28 February 2011

Kingston Murder Accused Not Guilty

| johnboy
Join the conversation
62

The ABC is reporting that the woman accused of the Kingston murder two years ago has been found not guilty, having successfully argued self defence before Chief Justice Terence Higgins.

It’s a shame in our system young Cameron Anderson was not represented.

Join the conversation

62
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
colourful sydney racing identity3:45 pm 08 Mar 11

JC said :

harvyk1 said :

Lets take a step back here,
I agree that judges are way too soft on people whom are actually guilty. But this woman has proven in a court of law that the act was in self defence.

If she was guilty, and was then given a slap on the wrist, then sure, demand her blood. But also keep in mind, not everyone who goes infront of the courts are infact guilty. (ourts are pretty much a safeguard so that innocent people don’t get punished.

Self defence based on one side of the story only.

Plus evidence of forced sexual intercourse.

Look,
i’ve read the judgement and understand how Higgins came up with his decision. There were however many inconsistencies in this case and the stories told by many witnesses that don’t fit.
As I said in the other thread on the the Russell Field case, I think that the pendulum has swung too far in self defence cases.
If you can show that you are paranoid enough, then you can employ this defence.

PBO said :

AT the end of the day she murdered someone, that is no wild conclusion.

There’s just no helping some people, is there?

Monster of the Deep said :

This is why all you people shouldn’t be questioning the decisions of the judge. You obviously haven’t heard the evidence and yet you’re drawing wild conclusions from the snippets you see in the media.

1. She did call 000 and reported stabbing a man who had raped her.
2. The police found Cameron Anderson’s body that morning around 7 am if I remember correctly.
3. There was a medical examination that day. The accused had high vaginal bleeding and a 1cm tear to her perineum, which is of course indicative of her having been forcibly raped.

AT the end of the day she murdered someone, that is no wild conclusion.

Monster of the Deep1:05 pm 08 Mar 11

Sleaz274 said :

I also read the articles online and here and didn’t find the timeline that clearcut regarding her contacting police at all. If she had dialed 000 shortly after the attack then it seems strange that it took 3 weeks from the murder (3 Sept) to the police taking DNA evidence from a person of interest (24 Sept) after being identified on CCTV and by pub patrons and staff. I’d also imagine that the victim would have been found more swiftly as he hadn’t even made it out of the park due to the fatal wounds if the accused rang 000 to report a rape and stabbing. I would have thought police would have found him within an hour or so and herself shortly after. It is confirmed that he called 000 twice but was unable to speak and died fairly swiftly from his wounds. I am unable to confirm at all if she even contacted police, emergency staff etc.

The fact that 3 weeks afterwards she maintains a claim of sexual assault leads to all this conjecture because if she had rang 000 immediately after the attack police/hospital staff would have been able to collect physical evidence of the sexual assault.

This is why all you people shouldn’t be questioning the decisions of the judge. You obviously haven’t heard the evidence and yet you’re drawing wild conclusions from the snippets you see in the media.

1. She did call 000 and reported stabbing a man who had raped her.
2. The police found Cameron Anderson’s body that morning around 7 am if I remember correctly.
3. There was a medical examination that day. The accused had high vaginal bleeding and a 1cm tear to her perineum, which is of course indicative of her having been forcibly raped.

Ops ops! yes consensual, up to late on computer! lol

Diggety said :

A few legal questions for anyone who can answer (pref. accurately):

1. Are the Anderson family and/or DPP able to appeal?
2. If an appeal is granted, are they able to request a jury?

1a. No.
1b. Yes.
2. No

A few legal questions for anyone who can answer (pref. accurately):

1. Are the Anderson family and/or DPP able to appeal?
2. If an appeal is granted, are they able to request a jury?

colourful sydney racing identity said :

cleo said :

Opps I mean concessional sex

I don’t think you do…

lol…

Sleaz274 said :

I’d tend to disagree with you there. This is quoted from the Canberra Times today.

”The evidence taken as a whole supports the conclusion it was the deceased who forced sexual intercourse upon the accused,” he said (Higgins).

”The probability is that Mr Anderson would have been charged with sexual assault.”

As has been shown by this case, there’s a pretty big gap between charging someone and finding them guilty. That said, I haven’t got an in-depth knowledge of the specifics, so I won’t comment any further.

cleo said :

Opps I mean concessional sex

I think you meant “consensual”.

colourful sydney racing identity8:55 am 02 Mar 11

cleo said :

Opps I mean concessional sex

I don’t think you do…

harvyk1 said :

Lets take a step back here,
I agree that judges are way too soft on people whom are actually guilty. But this woman has proven in a court of law that the act was in self defence.

If she was guilty, and was then given a slap on the wrist, then sure, demand her blood. But also keep in mind, not everyone who goes infront of the courts are infact guilty. (ourts are pretty much a safeguard so that innocent people don’t get punished.

Self defence based on one side of the story only.

Mr Gillespie # 29

If the trials in 2010 had jury and judge, the murderer wouldn’t have a hope in hell, as that is where he will end up, ” JUSTICE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY” and he will if god has anything to do with it.

Opps I mean concessional sex

Cameron is not here so he cannot tell us what happened, only two know what happened,and one is not here.
It’s a pity that young woman did not report to the rape crisis people, and have medical attention, as to whether she was raped or had conventional sex.

I really just think it’s sad all round. Firstly, Cameron Anderson’s family have suffered a tragic loss. An experience I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. Secondly, if this girl has done this in cold blood, well she’s has to maintain a lie of the worst kind for the rest of her life. If it was self-defence, then that’s a traumatic memory that no amount of time will heal. There are no winners in this situation.

chrisi said :

Stabbed him 8 times while on top of him…. yep, thats self defence with resonable force alright. Higgins is so out of touch its not funny. Actually, its sad. But what do you expect, he was actually sleeping through parts of the case. Dont believe me, ask people who were in the courtroom during the case. Pathetic.

Whilst a defendant is expected and required to have a fair trial, I do believe a person who has lost their life deserves one too. If you are the SOLE decider for a case, your full attention has to be for ALL the facts presented.

cranky said :

and it should have read ‘lady’s”

When the hell are we going to get an edit facility?

When you pay for a premium membership, cheapskate!!

and it should have read ‘lady’s”

When the hell are we going to get an edit facility?

Forgive the totally non PC, but would the young ladies heritage have anything to do with His Honours decision?

Stabbed him 8 times while on top of him…. yep, thats self defence with resonable force alright. Higgins is so out of touch its not funny. Actually, its sad. But what do you expect, he was actually sleeping through parts of the case. Dont believe me, ask people who were in the courtroom during the case. Pathetic.

Here Here. ACT justice is of the highest quality around the world. That doesn’t mean any of us got the truth. Facts and truth have very little to do with each other.

I’d tend to disagree with you there. This is quoted from the Canberra Times today.

”The evidence taken as a whole supports the conclusion it was the deceased who forced sexual intercourse upon the accused,” he said (Higgins).

”The probability is that Mr Anderson would have been charged with sexual assault.”

Personally I think the verdict should more correctly be guilty but no charge/sentence due to self defence.

Her actions directly caused his death via stabbing therefore did she murder him? yes.
However she did so after/while being raped and is therefore excused of any punishment/sentence.

Just shows how far reality can actually be from any judgement inside a courtroom. It also appears from the CT article that it was the DPP who pursued the murder charge without the support of the police so there is a huge red flag there and question mark to be answered.

I guess however unlike a few other trials ultimately justice is done and over with and I hope everyone involved can rebuild their lives. It has been enlightening reading all the posts from a few years ago and reflecting back on what was said at the time. People might want to learn from that before feeding the trolls too much about Michael Steep.

Sleaz274 said :

As I said it is an interesting case because Higgins has by proxy handed down a verdict of rape against the dead guy and has obviously found there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to back up the girls claim, even so to allow a self defence claim. JB’s point that had Cameron had legal representation the result may have been very different. Rape being notoriously hard to prosecute.

I would suggest that there’s a middle ground, where neither rape nor murder can be proved at trial. Since the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt lies with the prosecution, it is entirely possible that a hypothetical rape charge against the deceased would also result in a not guilty verdict. In other words, this is not a de facto finding of rape against the deceased.

I tried to respond yesterday evening but had posting issues… so here goes again in response to screaming banshee, JB, george et al…

I also read the articles online and here and didn’t find the timeline that clearcut regarding her contacting police at all. If she had dialed 000 shortly after the attack then it seems strange that it took 3 weeks from the murder (3 Sept) to the police taking DNA evidence from a person of interest (24 Sept) after being identified on CCTV and by pub patrons and staff. I’d also imagine that the victim would have been found more swiftly as he hadn’t even made it out of the park due to the fatal wounds if the accused rang 000 to report a rape and stabbing. I would have thought police would have found him within an hour or so and herself shortly after. It is confirmed that he called 000 twice but was unable to speak and died fairly swiftly from his wounds. I am unable to confirm at all if she even contacted police, emergency staff etc…

The fact that 3 weeks afterwards she maintains a claim of sexual assault leads to all this conjecture because if she had rang 000 immediately after the attack police/hospital staff would have been able to collect physical evidence of the sexual assault.

As I said it is an interesting case because Higgins has by proxy handed down a verdict of rape against the dead guy and has obviously found there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to back up the girls claim, even so to allow a self defence claim. JB’s point that had Cameron had legal representation the result may have been very different. Rape being notoriously hard to prosecute.

I’m trying to imagine a scenario where if I stabbed to death a 19 year old guy (as a 28 yr old, 5 foot 9, 70kg white male) and then 3 weeks later maintained a claim of sexual assault whether I to would receive the same treatment. I’m also trying to imagine a scenario where this case didn’t end in murder and the guy was instead found guilty of rape and unfortunately can’t envisage it at all with our legal system.

As someone else said a tragic yet intriguing case, I’m interested to see if anyone else can provide more details or has a different opinion from a legal stand point.

colourful sydney racing identity9:35 am 01 Mar 11

cleo said :

Well you can’t believe what is written in The Canberra Times, I’m sure there is more to this, wait two or three days and look under Supreme Court Listings, where you can read for yourselves, no need to speculate.

I can’t believe I am going to say this, but, Cleo I agree with something you have said.

The Hoff said :

johnboy said :

To be fair, judge only trials are currently being legislated out of existence.

The sooner the better.

Ever been on a jury?

georgesgenitals said :

I wonder if anyone has considered the possibility that just maybe it really was self defence?

I had, but that sort of talk doesn’t fly around here…

johnboy said :

To be fair, judge only trials are currently being legislated out of existence.

The sooner the better.

Mr Gilispie # 29

The reason the verdict is taking longer from 2010, is the fact that the trial didn’t run the full course, as in this case, it is more complicated, the statements are before the judge, to come to his conclusions regarding the evidence for a verdict.

Well you can’t believe what is written in The Canberra Times, I’m sure there is more to this, wait two or three days and look under Supreme Court Listings, where you can read for yourselves, no need to speculate.

A sad, sad tale no matter what happened….

that says it all really

futto said :

YAY!!! Canberra is still murder free for more than a decade. Thanks DPP!

thankfully our record remains unblemished – unbelievable! well no, not really

Mr Gillespie10:03 pm 28 Feb 11

Hey wait a minute…..why was the judge so quick to return a verdict on this case while cases trialled in 2010 are still awaiting a verdict?

screaming banshee said :

Sleaz274 said :

and then called the police to say she’d been attacked and had been forced to fight for her life (by stabbing someone).

From the few snippets I’ve read over the last couple of weeks I’m pretty sure she did call 000 saying she was raped in the park and stabbed the guy. 000 also received the call from him but he couldn’t talk, I would imagine they were around the same time so its rather unfortunate they couldn’t put 2 and 2 together to find him a little sooner.

As stated in the trial, he needed medical attention almost immediately for him to have survived.

Beserk Keyboard Warrior said :

In a strange twist it turns out that an alleged perpetrator in an ACT courtroom was actually the victim all along! How ignorant of me for thinking she was just a knife-carrying sociopath with a massive massive grudge against men.

Ah yes, a man hater. Feminism kills, people, feminism kills.

She must, of course, be a sociopath, because no woman walking home at night (or you know, anytime of the day) through parkland (or you know, anywhere) has ever had a reason to be scared or had need to defend themselves.

I don’t presume to know anything about how the victim acted towards the accused, but nor should anything be presumed about the accused and her state of mind or mental capacity.

georgesgenitals said :

I wonder if anyone has considered the possibility that just maybe it really was self defence?

Ah, now, now, we’ll have none of that faith in our judiciary here.

alicerusselwallace7:14 pm 28 Feb 11

Beserk Keyboard Warrior said :

In a strange twist it turns out that an alleged perpetrator in an ACT courtroom was actually the victim all along! How ignorant of me for thinking she was just a knife-carrying sociopath with a massive massive grudge against men.

Woah, woah, woah. First up, the defendant was found not-guilty. Few of us here would be party to the full details of the case, however, if you have followed the trial you would know that there was evidence supporting the defendant’s case that she had been raped and had stabbed her assailant in self defence. For example, see the report below:

http://www.bananasinpyjamas.com/news/stories/2011/02/25/3149039.htm?site=news

Your “knife-carrying sociopath with a massive massive grudge against men” was raped and fought back. Are you saying that she shouldn’t have fought back? Are you saying that this young girl (who was a minor) should be convicted because she fought back during an assault? Perchance some of you need to think long and hard about what you would do – or what your daughter, sister, mother, wife or girlfriend – if you found yourself in this situation.

George@23

How anyone can reconcile murder as a justifiable response to (a very suspect) rape is unbelievable.

How many people have approached you to ‘borrow’ a knife? How a man with a blood alcohol reading rendering him unlikely to be awake, let alone capable of maintaining a physical condition allowing him to be any danger to this young lady, can be adjudged a suitable candidate for death by the Judge is unbelievable.

georgesgenitals6:20 pm 28 Feb 11

I wonder if anyone has considered the possibility that just maybe it really was self defence?

screaming banshee5:25 pm 28 Feb 11

Sleaz274 said :

and then called the police to say she’d been attacked and had been forced to fight for her life (by stabbing someone).

From the few snippets I’ve read over the last couple of weeks I’m pretty sure she did call 000 saying she was raped in the park and stabbed the guy. 000 also received the call from him but he couldn’t talk, I would imagine they were around the same time so its rather unfortunate they couldn’t put 2 and 2 together to find him a little sooner.

Beserk Keyboard Warrior4:33 pm 28 Feb 11

In a strange twist it turns out that an alleged perpetrator in an ACT courtroom was actually the victim all along! How ignorant of me for thinking she was just a knife-carrying sociopath with a massive massive grudge against men.

johnboy said :

Heavs said :

EvanJames said :

Does this woman now get to walk around in society, or is there some kind of follow-up (compulsory) treatment for her issues? Running around a pub asking people for a knife is not normal, neither is stabbing someone multiple times.

Not sure if serious. You know she was found not guilty right.

Not guilty by reason of self defence. There’s no question she stabbed the guy to death.

That’s not the same as not guilty because of insanity.

Heavs said :

EvanJames said :

Does this woman now get to walk around in society, or is there some kind of follow-up (compulsory) treatment for her issues? Running around a pub asking people for a knife is not normal, neither is stabbing someone multiple times.

Not sure if serious. You know she was found not guilty right.

Not guilty by reason of self defence. There’s no question she stabbed the guy to death.

EvanJames said :

Does this woman now get to walk around in society, or is there some kind of follow-up (compulsory) treatment for her issues? Running around a pub asking people for a knife is not normal, neither is stabbing someone multiple times.

Not sure if serious. You know she was found not guilty right.

Does this woman now get to walk around in society, or is there some kind of follow-up (compulsory) treatment for her issues? Running around a pub asking people for a knife is not normal, neither is stabbing someone multiple times.

Tooks said :

Higgins made it pretty clear early on which way he was leaning. In the end, it was up to the prosecution to disprove she was acting in self-defence.

Sometimes, everything can be done right in an investigation, but the available evidence just isn’t enough. Having said that, a jury may have come to a different conclusion.

Higgins. Enough said. Pretty clear is an understatement.

Higgins made it pretty clear early on which way he was leaning. In the end, it was up to the prosecution to disprove she was acting in self-defence.

Sometimes, everything can be done right in an investigation, but the available evidence just isn’t enough. Having said that, a jury may have come to a different conclusion.

Clown Killer1:53 pm 28 Feb 11

I’m getting myself some pop-corn and a soda – watching the twat brigate get their panties all knotted up over this one is going to be a hoot!

Indeed…or in fact run home (using the fight and then flight method) and then called the police to say she’d been attacked and had been forced to fight for her life (by stabbing someone). By my vague recollection it took some nifty police work and some digging around over a number of weeks to find the “victim”.

Does anyone know what evidence was brought forward by the defence to prove an attack requiring lethal force as retaliation?

Also cracker of a call about the 58+ stab limit to prove intent, Massey might also get off under this clause although I doubt it.

The legal system in the ACT is a joke and will continue to be until we get some half decent judges.

johnboy said :

For mine I’d have been more inclined to buy self defence if she’d called an ambulance when he was no longer a threat to her and bleeding his life away.

That involves thinking straight, which is not always something a person does in a life \ death situation.

The fight \ flight response would have kicked in which switches off a persons ability to think rationally, also I would be surprised if alcohol wasn’t involved somewhere.

YAY!!! Canberra is still murder free for more than a decade. Thanks DPP!

For mine I’d have been more inclined to buy self defence if she’d called an ambulance when he was no longer a threat to her and bleeding his life away.

Another success from the DPP.

Expect to see well quoted deflection articles in the CT over the next month decrying the lack of prosecutorial support, poor court practices and poor court security. Anything to remove the focus from the lack of conviction for murder in the last decade.

Lets take a step back here,
I agree that judges are way too soft on people whom are actually guilty. But this woman has proven in a court of law that the act was in self defence.

If she was guilty, and was then given a slap on the wrist, then sure, demand her blood. But also keep in mind, not everyone who goes infront of the courts are infact guilty. (ourts are pretty much a safeguard so that innocent people don’t get punished.

Well, she did come under the 57 stab wound threshold for intent.

To be fair, judge only trials are currently being legislated out of existence.

From what I’ve read of the case, I certainly won’t be offering to escort any young women home from the pub, ever.

Mr Gillespie12:43 pm 28 Feb 11

THIS IS RIDICULOUS!!!!!

Justice in the ACT, what can you expect????

The law in the ACT is in URGENT need of repair. The system is BROKEN!!!! PLEASE FIX IT NOW, CORBELL!!!!!

Higgins, well what do you expect from such a softly-softly Chief “Justice”.

How can someone who deliberately killed someone be not guilty of murder????

Oh and there’s the added bonus of remaining anonymous, so much for justice being seen to be done. What a farce of a system this still is……

Some people are actually not guilty, that doesn’t mean it’s a failure.

the “justice” system fails again

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.