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.
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. Contrary to what many people believe, our adversarial justice system is not a search for the truth. It is a gladiatorial contest with increasing reliance on complex science. The more complex it is, the more likely the accused is to be disadvantaged.
Within a growing sector of the scientific community, this evidence is referred to as “junk science”, and it causes wrongful convictions that irreversibly shape people’s lives. In the cases of the Chamberlains and Folbigg, it led to them being found guilty of crimes they did not commit. Most accused simply cannot match the resources of police and the prosecution. It’s akin to turning up to a gunfight armed with a knife.