“…it does not take much to persuade the average detective that someone is guilty. Unfortunately, when this occurs police investigation may turn into a targeting exercise, in which the target is pursued and any evidence tending to clear the target is ignored or even concealed.”
Chester Porter QC, The Conviction of the Innocent
In November 1998, the naked body of a prostitute was found in a suburb of Sydney. She died of stab wounds.
In early 2009, Jason* was charged with murder and was bail refused by the Police. Benjamin Goh was contacted by Jason’s mother and was asked to visit Jason in gaol. Jason decided to retain Benjamin Goh as his solicitor after the first conference.
After 15 months of being bail refused and a 3 week Supreme Court Trial, a jury found Jason not guilty. Jason was free to walk out of the dock and into the arms of his parents who attended every single day of the Trial.
The main evidence against Jason was DNA which was found at the scene of the crime. There was also a bite mark on the deceased’s left wrist which had a partial match to Jason’s dental impression. The Police theorised that Jason used his “bright orange” 70’s Kombi Van to pick up the prostitute from Darlinghurst and eventually using the same van to dispose of the body. The police were relying on a circumstantial case as there were no direct witnesses to the murder.
The police were convinced that the person who had the same DNA profile as that which was found inside the deceased’s vagina and condoms was the person who committed the murder. This case was a perfect example of a police investigation which turned into a “targeting exercise”.
It was demonstrated at the Trial that there were at least 2 other men who could have committed the murder. The police did a canvas of the Darlinghurst area immediately after the discovery of the body and not one prostitute saw an “orange” Kombi Van drive down the street where the girls were working (one cannot miss a back firing “bright orange” Kombi Van). The girls did however, provide descriptions of vehicles which were driven by these other men. One of these men drove around with a knife under the seat of his car and he would use it to threaten the girls!! The other man confessed to one of his mates that he killed the prostitute but then laughed it off as a joke!! This same man was questioned at his storage garage where he kept a mattress and bedding. It was surprising to hear at Trial that the police made no attempt to search his garage or take any forensic samples from the garage.
It was demonstrated at Trial that the police did not fully investigate these other men but for taking DNA samples to make comparisons with the DNA found at the crime scene.
Jason did not dispute using the services of prostitutes but he insisted that he always wore a condom. So why was there DNA inside her vagina? After cross-examining the forensic experts, the jury were provided with a proper explanation as to why and how there would be the presence of DNA inside the vagina even if a condom was used. This dispelled the Police theory that the deceased was killed as a result of a struggle which broke out because of not wanting to have unprotected sex.
Jason gave evidence at the Trial and he denied committing the offence as he had since his arrest.
After 3 hours of deliberations, the jury came back with a verdict of not guilty. They must have been satisfied that it was someone other than Jason who committed the murder. They must have been satisfied that this was simply a “targeting exercise”.
If you, a friend or a loved one is charged with a serious offence, don’t risk your freedom. Contact Benjamin & Leonardo Criminal Defence Lawyers to arrange a conference. You can attend our offices or we can organise a gaol visit.
