Justice system indifferent to injustice?

Citing several wrongful convictions examined on wrongfulconvictionsreport.org in his forthcoming book, Frank Valentine and the Abuse of Lady Justice – Presumption of Evil 2, author Andrew L. Urban condemns the justice system’s seeming indifference to injustice.  Continue reading

Posted in General articles | 5 Comments

Give us back our money, Brittany, taxpayers may well demand

Andrew L. Urban

 Was the Commonwealth negligent to pay Brittany Higgins $2.4 m in response to her claims that have now been found to be false by two judges, and will the commonwealth take steps to recoup the taxpayers’ money, asks lawyer/columnist Janet Albrechtsen (The Australian, Sept 3, 2025).  Continue reading

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 6 Comments

Brittany Higgins defamed Linda Reynolds with malice

In this week’s devastating findings by Justice Paul Tottle of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the judge found that Brittany Higgins had exaggerated and embellished aspects of her story when speaking to the media, critical elements of her narrative did not correspond with reality, others were misleading, dishonest, speculative, driven by malice or simply untrue. She had indeed defamed Linda Reynolds in the long running Higgins/Lehrmann legal jumble.

The crippling verdict has shredded her credibility, threatens her $2.4m commonwealth compensation payment and could send her into bankruptcy, as Paul Garvey writes in The Australian today (29/8/2025). Not the best profile for a newcomer to a proposed public relations career…

On another page, legal affairs contributor Chris Merritt writes: “It is worth considering what course this affair might have taken had everyone involved adopted the principle that accusations of criminal wrongdoing should be prosecuted by the justice system, not the media.

“By discarding that principle, significant parts of the mainstream media seemed utterly unaware of their limitations. They retailed falsehoods and presented it as news.”

Earlier in August, the Federal court heard Bruce Lehrmann’s appeal over the loss of his defamation suit against Network TEN and Lisa Wilkinson; the judges have reserved their decisions.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 9 Comments

Bruce Lehrmann’s hat returns to court

His appeal against Justice Lee’s Federal Court decision in Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case begins tomorrow in Court 1 at 10.15 am tomorrow, Wednesday, August 20, 2025, available via live streaming  

Justice Wigney, Justice Colvin, Justice Abraham will be on the bench. Lehrmann is hoping to reverse the decision that denied his defamation case against Network Ten but delivered a civil conviction for the rape of Brittany Higgins.

The appeal is listed for two days but some observers expect it may run longer.

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 3 Comments

Lucy Letby babies ‘died of natural causes’ – report

Lucy Letby didn’t murder the babies, a new report shows. Now, Alasdair Millar calls for profound reforms from police culture and a CCRC, to reduce wrongful convictions, as he writes in Quadrant (August 18, 2025)

Letby, a nurse convicted in 2023 of seven murders and fourteen attempted murders at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital in Cheshire. Letby was sentenced to fifteen whole-of-life prison sentences, indicating that she will spend her entire life behind bars without hope of release. Two appeals against her conviction (the maximum allowed) have been rejected. However, a recent report from fourteen internationally renowned neonatologists and paediatricians argues that she is innocent of all charges, that no crimes were committed, and that the deaths and deteriorations observed in the alleged attempted murders were due to natural causes complicated by various human factors.

Letby worked in the unit from 2012 to 2019. The deaths for which she was found responsible occurred from June 2015 to June 2016. No accusations were levelled for any other period. The details of the alleged murders are contained in the final judgment7 and in articles in the lay press including one published this year in the New Yorker.

I concentrate here on the quality of the evidence.

First, the case was entirely circumstantial. There was no witness to any of the alleged attacks. The murders were said to arise by injection of air into the veins or stomach (air embolism; five cases), or by insulin (two cases). Both methods are indeed potentially fatal, and insulin as a murder weapon has precedent. However, the presence of air in the bloodstream can arise from other causes. In neonates, air embolism is usually (in 80 per cent) associated with cardiorespiratory resuscitation (common in neonatal ICUs), but can also arise from inadequate flushing of air from syringes, surgery including radiological procedures, or infections with gas-forming bacteria. The amount of air required to cause severe injury in premature neonates is very small.

Second, a 1989 paper on neonatal air embolism was presented by the prosecution, but the paper’s author, Professor Shoo Lee, did not give evidence and subsequently claimed his paper was misrepresented.

Third, the presence of higher than expected insulin levels, initially used as evidence of insulin administration, has been re-interpreted on biochemical grounds relating to unsuppressed levels of the compound C-peptide (which is secreted along with insulin, and suppressed when insulin is injected) to negate the conclusion that insulin was administered.

Fourth, the expert medical evidence at the trial was that death in the babies had no medical explanation, which allegedly left only murder as the cause. This is illogical and erroneous, as has now been shown in the Folbigg case.

Fifth, the police presented a table showing that Letby was the only nurse on duty at the time each baby was assaulted. This evidence would have weighed heavily with a jury but is regarded as invalid on statistical grounds. Letby was rostered on more frequently than other nurses, and the list did not include other babies who died when Letby was not present.

Last, police searched Letby’s home and found a scribbled sheet of paper containing the words “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them”; “I AM EVIL I DID THIS.” This was also highly incriminating, but is now reported as having been generated during a session with a psychologist, and one plausible interpretation is that Letby blamed her imagined personal inadequacies for the high number of deaths in the unit.

Evidence was also drawn about the poor physical state and inadequate size of the hospital, the inadequacy of the ICU, poor hospital management, the introduction of relatively unqualified nurses replacing experienced nurses leading up to the year of the “murders”, and friction between nursing and medical staff. It is also relevant that neonatal intensive care units care for premature as well as full-term patients who are dangerously ill. Consequently they experience high and variable mortality rates, and are stressful worksites.

The panel unanimously concluded that every death … was due to natural causes

No further appeal is open to Letby, but the new information on the case has been submitted to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which was created in the UK in 1995. The CCRC has the power to send a case back to the courts for reconsideration in the light of new evidence. The new information in the Letby case is the report by the fourteen internationally renowned paediatricians and neonatologists, who studied the cases on the suggestion of Professor Lee. The summary report has been published. The panel unanimously and sensationally concluded that every death and case of deterioration was due to natural causes. In effect, they declared Letby innocent of all charges. The summary report gives reasons for these findings in seven selected cases. The panel also laid blame on several contributing factors: the poor physical state of the hospital, understaffing, and inadequate medical performance were contributing factors to the deaths. The full report has been submitted to the CCRC and is not yet publicly available.

The important background issues remain. How do miscarriages of justice arise and what can be done to minimise them? I shall start with the UK broadcaster Ludovic Kennedy, who was born in Edinburgh in 1919 and died in 2009 after an illustrious career as journalist, broadcaster, humanist and author. He was to me a familiar television face as a newsreader and presenter of the BBC TV flagship Panorama (the UK equivalent of Four Corners). In the 1950s and 1960s he campaigned against the death penalty, stimulated by the case of Timothy Evans, who was wrongly hanged for two murders committed by his neighbour.

Kennedy became concerned with the wider phenomenon of the miscarriage of justice and its causes. His interest was sustained over decades and culminated in his book 36 Murders and 2 Immoral Earnings, published in 2004. He argued that the high rate of miscarriages was a result of the adversarial system used in criminal court cases in the Anglosphere, in which prosecution and defence teams lead evidence and cross-examine in front of a judge and jury. He concluded that the so-called inquisitorial system (by a magistrate or judge without a jury) as used in continental Europe, was to be much preferred.

Kennedy had presented these arguments in Australia almost two decades earlier, and published an article in Police Life (published by the Victorian Police) in 1986. That article, now difficult to obtain, was referred to and answered in turn by Justice Michael Kirby. Kirby called Kennedy’s proposals a “dazzling dream”. He expressed concerns that confidence in a magistrate or judge to always remain neutral was misplaced, and that the proposals would alter the balance of power in favour of the state against the accused individual and thereby dilute protections under law. More recently, Kirby has published his responses to recent wrongful convictions in Australia including the Folbigg and Pell cases, and clearly his views have altered little. In both papers he states that no system of justice is perfect or can be made perfect. This is of course true but it must not be conveyed in such a way as to imply that wrongful convictions are tolerable because they are inevitable. An important objection to Kennedy’s solution arises from the significant number of miscarriages of justice in Europe (see above) where jury trials have been largely abandoned. Thus his suggested alternative system does not prevent wrongful convictions.

Preventing miscarriages of justice depends on the availability of good data on how the cases arise. Unfortunately this is hampered because there is no single international definition of “miscarriage of justice”, no standard procedure for collecting data, and no standard method of analysing deserving cases after exhaustion of appeals. Australia does not have a last-resort review committee, unlike the UK (the CCRC) and New Zealand, a circumstance noted by Kirby. A related problem in this area is the lack of a legislated method (except in the ACT) of assessing entitlement or amount of compensation for wrongful prosecution and incarceration. All other states and territories rely on ex gratia payments.

Prevention depends on minimising the possibility of each known cause, logically starting with the most common. However, data on the relative contribution of the known contributing factors are not collected routinely, and are not available on an internet search. I extracted the reasons for miscarriages given in cases listed in Wikipedia including short summaries, restricted to cases arising in Australia, New Zealand and the UK, which have similar criminal justice systems. This list “includes cases where a convicted individual was later cleared of the crime and either has received an official exoneration, or a consensus exists that the individual was unjustly punished or where a conviction has been quashed and no retrial has taken place, so that the accused is legally assumed innocent. This list is not exhaustive.” It was updated as recently as April 15.

The list provided seventy-three cases, excluding the fifty-nine prosecutions in the Post Office scandal (listed as one case) which is reminiscent of the Robodebt case in Australia. Where the reason for the miscarriage was not clearly listed, I inspected primary reports. The results are shown in the table below. These data should be taken as general trends only, because the Wikipedia database may be incomplete. For example, the Folbigg case is not listed but was included in the analysis. The results clearly suggest a disappointing tendency for police malfeasance as the most common contributor.

Though never acceptable, the irregularities vary in their severity, and in extreme circumstances such as the troubles in Ireland or the 1985 Tottenham riot which resulted in the murder of a young police constable, are even perhaps understandable though nevertheless wrong. When emotions run high, the need for restraint becomes mandatory. The data also point to a need for improved procedures to reduce the potential for flaws in forensic evidence.

Though it is of course correct to reverse a guilty decision when new technology exonerates the accused, the term “miscarriage of justice” is always retrospective, and the original trial might in fact be beyond criticism. Reliance on flawedexpert opinion is also an area of risk, as shown by the faulty evidence from Sir Roy Meadow and Dr Martin Ward-Platt in three cases of alleged murder of children by their mothers that was rejected on appeal. Ward-Platt was listed to be a witness at Lucy Letby’s trial but died beforehand. There is an implication that prosecutors know which expert witnesses to call to obtain testimony known to support a guilty verdict. An incidental finding of my analysis was that the average duration of incarceration before the wrongful verdict was discovered was 10.8 years, but was fifteen years or more in nineteen cases. This is a tragically high human cost.

Miscarriages of justice arise from the complexity of criminal law and procedures, and the way that this system interacts with the imperfect actors involved: judges, legal representatives, officers of the DPP, police, jury, witnesses, the accused and news media. Shakespeare declared “All the world’s a stage”, but no part is more so than inside a criminal court in session. The subject matter generates emotional extremes. Some actors intend to tell the truth, and some wish to obscure it. Some claim expertise but may present untrue testimony which they believe is correct and which is accepted on the basis of their qualifications and reputation. All may exhibit shortcomings of human behaviour that may be inconsequential outside the court but can obscure important truths inside. Some exhibit unethical behaviour in generating false evidence.

So, yes, there are many ways a miscarriage can arise, and in that context they do appear inevitable. But surely we can reduce the rate? As a layman, it appears to me necessary to construct stronger rules of evidence to expose faulty testimony or wrongly presented forensic data at a trial, and perhaps strengthen further the procedures for appeals. My data suggests that substantial cultural changes are required by the police in each of the three jurisdictions studied, and probably

elsewhere. In the past few weeks, as part of the Lawyer X scandal in Victoria, a convicted criminal has been released because his trial was tainted by an improper secret association between the police and the accused’s solicitor. Our guardians of the law should know better. In the light of such cases it is naive to believe that police malfeasance is limited to only those cases that lead to a successful appeal.

I am under no illusions that reducing the incidence of miscarriages of justice will be easy. Each suggested improvement will require deep thought to exclude unintended consequences, but this does not apply to two obvious possibilities, namely to establish a federal Criminal Court of Appeal, and an Australian CCRC (also federal) with power of referral to state and territory criminal courts. The ex gratia system of compensation provides highly variable and often politically determined relief, and a legislated system of compensation in both Australia and New Zealand is desirable. This is not intended to suggest that every victim deserves compensation, because innocence does not always follow in cases of wrongful imprisonment, and in some appears unlikely.

Finally, returning to the yet-to-be-resolved Letby case, the mounting criticism of the evidence given at her trials and the recent report of fourteen international experts6 surely cast strong doubt on the trial verdicts. In other words, if the international report is accepted, the “beyond reasonable doubt” threshold required for a guilty verdict has not been met. The corollary is that the presumption of innocence applies. (Note: citations have been omitted.)

Alasdair Miller is a retired physician and clinical pharmacologist who lives in Denmark, WA.

This not the first investigation that challenges the Letby conviction we have published:

Lucy Letby: Did she do it?

Lucy Letby – serial baby killer or wrongfully convicted nurse?

Posted in Case 23 Lucy Letby | 6 Comments

Tasmanian parole board gag order on Sue Neill-Fraser challenged

The following media release was issued today, August 13, 2025 by the Human Rights Law Centre after the Tasmanian parole board’s further and more restrictive conditions were applied in April this year. Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 53 Comments

Former detective convinced of their guilt … always was, always will be

Andrew L. Urban

For those who may have missed the following exchange on the comments section of the recent memorial page for Frank Valentine (11/8/2025) … please note: former Detective Sergeant Timothy Paul was also in charge of the Noel Greenaway investigation. Both men were convicted of historical sexual abuse in the 60s and 70s at the Parramatta Training School for Girls.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 22 Noel Greenaway, Case 26 Frank Valentine | 3 Comments

Anniversary of arrest without probable cause – Tasmania’s legal shame

Andrew L. Urban

There has never been a more blatant disregard for the rule of law – by officers of the law; when police arrested Sue Neill-Fraser to charge her with murder, they had no body of the victim, no murder weapon, no witness and no motive. And certainly no confession …  Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Speakman – and he talks of cowardice!

Andrew L. Urban

My case against Mark Speakman as leader of the Liberals rests entirely on his failure, as then Attorney General of NSW, to offer a man claiming to having been wrongfully convicted the same opportunity to clear his name as Speakman afforded Kathleen Folbigg, and a second appeal (conducted by former NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst) into her conviction. I laid out in full why this was an unforgivable error on the part of the Attorney General, on April 22, 2019. Continue reading

Posted in Case 06 'Paul', Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Frank Valentine 10/9/1940 – 8/8/24 – eulogy

Marking the first anniversary of his death, we publish an extract from the eulogy by his sons Ben & Richard and delivered at his funeral,  from the new book by Andrew L. Urban, Presumption of Evil 2 – Truth Be Told, to be published later this year.

 Mum says that she thought dad was so handsome, though he wasn’t a great dancer and she couldn’t wear heels because she didn’t want to be taller than him, it was his generosity and care for others that mum loved.

1969, July 19, the day before the Moon landing, Mum and Dad took their own giant steps for Valentine-kind. Their 55 year marriage, 5 children, 9 grandchildren, moves around the country side for career progression, investigating becoming a chicken farmer, operating a motel and finishing up running a small cattle farm and olive grove, these were the “money-in-the-bank” parts of Dad and Mum’s marriage.

Along the journey, Dad was absolutely devoted to mum. Decisions were made together, helping each other was their way, asking for advice, knowing the things that he wasn’t as good at doing, stepping back or stepping up, these were the things that dad did, he seemed to just know what the situation required of him in that moment as a husband and father.

Dad was born in September 1940, the 2nd son of Mary and Frank, a war-time baby and no doubt evidence of a furlough home.

Dad shared so many stories of his childhood. He was thick as thieves with his older brother Jim and younger brother David.

They grew up in Leeds in Yorkshire and their days would be spent getting up to mischief as they went from one aunt’s house to another. Good ideas abounded, climbing being one of them. Whether dad was encouraged, coerced, dared or simply showing his boyhood bravado, scaling the roof of St Patricks church in the end was not his most prudent decision, for you see, going up was decidedly easier than coming back down.

The fire brigade with their extension ladder was called for the young lad needed rescuing from his 20 metre perch atop the peak of the steeply sloping roof.

Dad was a man of determination. He ran all over Yorkshire, winning cross country races wherever he competed, though sometimes the 2nd place prize was better than for coming first. He told us that he would have preferred the track suit rather than the biscuit barrel. Life was tough.  

He made a few quid on the side by unblocking frozen water pipes while he was an apprentice plumber and he sold vegies around the pubs from his work on a local farm.  

But he thought that there was a different life out there for him and he moved to Australia just after turning 21.

Dad had been a motorbike rider in England, so it’s perhaps his unfamiliarity with being behind the wheel of a car or maybe it was his visit to Balmain Leagues Club, either way the petrol bowser at the servo where he parked felt the brunt of his poor reversing.

And so it was that Dad was now an Aussie, though it would be over 30 years before he was officially naturalised. What was he waiting for? Well, I guess he was just too busy raising a family, making homes out of houses we lived in.

There was a theme there, definitely the worst house in the best street that mum and dad could afford. And each of these ‘worst’ houses needed a helluva lot of work, and dad ploughed in. He was a ball of energy, with the exception of when we would go on family holidays where a midday nap and the reply of “in due course”

would be the answer to our question of when would we be going to the beach for a swim. Family life was loud, small houses and shared bedrooms, extensions were added to create more space, an oldest daughter needed her own room, the new baby needed a quiet place and the baby of the family, well, she was the princess (perhaps self-appointed).

Dad was a great mentor, I continued to learn from him as I became a parent, they say that you don’t receive a manual from the hospital as you take a new-born home but I had someone I could ask as I wondered whether what I was experiencing was normal. He loved his grandchildren and was always interested in whatever they were doing and memories from my boys include sitting on grandads lap playing solitaire or being amused by his little dog – Herbie. 

Dad’s humour and mischievousness is part of who he is, right until the end his jesting nature couldn’t help but come forth.

The priest brought him communion at hospital, after receiving the body of Christ, Dad looked at the priest and optimistically asked with a twinkle in his eye “and a little bit of blood of Christ”. The poor priest who was completely unprepared looked lost until we all had a chuckle, then he realised that dad was just being cheeky.

He Loved his wife as she loved him and when it was time for him to let go, he gave mum’s hand a gentle squeeze and left.

 {Published with permission}

 In Presumption of Evil 2, the author argues that Valentine’s conviction in 2019 of several indecent assaults, rapes and other assaults allegedly committed 45-50 years prior was wrongful. I say allegedly despite the convictions, partly because the grounds for appeal are compelling, notwithstanding they were dismissed by the Court of Appeal, and partly because a detailed examination of the case doesn’t provide proof beyond reasonable doubt. These two reasons are intertwined, of course.

Valentine was sentenced to 22 years in prison, with a non parole period of 13 years. His alleged offending took place at Parramatta Girls Training School in the 70s and were first raised at the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse set up by Julia Gillard.

 

Posted in Case 26 Frank Valentine | 3 Comments