Kathleen Folbigg’s Letter to Attorney General Mark Speakman
Similar Posts
Lawyers Weekly EXCLUSIVE: Major Developments in Kathleen Folbigg’s Case May Prove Her Innocence
60 Minutes presents the scientific data and opinion that proves there are real medical explanations for the death of Kathleen’s children. Kathleen’s conviction can’t possibly be beyond reasonable doubt.
Profiteering From Offshore Detention
Offshore detention has been a policy of the Australian government since the Howard years. Mark Basa is currently held on Christmas Island – but how much does offshore detention cost and who profits from it. The Guardian recently published an article about the company that manages the detention centre on Nauru.
Press Release | One Year On and Still No Answer From the NSW Attorney General
The Australian Academy of Science issues a press release on March 5, 2022. You can see the original here. https://vimeo.com/518533234 “Respect the scientific and medical evidence that provide ample justification for the pardon of Kathleen Folbigg and demonstrate that…
The Conviction of Kathleen Folbigg
The following account is designed to provide a brief overview of the prosecution of Kathleen Folbigg and her attempts to gain her freedom. Overview Facts In 2003 Kathleen Folbigg stood trial on four counts of murder and one of maliciously…
Criminal Case Review Commissions and Criminal Appeal Limitations
The way in which criminal cases involving potential injustice are dealt with in NSW is flawed and lead to serious problems – Kathleen Folbigg is an example of the systemic failure. An alternative approach is offered in this lecture.
Articles | Crime | Expert Evidence | Kathleen Folbigg | Law | Smothering | Trials
Evidence Excluding Smothering
The most important requirement in all criminal trials is that the onus of establishing guilt is to the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. This standard of proof stays immovably with the prosecution throughout a trial. In Kathleen Folbigg’s case an essential element that needed to be proved beyond reasonable doubt was that she intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to her children.
The prosecution said that she smothered them, but failed to prove this was the case.