Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Daily flights from Canberra
to Singapore and the world

DPP Cocks up again – Stephen Hillier walks free

By johnboy 16 April 2010 18

The Supreme Court has posted the order in the matter of The Queen v Steven Wayne Hillier.

Justice Besanko concludes:

In the circumstances, with respect to the charge on indictment that Steven Wayne Hillier murdered Ana Louise Hardwick between 30 September 2002 and 2 October 2002 at Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory, I find the accused not guilty. A verdict of acquittal must be entered.

Without any reference to Mr Hillier’s guilt or innocence (and Steven, I’m really looking forward to the next email) it’s time for a long hard look to be taken at the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Either these cases should not be prosecuted or the DPP should start winning a few.

Maybe it’s time to outsource this to NSW?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
18 Responses to
DPP Cocks up again – Stephen Hillier walks free
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
merlin bodega 3:46 pm 26 Apr 10

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.

RAMBOR 7:20 pm 17 Apr 10

?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??????

Anna Key 5:19 pm 17 Apr 10

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?

Spideydog 2:12 pm 17 Apr 10

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

vg 8:51 am 17 Apr 10

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

merlin bodega 10:53 pm 16 Apr 10

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.

Skidd Marx 10:52 pm 16 Apr 10

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

vg 10:39 pm 16 Apr 10

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

vg 10:38 pm 16 Apr 10

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

cleo 10:35 pm 16 Apr 10

It is 12 years now, time is marching on.

johnboy 10:08 pm 16 Apr 10

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

vg 8:10 pm 16 Apr 10

johnboy said :

They at least succeed in most of the prosecutions they bring.

As does the ACT DPP.

harley 5:07 pm 16 Apr 10

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

Heavs 4:50 pm 16 Apr 10

From reading the reasons it appears the DPP could not have done anything differently. Their case rose or fell on the DNA evidence. Forensics produced by AFP were not to a standard which would enable him to be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Hence the acquittal.

ricci 4:23 pm 16 Apr 10

I’m with Johnboy on this.

marcothepolopony 3:53 pm 16 Apr 10

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

johnboy 1:28 pm 16 Apr 10

They at least succeed in most of the prosecutions they bring.

Aurelius 1:26 pm 16 Apr 10

Whatever we believe in individual cases, the reality is that the prosecution (Police & DPP) have rules to abide by. And if they don’t abide by them, the accused person receives a less-than-legitimate trial. And the result is an acquittal.
That is how it should be.
If the rules are inappropriate, change the rules. Don’t moan about potential culprits getting away on technicalities.
And Johnboy, if you have sat in enough NSW court rooms, you’d not write your last line. Their level of competence is questionable at best.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site