD1473C4918A23C843B25D05">drug-resistant pathogens</a>, including hospital-associated infectious agents (germs) that are very difficult to treat. Add in cancer-causing toxins from <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408444.2018.1528208">asphalt road residue</a> and endocrine-disrupting <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23273747.2016.1148803">lawn chemicals</a>, and you might view the filth on your shoes in a new light. <h2>A roll-call of indoor nasties</h2> Our work has involved the measurement and assessment of exposure to a range of harmful substances found inside homes including: <ul> <li> <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/2231210-antibiotic-resistance-genes-can-be-passed-around-by-bacteria-in-dust/">antibiotic-resistant genes</a> (genes that make bacteria resistant to antibiotics) </li> <li> <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00587">disinfectant chemicals in the home environment</a> </li> <li> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117064">microplastics</a> </li> <li> the <a href="https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/5/e044833.citation-tools">perfluorinated chemicals</a> (also known as PFAS or “forever chemicals” because of their tendency to remain in the body and not break down) used ubiquitously in a multitude of industrial, domestic and food packaging products </li> <li> <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1959.14/1276977">radioactive elements</a>. </li> </ul> A strong focus of our work has involved assessing levels of <a href="https://theconversation.com/house-dust-from-35-countries-reveals-our-global-toxic-contaminant-exposure-and-health-risk-172499">potentially toxic metals (such as arsenic, cadmium and lead)</a> inside homes across <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04494">35 nations (including Australia)</a>. These contaminants – and most importantly the dangerous neurotoxin lead – are odourless and colourless. So there is no way of knowing whether the dangers of lead exposure are only in your <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106582">soils</a> or your <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/sites/default/files/resources/2020/Lead_in_Plumbing_Products_and_Materials.pdf">water pipes</a>, or if they are also on your <a href="https://theconversation.com/house-dust-from-35-countries-reveals-our-global-toxic-contaminant-exposure-and-health-risk-172499">living room floor</a>. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/house-dust-from-35-countries-reveals-our-global-toxic-contaminant-exposure-and-health-risk-172499">science</a> suggests a very strong connection between the lead inside your <a href="https://www.mapmyenvironment.com/">home and that in your yard soil</a>. The most likely reason for this connection is dirt blown in from your yard or trodden in on your shoes, and on the furry paws of your adorable pets. This connection speaks to the priority of making sure matter from your outdoor environment stays exactly there (we have tips <a href="https://www.360dustanalysis.com/pages/interpreting-your-results">here</a>). A recent Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/heres-why-ill-be-keeping-my-shoes-on-in-your-shoeless-home-11644503227">article</a> argued shoes in the home aren’t so bad. The author made the point that E. coli – dangerous bacteria that develop in the intestines of many mammals, including humans – is so widely distributed that it’s pretty much everywhere. So it should be no surprise it can be swabbed on shoe bottoms (96% of shoe bottoms, as the article pointed out). But let’s be clear. Although it’s nice to be scientific and stick with the term E. coli, this stuff is, put more simply, the bacteria associated with poo. Whether it is ours or Fido’s, it has the potential to make us very sick if we are exposed at high levels. And let’s face it – it is just plain gross. Why walk it around inside your house if you have a very simple alternative – to take your shoes off at the door? <h2>On balance, shoeless wins</h2> So are there disadvantages to having a shoe-free household? Beyond the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/wellness/feet-toes-broken-pain-covid/2021/01/11/470d2efa-4a05-11eb-a9f4-0e668b9772ba_story.html">occasional stubbed toe</a>, from an environmental health standpoint there aren’t many downsides to having a shoe-free house. Leaving your shoes at the entry mat also leaves potentially harmful pathogens there as well. We all know prevention is far better than treatment and taking shoes off at the door is a basic and easy prevention activity for many of us. Need shoes for foot support? Easy – just have some “indoor shoes” that never get worn outside. There remains the issue of the “sterile house syndrome,” which refers to increased rates of allergies among children. Some argue it’s related to overly sterile households. Indeed, some dirt is probably beneficial as <a href="https://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(10)00907-3/fulltext">studies</a> have indicated it helps develop your immune system and reduce allergy risk. But there are better and less gross ways to do that than walking around inside with your filthy shoes on. Get outside, go for a bushwalk, enjoy the great outdoors. Just don’t bring the muckier parts of it inside to build up and contaminate our homes. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared in <a href="https://theconversation.com/wearing-shoes-in-the-house-is-just-plain-gross-the-verdict-from-scientists-who-study-indoor-contaminants-177542" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Home & Garden

Craig McLachlan’s next move after not guilty verdict

Actor Craig McLachlan is moving to pursue his claim for defamation just hours after he was found to be not guilty of indecently assaulting four women during production of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Magistrate Belinda Wallington acquitted the actor of all 13 indecent and common law assault charges in Melbourne Magistrates' Court on Tuesday. McLachlan watched the verdicts being handed down on a video link from a Sydney office, while his partner Vanessa Scammell also watched on in the room. "We've maintained a dignified and a respectful silence for the past almost three years and put our trust in the law and here we are today," McLachlan said afterwards. The magistrate said the four female complainants were "brave and honest witnesses" and did not consent to multiple incidents of inappropriate touching. However, she said that prosecutors could not prove the crimes had occurred and that Mclachlan's "egotistical, self-entitled sense of humour" may have led him to believe they were consenting. McLachlan has sued the ABC, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age newspapers, and Christie Whelan-Browne for defamation in NSW, when allegations against him were first reported.

Legal

"Stoic and strong": Weinstein's legal team responds to guilty verdict

For decades, movie mogul Harvey Weinstein got whatever he wanted, when he wanted it. That included sex with Hollywood’s biggest names and those who aren’t as well known – even if that meant by force. But now, the tide has turned as the disgraced Oscar-winning producer was convicted today on two of five sexual assault charges, ending a high profile rape trial in New York. After five days of deliberation, a jury unanimously agreed that Weinstein was guilty of raping an aspiring actress in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013 and forcibly performing oral sex on another woman, TV and film production assistant Mimi Haleyi, in 2006. The 67-year-old was convicted of first degree sexual assault and third degree rape. He is facing up to 29 years in prison and will be sentenced on March 11. The first charge carries a sentence of 5-25 years behind bars with the second carrying a minimum probationary period and a maximum four year jail term. Speaking to news.com.au, Weinstein’s lawyer Arthur Aidala said that his team will appeal the convictions which he said is “disappointing”. “Harvey was unbelievably stoic and strong and powerful,” said Mr Aidala. “The words he said over and over again to me is: ‘I’m innocent, I’m innocent, I’m innocent. How could this happen in America?” Donna Rutonna, lead defence lawyer told reporters outside court that “the fight is not over”. “Harvey is very strong. Harvey is unbelievably strong. He took it like a man,” she said. Meanwhile, a slew of global celebrities took to social media to express their heartfelt reactions to the verdict: <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Gratitude to the brave women who’ve testified and to the jury for seeing through the dirty tactics of the defense .we will change the laws in the future so that rape victims are heard and not discredited and so that it’s easier for people to report their rapes — Rosanna Arquette🌎✌🏼 (@RoArquette) <a href="https://twitter.com/RoArquette/status/1231991023384973313?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> off he goes to prison - where he belongs - over 80 women accused him of rape - imagine the total number? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HarveyWeinsteinGUILTY?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#HarveyWeinsteinGUILTY</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RAPIST?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RAPIST</a> and lets not forget <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/trumpSEXcrimes?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#trumpSEXcrimes</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/guilty?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#guilty</a> — ROSIE (@Rosie) <a href="https://twitter.com/Rosie/status/1231995057483452426?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> For the women who testified in this case, and walked through traumatic hell, you did a public service to girls and women everywhere, thank you.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ConvictWeinstein?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ConvictWeinstein</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Guilty?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Guilty</a> — ashley judd (@AshleyJudd) <a href="https://twitter.com/AshleyJudd/status/1231995493888266242?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> The beginning of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/justice?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#justice</a>. More to come, my sisters. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/weinsteinguilty?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#weinsteinguilty</a> — Mira Sorvino (@MiraSorvino) <a href="https://twitter.com/MiraSorvino/status/1232000389664235525?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>

News

Prince William and Duchess Kate’s date full of love: Body language expert dishes verdict on couple’s night out

After eight years and three children together, the royal couple looked just as loved up as they would have been on their first date night, a body language expert has revealed. Judi James says both Prince William and Duchess Kate, who are not a couple to publicly display acts of affection, exhibited “subtly flirt” behaviour that royal fans got to see at the beginning of their relationship. While their displays of love and appreciation may be a little more downplayed than the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, James told<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html"> FEMAIL</a>, they still signal they have a solid foundation rooted in mutual affection. The body language expert noted a photograph showing Prince William’s hand on the small of his wife’s back appeared “gentlemanly.” “William and Kate aren’t known for their overt PDAs and they can keep their touch rituals to a minimum in public but this back-touch from William looks unusually tactile and affectionate,” she said. “His smile looks almost shy here and the splayed hand appears gentle and gentlemanly, although that raised thumb suggests intense happiness.” It was not the only snap that showed the royal’s looking starry eyed and in love that got James’ attention though. An image shared by Kensington Palace’s official Instagram page displayed the Duke and Duchess in their seats at the London Palladium during the show. “The couple’s mirroring is always tight, showing like-minded thinking and a subliminal desire to present as an double act based on two empathetic equals,” James said. “Here though they add some strong eye-engage signals, leaning their heads together at matching angles to do so. “The eye contact has produced facial expressions that suggest the classic "look of love", with a softening of the features plus a dimpled smile from Kate.’ Once more, a picture of the couple laughing in their box during the show signalled to the body language expert that they were both having fun. “Royal Variety performances can prompt some smiles from the royal box but here William and Kate are literally rocking with laughter,” Judi explained. “Again it is mutual though, with mirrored movements, suggesting a shared sense of fun.” However, what stood out to her was a snap of the couple leaving the event and heading back to their car after a long night in public. “When any smiling public displays have been an act it’s the moment a couple take their seats in the car that you’ll often see masks begin to slip,” Judi said. “But if anything Kate’s expression of delight appears to intensify here. Her excited, widened eye expression, her rounded cheeks and her symmetric smile all make her look like someone on a first date.” Scroll through the gallery above to see the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge looking loved up on date night.

Relationships

Outrage over Kmart child attacker verdict as Peter Dutton calls for review

A man who abducted a seven-year-old girl from a Queensland Kmart toy aisle and sexually assaulted her in bushland nearby has been jailed for a maximum of eight years. The mother of the young girl has been left “shaken” by his sentence, says child safety advocates. Prominent child safety campaigner Bruce Morcombe spoke outside court, saying he “fears for the children of Australia” after Sterling Mervyn Free was given eight years in prison over the abduction this morning. The man, Sterling Free, will be eligible for parole in August 2021. Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has slammed the sentence as an “outrage” and has called on the Queensland Government to appeal the decision. “You cannot have a young girl taken and put in a situation that no parent could ever imagine for their child,” he told the <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/crime-and-justice/bruce-denise-morcombe-peter-dutton-slam-sterling-free-sentence/news-story/093f4dc9a89d55eb6994ed99fc945a00" target="_blank" title="www.couriermail.com.au">Courier Mail.</a> “For a child that’s sexually abused or abducted, for somebody to get essentially a penalty of about two and a half years is unacceptable.” The 27-year-old father of twins lured the girl from the Kmart at Westfield North Lakes in December last year, but was sentenced today. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> The 27-year-old man who lured a girl from Kmart before sexually assaulting her has been sentenced to a maximum of eight years behind bars. He will be eligible for parole in less than two years. Sterling Free’s statement has been read by his lawyer outside court. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/7NEWS?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#7NEWS</a> <a href="https://t.co/qOObCLYJi7">pic.twitter.com/qOObCLYJi7</a> — 7NEWS Sunshine Coast (@7NewsSC) <a href="https://twitter.com/7NewsSC/status/1182441043469295616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 10, 2019</a></blockquote> Judge Julie Dick said Free’s offending was “every parent’s nightmare”. Child safety advocates Denise and Bruce Morcombe read a statement on behalf of the girl’s mother outside court. “While disappointed with the sentence, my daughter and our family are moving forward,” the statement read, according to <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/courts-law/brisbane-kmart-child-attacker-faces-20-years-in-jail/news-story/be0dca06e3d26c96708bd3ab0cbd8998" target="_blank">news.com.au</a>. “The bar needs to be sufficiently high to say to these other people, these other creeps that are out there that have fascination about our kids, don’t go there or you’ll be locked up for decades,” he said. “I’m not sure this sentence does that.” Free’s lawyer read out a statement from Free, saying that he was sorry for the “pain I caused her (the victim), her family and my own family and my children. “I today accept the punishment imposed upon me by the justice system,” the statement read. “I do not wish to cause any further pain upon the young victim, her family nor delay justice any further. “I cannot comprehend the pain I’ve caused her. I took away her innocence and scared her family. I hope that today my sentence provides her and her family some closure. “I can only ever say sorry. I know this is not good enough. I cannot imagine the pain and fear I’ve caused. I can’t take that back.” The mother of the young girl has released a statement herself, saying that despite her daughter being taught about “stranger danger”, Free had managed to trick her. “My tiny innocent girl was well aware of stranger danger, however this person was friendly to her and tricked her into following him,” she said in a statement. “No child should ever have to go through this type of trauma, and no sentence will ever be long enough to make up for the ongoing effects this will have on her. “We, as a family, remain positive and are trying to move forward. We would like to thank the QPS, the QDPP and the Australian public for their support throughout this ordeal.”

News

“Genuine doubt”: Why one judges’ argument could save George Pell

After George Pell’s application to Victoria’s Court of Appeal was dismissed on Wednesday with two judges ruling that they thought the jury’s verdict was unreasonable, Pell’s legal team has their sights set on the High Court of Australia. It’s all due to one judge who disagreed and put his views forward in a <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/case-summaries/court-of-appeal-proceedings/george-pell-v-the-queen" target="_blank">203-page dissenting opinion.</a> Justice Weinburg is a former Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecution who joined the Federal Court in 1998 before moving to the Victorian Court of Appeal in 2008. He retired in 2018 but has served as an acting judge since then. There are five reasons as to why he disagreed with his fellow judges. 1. Genuine doubt Weinburg says that he has a “genuine doubt as to the applicant’s guilt.” The jury was required in the case to find Pell guilty “beyond reasonable doubt”, but after reviewing the evidence himself, Weinburg thinks that there was a “significant possibility” that Pell did not commit the offences. “My doubt is a doubt which the jury ought also to have had,” he wrote. 2. He didn’t find the complainant convincing Weinburg has suggested that there was a lot of evidence that casts doubt upon the complainant’s story. He said that there were “inconsistencies, and discrepancies, and a number of his answers simply made no sense”. One example Weinburg used was that the fact that the complainant did not remember there were rehearsals for the choir after mass on the two days that the abuse likely occurred. The complainant was also unsure if Pell had said mass that day or was leading Mass. 3. Weinburg trusts the other witnesses He gave more weight to other witness testimonies than his fellow judges who concluded their evidence was inconsistent. Weinburg has disagreed and said that their evidence is critical and “if accepted, would lead inevitably to acquittal”. The other evidence provided by Pell’s master of ceremonies Charles Portelli established a routine within the church and helped rule out certain dates. The other judges found that the evidence provided by Portelli and sacristan Max Potter was inconsistent, but Weinburg said that it proves there were “modes of conduct that were subject to particularly rigorous and strong norms”. 4. Large number of improbable possibilities Weinburg paid attention to one of the arguments put forward by Pell’s legal team which suggested that for the first incident to have happened, a large number of improbable things would have to had occurred within a short time frame. The boys would have had to break away from the procession, go through two normally locked doors and return to choir rehearsal without anyone noticing they were gone. Weinburg accepts this argument. “The chances of ‘all the planets aligning’, in that way, would, at the very least, be doubtful.” 5. Unusual aspects of the case Weinburg noted that the prosecution relied entirely on the evidence of the complainant and that there was no supporting evidence. “These convictions were based upon the jury’s assessment of the complainant as a witness, and nothing more,” he said. He noted that juries were told they cannot convict an accused unless they were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, as well as being told that they should not convict if there was a “reasonable possibility” that there was substance to the defence provided. “It is not now, and never has been, a question of whether (Pell’s) complainant was to be preferred as a witness to, for example, Portelli, Potter, McGlone, Finnigan, or any other particular witness who gave exculpatory evidence,” Justice Weinburg wrote.

Legal

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

"Unspeakably vicious": Judge hands down verdict to Justin Stein

Families of murdered campers finally break silence after Greg Lynn verdict

Shocking verdict in trial of murdered campers

Donald Trump facing jail after guilty verdict

Verdict delivered over fatal Rust shooting

Sitcom star jailed for 30 years

“What a disgrace”: Grace Tame slams footy star’s child abuse verdict

The verdict: Full fat versus low fat milk

Stunning developments in rape trial of Bruce Lehrmann

Chris Dawson tries to overturn guilty verdict ahead of tell-all interview

Karl Stefanovic's brutal verdict on Meghan Markle's emotional funeral display

Lynette Dawson's family responds to guilty verdict

Stunning Chris Dawson verdict handed down

Verdict reached in Depp versus Heard trial

Wearing shoes in the house is just plain gross, says the verdict from scientists who study indoor contaminants

Craig McLachlan’s next move after not guilty verdict

"Stoic and strong": Weinstein's legal team responds to guilty verdict

Prince William and Duchess Kate’s date full of love: Body language expert dishes verdict on couple’s night out

Outrage over Kmart child attacker verdict as Peter Dutton calls for review

“Genuine doubt”: Why one judges’ argument could save George Pell

Our Partners