Kathleen Folbigg

In 2003, Kathleen Folbigg was convicted of killing her four children over a period of 10 years. Despite natural causes of death given for Caleb, Patrick, Sarah and Laura Folbigg, Ms Folbigg was convicted of smothering them to death. The basis for her convictions were the journals she wrote in during the 10-year period; they were used as evidence to suggest she admitted to killing her children. Ms Folbigg has been unsuccessful in overturning her convictions and has served 18 years in prison. In combination with leading forensic pathologists concluding natural causes of death for each of the children, new genetics evidence shows the infants had genetic defects that can explain further how they died. For the first time, Ms Folbigg’s journals are now being examined by experts who consider them to be unremarkable and contrary to the way in which they have been interpreted by the law to date.

There was reasonable doubt at the time of the conviction, now there is expert evidence that disproves murder.  It is time the conviction is overturned and she is freed. 

The 60 Minutes Folbigg Breakthrough

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.

Read More »

Folbigg Submission on Coincidence

The submissions for coincidence regarding Kathleen Folbigg were prepared by Robert Cavanagh and Rhanee Rego as the effort to convince the Attorney General to recommend a pardon continues. Read the full submissions here.

Read More »

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 inflicting grievous bodily harm. The counts concerned the deaths of

Read More »

Media Reports – Kathleen Folbigg

The media has followed the case since its inception.  While the earlier reports were demonising, the later scientific evidence has raised the obvious question – did the court get it wrong?  This question is not only raised in the Australian media, but media outlets in other countries have taken an

Read More »