Andrew L. Urban
“Why do we keep letting monsters out?” That’s the headline on the top editorial in the Saturday Telegraph (26/4/2025). The context is the latest murder of a young woman (Audrey Griffin) by a man free on parole yet known as a violent predator (Adrian Torrens). “A man who should never have been on the streets,” went the editorial.
Why do we keep jailing the innocent, the man or woman who should never have been sent to jail?
Putting those two question side by side, we have to accept that our criminal justice system looks dangerously incompetent – and sometimes wickedly biased; freeing the guilty, jailing the innocent. Like letting Adrian Torrens out, a man with a history of violence, but incarcerating Noel Greenaway, a man of impeccable character, his many glowing character references not seen by the jury. He was convicted solely on the unreliable memories of a handful of women from their days as delinquents, decades earlier.
Or like Robert Xie, serving five life sentences for the murders of his wife’s family, on the flimsiest circumstantial evidence, and without a history of any crimes.
Or like Sue Neill-Fraser in Tasmania and the many other cases we have exposed as wrongful convictions on this blog. Many more remain out of the public’s view, with no headlines and no editorials in the legacy media.
The Telegraph editorial sums it up well: this case “reveals a dark and dangerous fact about the society in which we live: We have learned nothing.”
And it goes on: ‘If the law had worked as it ought to then he would never have been on the streets. And just a year ago young Forbes mother Molly Ticehurst was murdered, allegedly by her ex-boyfriend while on bail after being charged with other violent offences against her, including rape and intimidation.”
The question prompts another question: who are those in the system who so frequently ‘let monsters out’ and why can’t they be better trained, informed and restrained from such decisions that endanger the public?
And another: Why do we keep jailing the innocent?
Those who want to do good for society ?
Mendolson Miller (NSW junior policeman) is just one example of the punishment imposed when a policeman refuses to lie . The police union and the very top police hierarchy desired the conviction of an innocent citizen.
Mendolson Miller did NOT have a nasty accident – mainly because he had backing from an independent newspaper, The Truth, and its proprietor Ezra Norton.
These types have long gone from Australia .
Home of the free and the brave..
Every wrongful conviction we read of in Andrews WCR is the direct result of police prosecutor shenanigans. The use of flexible forensics is only one tool – but an important jury fooling weapon in many, if not all, wrongful convictions . As is the coaching / creating or removal of witnesses to be cast in the judge and police prosecutors screenplay . Only a fool believes Lindy Chamberlain was thrown out of prison because of new evidence . An item of the victims clothing found near a dingoes home does not prove who actually done the deed !
This evidence discovery was just a convenient escape for the scoundrels.
It was becoming untenable to continue the farce of Londinium dingoe expertise and the flexible forensics of General Motors sprayed blood undercoat.
The NT. justice system was fast becoming an embarrassing fiasco.
Unfortunately, the Tasmanian “justice system” is incapable of embarrassment!
three types of police in any system, those who want to do good for society, those who want power over others, and the uneducated that can’t obtain other jobs.
What sort of person has a role in the Justice system , and therefore is an essential cog in the requirement for seeking truth , then takes it upon themselves to lie cheat and distort , to get the outcome they want. ? DPP and Police have no interest in truth or Justice ! Just winning. Playing dirty tricks , to make sure the jury does not hear things that may foster reasonable doubt is just plain evil and corrupt. Just ask me. !! Pv