Lindsey Chamberlain has been properly cleared. Little Azaria would have been 37 this week - how time flies. What a tragic life for the family - all those years with the finger of suspicion pointing at them.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I always believed Lindsey to be innocent, I am very happy for her after all these years.
Originally Posted by Sezit:
I always believed Lindsey to be innocent, I am very happy for her after all these years.
Me too ...................shocking it's taken so long. And all the while she'd have been grieving after having lost her baby in such a cruel and horrible way.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by Sezit:
I always believed Lindsey to be innocent, I am very happy for her after all these years.
Me too ...................shocking it's taken so long. And all the while she'd have been grieving after having lost her baby in such a cruel and horrible way.
Did she do time Soozy?, I am a bit sketchy now after all these years
Originally Posted by Sezit:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Originally Posted by Sezit:
I always believed Lindsey to be innocent, I am very happy for her after all these years.
Me too ...................shocking it's taken so long. And all the while she'd have been grieving after having lost her baby in such a cruel and horrible way.
Did she do time Soozy?, I am a bit sketchy now after all these years
Yes she was sentenced to life but served three years - I think the appeal rendered the original verdict unsafe but it was never listed on the death certificate that 'it was the Dingo that did it' until today. I guess there are some that will always doubt her.
I always believed her to be innocent too. Cant imagine the pain she has gone through over the years. I hope she can find some kind of peace now...
It's shocking isn't it. I'm glad they have eventually got the outcome they deserved.
The first time I ever heard of the case was watching Meryl Streep in the movie.
Not only did the dingo kill their child but it killed their family too.
Originally Posted by Skylark24:
I always believed her to be innocent too. Cant imagine the pain she has gone through over the years. I hope she can find some kind of peace now...
It's brilliant that they (her in particular, as she was the one charged with the babies murder) found the strength to carry it on for so many years. I can't remember her full name now 'Sally' I think, the lady in recent British news who was accused of murdering her son then years later acquitted. Sadly a couple of years after being freed from prison, she died from alcohol abuse because she just could never deal with everything.
Reinforces opposition to the death penalty
Originally Posted by Saint (fka Renton):
Reinforces opposition to the death penalty
Yes, 30 years ago, but what about today when they have DNA evidence.
Originally Posted by Cinds:
Originally Posted by Saint (fka Renton):
Reinforces opposition to the death penalty
Yes, 30 years ago, but what about today when they have DNA evidence.
DNA evidence wouldn't have helped Lindsey Chamberlain, and indeed it was supposed technology advances (such as ultraviolet photography) that helped convict her in the first place.
She was only released because they finally found Azaria's jacket.
Fact is that the original inquest judge said it was a dingo right from the start, and spent a lot of time demolishing the lies and misrepresentations of the facts that had been circulating. Chamberlain's problem was that there was a gossip campaign by the press and "weekend bushmen" who insisted that they knew all about dingos and didn't consider Chamberlain's explanation (and by definition the Judge's decision) plausible.
Part of the reason for this final decision is that since Azaria's death there have been a number of dingo attacks on children - something which many of Chamerlain's opponents simply refused to believe possible. I found it interesting (and rather depressing) that the latest judge still felt the need to point out how much the claims against Chamberlain depend on misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the facts...
Originally Posted by Eugene's Lair:
Originally Posted by Cinds:
Originally Posted by Saint (fka Renton):
Reinforces opposition to the death penalty
Yes, 30 years ago, but what about today when they have DNA evidence.
DNA evidence wouldn't have helped Lindsey Chamberlain, and indeed it was supposed technology advances (such as ultraviolet photography) that helped convict her in the first place.
She was only released because they finally found Azaria's jacket.
Fact is that the original inquest judge said it was a dingo right from the start, and spent a lot of time demolishing the lies and misrepresentations of the facts that had been circulating. Chamberlain's problem was that there was a gossip campaign by the press and "weekend bushmen" who insisted that they knew all about dingos and didn't consider Chamberlain's explanation (and by definition the Judge's decision) plausible.
Part of the reason for this final decision is that since Azaria's death there have been a number of dingo attacks on children - something which many of Chamerlain's opponents simply refused to believe possible. I found it interesting (and rather depressing) that the latest judge still felt the need to point out how much the claims against Chamberlain depend on misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the facts...
I know. I was responding to Renton about the reinforcement of opposing the death penalty.
I'm so pleased at the result of this, even though it's 37 years too late, I never once thought she was guilty.
Originally Posted by Cinds:
I know. I was responding to Renton about the reinforcement of opposing the death penalty.
But surely the point is that if Australia had had the death penalty, Lindsey Chamberlain could have been executed before Azaria's jacket was found?
Originally Posted by Eugene's Lair:
Originally Posted by Cinds:
I know. I was responding to Renton about the reinforcement of opposing the death penalty.
But surely the point is that if Australia had had the death penalty, Lindsey Chamberlain could have been executed before Azaria's jacket was found?
I agree, but, like I said I was responding to Rentons post, which to me was talking about the death penalty in the present and not in the past.
Some cases "are" convicted without DNA evidenceto back up the charge, yes?
Its not always available, but some cases can still lead to a death sentence
Look at the Linda Carty case
DNA is a fantastic discovery - the thing is - does no one else think it could be abused? I mean imagine someone setting another person up with planted fibres from clothes or hairs from a hairbrush. Maybe I'm a bit neurotic but I don't think it can ever be trusted to be 100% safe unless it's completely indisputable (and how would we ever know?.
There is a case where family DNA DID NOT match - it has a name/syndrome but i cannot remeber it.
Read this though
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Fairchild
DNA is not exact in all cases
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
DNA is a fantastic discovery - the thing is - does no one else think it could be abused? I mean imagine someone setting another person up with planted fibres from clothes or hairs from a hairbrush. Maybe I'm a bit neurotic but I don't think it can ever be trusted to be 100% safe unless it's completely indisputable (and how would we ever know?.
Nothing in life (apart from death) can be 100% guaranteed and of course there is always the possibility that someone would consider planting evidence, but the collection of evidence is done quite strictly and there are checks and balances on the DNA evidence collected (the courts insist on audit able evidence).
Additionally, it is quite hard to "plant" DNA evidence as experts in the field would spot inconsistencies when gathering samples etc.