DPP Cocks up again - Stephen Hillier walks free

vg said :

Sounds like you’re the one with the newspaper beliefs……and the one who doesn’t know the difference between High and Supreme Courts, where yesterday’s decision was made.

Reluctant though I am to respond to the banjos, the facts are that Hillier was released by the High Court. The retrial at the Supreme Court occurred later and it acquitted the guy. Whether I believe the guy did it or not doesn’t matter.

My disbelief in the newspaper as a source of reliable information comes after having been summonsed for jury duty 4 times and being forced to sit through many trials. What I heard and what was reported were often very different because reporters tended to spend only an hour or two in a trial and what is reported was just pot luck. No-one who did not sit through the whole trial can have any reliable view but the result stands.

Murder is a terrible crime and affects people in a painful and enduring way that can never be overcome. That is why the punishment is so sever and the burden of proof so high.

?what a joke this man should be behind bars for a long time. How does the justice system let this happen? It is so obvious that Hillier killed Ana. and yet they set him free. so much time has passed that the justice system finds Hillier not guilty, as this is the simplest way to finalise the trial. In my eyes the system should now continue to investigate as to who did murder Ana!!!! but will they??????

vg said :

You think others display a ‘mob’ attitude yet you rely on the tired rejoinder “or the police were just about up to their usual half arsed effort “. Pot this is kettle over.

Sounds like you’re the one with the newspaper beliefs……and the one who doesn’t know the difference between High and Supreme Courts, where yesterday’s decision was made.

Curiously the burden of proof was met in the first trial…..which you clearly couldn’t comprehend either

Yes, and it was shown to be incorrectly proven, hence a retrial.

marcothepolopony said :

This case reminds me of the O J Simpson case in the US years ago.
Everyone knows the truth.

I don’t know the truth, I wasn’t there. So were you a witness what happened?

vg said :

You think others display a ‘mob’ attitude yet you rely on the tired rejoinder “or the police were just about up to their usual half arsed effort “. Pot this is kettle over.

Sounds like you’re the one with the newspaper beliefs……and the one who doesn’t know the difference between High and Supreme Courts, where yesterday’s decision was made.

Curiously the burden of proof was met in the first trial…..which you clearly couldn’t comprehend either

+1

You think others display a ‘mob’ attitude yet you rely on the tired rejoinder “or the police were just about up to their usual half arsed effort “. Pot this is kettle over.

Sounds like you’re the one with the newspaper beliefs……and the one who doesn’t know the difference between High and Supreme Courts, where yesterday’s decision was made.

Curiously the burden of proof was met in the first trial…..which you clearly couldn’t comprehend either

marcothepolopony said :

This case reminds me of the O J Simpson case in the US years ago.
Everyone knows the truth.

Well Marco that sounds exactly like someone who believes everything they read in the paper. There is a lot more going on in any legal case than you are going to read there. There is an obligation for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused and in this case the High Court seems to think they fell short of the mark. If the prosecution failed because the DPP was half arsed or the police were just about up to their usual half arsed effort then that is a bad outcome but nevertheless the burden of proof was not met. We no longer live in a time where people are convicted because the police wouldn’t have charged them if they didn’t do it. You and johnboy should take your lynching party a little further on down the road.

Little known fact: Steven Hillier’s, middle name: Teflon.

johnboy said :

Not the murder cases in the last, what? 10 years?

Conway and McFie were the last murder convictions, back in late 90s or early 00s.

And the failings don’t rest entirely with the DPP since then

harley said :

Heavs, what I took out of the DNA side was that the controls in the lab were not sufficient to guarantee they were not contaminated. No fault on the DPP there, one should look at the labs.

Where the DPP cocked up is failing to prove motive and opportunity, which is kinda key to a murder case.

btw: judgment has moved to http://www.courts.act.gov.au/supreme/judgments/hillier4.htm

Motive was proven…and opportunity?? Stop watching Law & Order

It is 12 years now, time is marching on.