The Court of Public Opinion !

Rarely is the conviction and sentencing in a murder case the end of the matter.  The outcome is the  subject of numerous appeals and these seem to go on as long as the time served in prison, and in many cases they contribute to either a release or a shortened sentence.

A former District Court chief judge is conducting an enquiry into a murder case that caused immense public controversy when a woman was found guilty of murdering her three children - and the manslaughter of another - and sentenced to at least a twenty-five year prison term.

That woman was Kathleen Folbigg and her four children all died an unexplained death when they were between nineteen days and eighteen months old.   Coroners enquiries were unable to determine the exact cause of their deaths and the sheer improbability of four children all dying of natural causes was a major part of the jury's deliberations.

Kathleen Folbigg is now 51 years of age and she has indicated that she will give evidence at this enquiry, which is something she refused at her earlier trial.   Her sentencing in 2003 was controversial because no precise cause of death could be delivered by medical examiners.   It is thought that comments recorded in her diary swayed the jury but many people thought that they merely indicated the pressure parents face when dealing with a sick baby amid the general frustrations of motherhood.

This was one of those rare cases where a person was found guilty without either a motive or a definitive cause of the manner of death put before a jury.   The letter of the law requires an accused to be found guilty by a jury of his or her peers and for that to happen the prosecution is required to prove its case.   Many contend that did not happen and this verdict was arrived at purely on an emotional basis.

Now a new issue has arisen in this controversial enquiry.  Kathleen Folbigg's  lawyer is accused of running a case in the media because research that was not tendered to the enquiry was being put before journalists and appearing in the press.   The judge added that if this were a court and not an enquiry such action would be regarded as " contempt of court ".

Any lawyer knows that good media is very helpful in deciding a matter before a court.  In particular, public opinion has an impact on jurors making up their minds because they will need to justify their decision to relatives and friends after the trial is concluded.  In this instance the decision will be made by a seasoned former chief judge who will weigh the decision precisely on the statutes of the law as they applied to this conviction.

As with many convictions, a review is timely  !