The following lecture notes relate to a presentation give to ‘the floor’ of the Sir Owen Dixon Chambers by Dr Robert Cavanagh.
The presentation used the case of Kathleen Folbigg as a case example to examine the limitations of the criminal appeal process in Australia as it relates to victims of injustice and to propose an alternative approach – creating a Criminal Case Review Commission.
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.
September 11 heralded many changes across the world. In Australia, one of those changes was a move toward greater restrictions on fundamental legal rights. This article explores some of those changes.
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…
A petition was commenced to try and help convince the minister that there is genuine public concern to try and help Mark stay in Australia supported by his family and that sending him to PNG and his almost certain death…
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.
Expert evidence is crucial to the outcome in many legal cases before the courts. The law surround the use of experts has been developing for more than 200 years. This article looks at the current law in Australia involving the use of expert opinion evidence.