Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

Rebecca Massey appealing (strictly in a legal sense)

By johnboy 7 May 2011 28

The Canberra Times has the news that convicted murderer Rebecca Massey is chancing her arm on the ACT’s appeal-a-go-round, safely removing the case from a know-nothing jury of her peers and returning it to the forgiving arms of the judiciary.

Massey’s legal team argues the judge who presided over the trial, Justice Malcolm Gray, failed to direct the jury properly on crucial points of law.

According to appeal papers, Justice Gray did not properly direct the jury about the evidence upon which Massey relied in her self-defence claim.

He is said to have failed to give the jury adequate instructions on the matter of self-defence and failed to link his instructions to the evidence on the topic.

It is argued that the errors deprived Massey of a fair chance of acquittal and the jury’s verdict is ”unsafe and unsatisfactory” as a result.

Massey’s lawyers seek to have her murder conviction quashed, allowing the Ngunnawal woman to walk free, or have the case remitted to the Supreme Court again for a re-trial.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to
Rebecca Massey appealing (strictly in a legal sense)
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Lookout Smithers 3:58 am 26 May 11

cleo said :

You can’t change what you don’t acknowledge.

That doesn’t even make sense. What are trying to say? That the appeal is evidence that she doesn’t feel bad about killing someone? It really is rare. Who says anyone wants to acknowledge? Or that its even their own views? Pay more attention. Its an appeal in court. One which she is entitled to lodge. It invariably is the case with murders.

cleo 11:49 pm 25 May 11

You can’t change what you don’t acknowledge.

Chop71 3:24 pm 09 May 11

Calamity said :

Fantastic title. Just fantastic.

I accidently cought a bus (that she was on) one day and luckily enough I could hear her foul mouth before I saw her face. I found both her language and looks far from appealing.

Skidbladnir 2:52 pm 09 May 11

Aj_1987 said :

Although the judge him self said after the trial we may discus it with whom ever we want…

You can discuss details made public, things deemed admissable as evidence, and details of preceedings which occurred in open court (just like the rest of us) but identifying yourself or anyone else who was part of the jury which declared Rebecca Massey guilty of murder, effectively says [Name Unknown] residing at [Address Unkown], was satisfied beyond all reasonable doubts that Rebecca Massey stabbed someone in a public space in front of witnesses, and was responsible for their death.

Hypothetical:
Perhaps she appeals successfully so is free to get back to the important things in life like carrying a knife into a shopping centre “for protection”, or the appeal fails but a similarly stable and just as law-abiding acquaintance of hers wanted to ‘settle a score’…
Perhaps revealing identities may not be the wisest of moves?

Calamity 2:39 pm 09 May 11

Fantastic title. Just fantastic.

Gerry-Built 12:28 pm 09 May 11

Skidbladnir said :

Aj_1987 said :

I was on the jury…

Then none of us want to know who you are, anything about you, or what you have to say on the matter of Rebecca Massey’s trial.
You would have been instructed about this.

It seems to me, that everything said and done in open court is OK… just not jury the closed deliberation (that 4 hours that it took the jury to convict Massey)… surely any evidence that led to the jury convicting Massey would have been presented, and discussed, in open court, and therefore open for “publication”…

Aj_1987 12:00 pm 09 May 11

Chop71 said :

p1 said :

Skidbladnir said :

Aj_1987 said :

I was on the jury…

Then none of us want to know who you are, anything about you, or what you have to say on the matter of Rebecca Massey’s trial.
You would have been instructed about this….

Well I will post no more about this subject… Although the judge him self said after the trial we may discus it with whom ever we want… We can not discus our deliberations however. Clearly you have never served as a jury member.

Unless Aj_1987 is his/he real name, he/she might not have actually breached that list of reg’s you mention. To the letter at least, I think the vibe….

yet……..

Chop71 11:45 am 09 May 11

p1 said :

Skidbladnir said :

Aj_1987 said :

I was on the jury…

Then none of us want to know who you are, anything about you, or what you have to say on the matter of Rebecca Massey’s trial.
You would have been instructed about this….

Unless Aj_1987 is his/he real name, he/she might not have actually breached that list of reg’s you mention. To the letter at least, I think the vibe….

yet……..

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