Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

David Eastman: guilty until proven innocent

By Peter Clack 27 May 2014 27

police-generic-a

It is now more than 25 years since Australian Federal Police Commissioner Colin Stanley Winchester was shot and killed as he arrived home from work at 9.15 pm on Tuesday 10 January 1989.

After a protracted police investigation and a trial that lasted 85 days, David Harold Eastman (now aged 69), was convicted of the murder in 1995.

The body of evidence was significant. Amongst it, revelations that ammunition residue found in the boot of Eastman’s car was indistinguishable from that found at the murder scene.

But the circumstantial evidence was also compelling. Several prominent people had come forward after the killing saying Eastman had told them he was going to kill Winchester (as well as a threat to kill the Commonwealth Ombudsman).

Eastman reportedly told Winchester this to his face because he would not withdraw an assault charge against him. A witness saw him staking out Winchester’s Deakin home in days prior to the shooting. The witness recalled the make and colour of car, but had the last digit wrong [the rest correct] from the number plate.

The jury was unanimous in finding him guilty and he was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole by ACT Supreme Court Justice Ken Carruthers. This by and large should have been the end of the matter and the last we see of Eastman.

The exhaustive trial had given plenty of opportunity for the evidence to be publicly reported and room for speculation. Almost from the time of the investigation and arrest it was clear Eastman was a serial nuisance, a dangerous public pest and a combative and violent individual.

He regularly had blow-ups with various government agency staff members (gathering more than 200 alleged assault reports). He fought with his lawyers and sacked his defence team on any number of occasions.

Eastman, who is occasionally painted as ‘highly intelligent’ by the Fairfax media, simply had no other case to make – or surely he would have done so. He would not or could not say where he was on the night of the murder. And he could not – or would not – explain other evidence presented to the court.

Possibly out of this genesis grew a thread of doubt that he might be a victim of a miss-trial. Police pressure could have sent him over the top and prevented him from presenting a rational defence.

These arguments gained some credence as the years passed and as the murder event recedes from memory and as police and key players age and move on in their lives.

A small group of anonymous supporters has spent the years arguing Eastman’s cause from behind the scenes. It has brought forward doubts that evidence might be flawed (or even fabricated) and/or given undue (or unfair) weight. The Fairfax media in particular has given a mostly sympathetic voice for the Eastman cause, and it has nurtured the idea that he may well (despite everything) be an innocent man.

On 3 September 2012 this background chorus of support paid off for Eastman when the Hon Justice Shane Marshall ordered an Inquiry into the conviction. The inquiry has now completed its hearings (on 15 May 2014).  The inquiry has its own Eastman Inquiry website.

Many readers of Fairfax newspapers were not born when Winchester was gunned down 25 years ago. They can be forgiven for giving credence to the long-running counter-argument that a Mafia hit man gunned the commissioner down as pay-back for a bungled marijuana deal.

It is difficult to imagine what this process has cost the public purse.  The investigation and court case alone lasted around five years. Since then his cause has re-emerged time and again, driven by a handful of well-meaning but more possibly misguided supporters.

Postscript: To obtain further insights read Justice Michael Adams sues over evidence claim (The Australian 7 June 2013). Justice Adam’s claim has not been reported in the Fairfax media.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
27 Responses to
David Eastman: guilty until proven innocent
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
portal0001@lycos.com 7:42 pm 23 Aug 15

“Eastman reportedly told Winchester this to his face because he would not withdraw an assault charge against him. A witness saw him staking out Winchester’s Deakin home in days prior to the shooting. The witness recalled the make and colour of car, but had the last digit wrong [the rest correct] from the number plate”.

Don’t we want to see the record of interview, e.g. was the witness led by showing them other number plates which are close to Eastman’s number? Such a record of interview was not in the court transcript. My point is that if one spent enough money (and wasn’t 6 years spent building a case against Eastman?) one could prove anything.

portal0001@lycos.com 7:46 pm 24 Aug 14

My understanding now, from looking at some of the inquiry material, is that the later audio recordings were better quality (later technology) and did not need to be sent off for enhancement. I saw some transcripts of the later recordings but what I saw did not seem to be incriminating. If anyone has found anything incriminating in the later recordings, I would like to see this evidence presented.

portal0001@lycos.com 3:16 pm 23 Aug 14

How wonderful to see what Humphries says on the net. I had seen him talking on the news yesterday but did not hear the sound.

This is what he said recently (clipped from the net). Humphries was the ACT attorney general when Eastman went down in 1995.

GARY HUMPHRIES: It reflects very badly both on the police and on the judicial system. I mean, we’ve all heard of the Chamberlain case and various other miscarriages of justice, but the idea that a man has been rotting in jail for 19 years when there is no satisfactory proof of his guilt ought to cause a lot of concern I would think.

I don’t think I am quoting Humphries out of context, in posting the above. I think Humphries is a hero for speaking up – he could easily have given a more equivocal statement which meant he would attract less flak for his comment.

astrojax 3:05 pm 23 Aug 14

so, if there’s no retrial, will the investigation be reopened on the premise that it might not have been eastman who gunned down the assistant commissioner?

portal0001@lycos.com 3:05 pm 23 Aug 14

I am a little concerned that some people are saying how distressing for the Winchester family that the matter is being looked again. I feel that such comments are spin-doctored. For what ulterior motive?

dungfungus 8:41 am 23 Aug 14

dungfungus said :

kean van choc said :

dungfungus said :

“gunned down” is not accurate but if it sells a story, why not?.
The victim was sitting in the driver’s seat of his parked, private plated police car, actually.
(for the benefit of Fairfax readers who were not born when it happened)

‘Gunned down’ is perfectly acceptable in this context. It simply means to shoot and injure or kill.

I suppose we can now say his conviction has been “shot down”?

I note the ABC news today is still insisting the victim was “gunned down”. It is simply wrong to say this, especially as there is a possibility of a re-trial.

portal0001@lycos.com 6:01 pm 22 Aug 14

22.8.2014 It is interesting that many of the officials, e.g. a victims of crime spokesman, and police union spokesman, have been trotting out the usual nonsense, such as how upsetting this is for the WInchester family.

How wonderful to see what Humphries says on the net. I had assumed that he was like one of the other establishment stooges, but this is what he said recently (clipped from the net). Humphries was the ACT attorney general when Eastman went down in 1995.

GARY HUMPHRIES: It reflects very badly both on the police and on the judicial system. I mean, we’ve all heard of the Chamberlain case and various other miscarriages of justice, but the idea that a man has been rotting in jail for 19 years when there is no satisfactory proof of his guilt ought to cause a lot of concern I would think.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site