The Law A dingo (or dingoes) took her baby!

[Dont be a lemon]

"The coroner finds that a dingo or dingoes took Azaria from her tent at Uluru."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-12/azaria-chamberlain-inquest-findings/4065466

Confess... how many of you old codgers thought the mother was guilty back in the day? You can be honest, we don't judge here.*

*may not be true

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I was still a kid, but I remembered swaying in my opinion a few times. I remember hoping that the Chamberlain's were not responsible, but the media sure did demonise them and were pretty convincing. I mean, why would you paint somebody in this way without the evidence? I did wonder if there had maybe been an accident they were responsible for but never thought they took their young family out to Uluru for the purpose of doing away with a baby.

The blood in the car evidence was a concern but I never felt compelled to find out what that was actually from.

I hope this is the final word and that justice has finally been done. This family has had their lives destroyed and if the truth is that a dingo took Azaria, it's a sad reflection on our society, our media and how powerless we are as individuals in the face of something like this.

People will still have doubts, they will never erase this. More than one person had their life ended that day, and what's worse, they never really got a chance to grieve for a lost child. I can't even begin to imagine how they feel.

 

[Old Skool]

I never believe she killed her kid. The story was far too bizarre.

The poor woman (and family) was crucified by the scum that pass for the mainstream media in this country.

 

[Paradigm]

It was the foetal blood in the car and the "absoluteness" of that scientific fact that tipped everyone over the edge - me included. And to be fair, when forensic evidence is stated to be a fact, then it doesn't leave a lot of wriggle room.
Once that was disproved I think everyone got on the same page.

 

[JimDocker]

I was 14 at the time and was swayed by schoolyard talk that Azaria meant 'Sacrifice in the Wilderness'. Also, they were Seventh Day Adventisit and in 1980s Australia, that meant they were weird !

The forensic evidence showing that her throat had been cut on her mum's knee because there was foetal blood on the underside of the dash board sealed it for me.

I cannot remember how old I was when I realised it seemed like the police had it all wrong. I do remember when the Scotland Yard forensic expert revealed that the foetal blood was in fact car paint and I was pretty sure by that time that the poor parents had been through enough.

I am much more cynical nowadays.

 

[Old Skool]

when forensic evidence is stated to be a fact

I cannot remember how old I was when I realised it seemed like the police had it all wrong. I do remember when the Scotland Yard forensic expert revealed that the foetal blood was in fact car paint.

Good points.

Forensic evidence is far from infallible and I have always believed that it was a tenuous position that forensic evidence is not independently formulated.

 

[Gough]

They were guilty in the court of public opinion for being a little "odd", they also didn't play to the media which didn't help their cause. To this day, I know people who think that she is guilty based open no reason other than they don't quite trust her, that too, I suspect, was the attitude of the Territory Old Bill who seemed pretty determined to pin it on her.
Just hope this is the end of it all now, it's dragged on long enough.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Bloody media. While holding the death certificate, they ask Lindy to 'give us a smile'. While Michael was holding it .. 'how do you celebrate a day like this?'

It's vindication but FFS people, there was still a dead baby involved here. Hardly a time to celebrate. It just brings to a close a living nightmare for these people.

Yeah sure, Lindy said, check out ACA as she has obviously made a deal for money and is protecting that. I don't begrudge her that after what they have gone through though.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

So what is the evidence that a dingo actually did it? It seems far more likely that a human (not the chamberlains) was involved.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

They were guilty in the court of public opinion for being a little "odd", they also didn't play to the media which didn't help their cause. To this day, I know people who think that she is guilty based open no reason other than they don't quite trust her, that too, I suspect, was the attitude of the Territory Old Bill who seemed pretty determined to pin it on her.
Just hope this is the end of it all now, it's dragged on long enough.

It was the lack of emotion and that people couldn't get their head around the fact that the jumpsuit hadn't been torn apart by the dingo.

Jury notes show that male jurors were less inclined to believe she did it, perhaps an indication that their frankness and apparent lack of emotion stuck more with women than men.

 

[Pessimistic]

You only have to look at the Joanne Lees case to realise that justice is optional in parts of Australia. And that little has changed since the Chamberlain case. The police services are sub standard and the media does the rest

 

[cancat]

The forensic evidence showing that her throat had been cut on her mum's knee because there was foetal blood on the underside of the dash board sealed it for me.

I cannot remember how old I was when I realised it seemed like the police had it all wrong. I do remember when the Scotland Yard forensic expert revealed that the foetal blood was in fact car paint and I was pretty sure by that time that the poor parents had been through enough.

Not sure what you mean by 'foetal' blood?

AFIK the spray on the dashboard was never tested. It could have been blood, it could have been chemical spray. But the murder prosecution case was severely weakened by the doubt.

But the evidence to conclude the baby was killed by a dingo is also weak. The coroner demonstrated that 'a dingo could have killed Azaria' but then concluded that 'a dingo did kill Azaria'.

 

[JimDocker]

Not sure what you mean by 'foetal' blood?

AFIK the spray on the dashboard was never tested. It could have been blood, it could have been chemical spray. But the murder prosecution case was severely weakened by the doubt.

But the evidence to conclude the baby was killed by a dingo is also weak. The coroner demonstrated that 'a dingo could have killed Azaria' but then concluded that 'a dingo did kill Azaria'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

The key evidence supporting this allegation was the jumpsuit, as well as a highly contentious forensic report claiming to have found evidence of fetal haemoglobin in stains on the front seat of the Chamberlains' 1977 Torana hatchback. Fetal haemoglobin is present in infants six months and younger and Azaria was nine weeks old at the time of her disappearance.[12]

The questionable nature of the forensic evidence in the Chamberlain trial, and the weight given to it, raised concerns about such procedures and about expert testimony in criminal cases. The prosecution had successfully argued that the pivotal haemoglobin tests indicated the presence of fetal haemoglobin in the Chamberlains' car and that it was a significant factor in the original conviction. But it was later shown that these tests were highly unreliable and that similar tests, conducted on a "sound deadener" sprayed on during the manufacture of the car, had yielded virtually identical results

 

[cancat]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

The key evidence supporting this allegation was the jumpsuit, as well as a highly contentious forensic report claiming to have found evidence of fetal haemoglobin in stains on the front seat of the Chamberlains' 1977 Torana hatchback. Fetal haemoglobin is present in infants six months and younger and Azaria was nine weeks old at the time of her disappearance.[12]

The questionable nature of the forensic evidence in the Chamberlain trial, and the weight given to it, raised concerns about such procedures and about expert testimony in criminal cases. The prosecution had successfully argued that the pivotal haemoglobin tests indicated the presence of fetal haemoglobin in the Chamberlains' car and that it was a significant factor in the original conviction. But it was later shown that these tests were highly unreliable and that similar tests, conducted on a "sound deadener" sprayed on during the manufacture of the car, had yielded virtually identical results

Thanks.

Not sure Wiki is reliable source of evidence though

 

[Admiral Byng]

This happened in 1980. I was in primary school and too young to understand the finer points of the case at the time. I'm 40-ish now. Glad to see a speedy resolution to the whole issue at last.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Thanks.

Not sure Wiki is reliable source of evidence though

Then go and read the transcripts. It is merely paraphrasing what was found. It was done using a test that would cause fetal blood to turn purple ... it did. The fact that many substances would also cause that effect was not taken into account.

Testimony that dingos have been observed to remove meat wrapped in paper without damaging the paper were also dismissed. Testimony that a dingo removed a 3 year old from a vehicle at the same campsite (thankfully the child was rescued), only weeks beforehand were ignored. An aboriginal man's testimony that his wife tracked the dingo for a distance and found spots where the dingo had put down the baby and clothing imprints were viewed, were dismissed because he spoke on her behalf and spoke in the first person (supposedly a cultural thing).

There are some suspicions that a domestic dog at the site may have killed Azaria and its owner covered up the scene.

 

[Pie eyed]

Hopefully it's all over for the Chamberlains.

A shitful 32 years no doubt.

 

[GuruJane]

Very moved today, especially the coroner being so emotional.

fwiw - this was my experience of the times.

It happened in 1980 2 months after I got back from 18 months in Europe with my children. My son was the same age as Aiden (6).
Believed her and Michael's story, there was no reason not to, and was appalled at the way media was driving suspicion - they were being fed by the local cops.
Thought 1st inquest had nailed it, but not so.
The forensic evidence at the trial was compelling. Having been a journo and done court reporting and knowing how coroners worked, forensics etc, there was no reason to doubt it.
And yet ... and yet... I had been following the trial avidly and one piece of evidence kept sticking in my mind.

Lindy Chamberlain had described the (missing) matinee jacket as a Size ooo. The jacket had never been found, so the cops evidence was that it never existed and she was lying about it.
But I knew from experience that a Size ooo jacket is the tiniest you can get, and not many mothers buy it because baby grows out of it too quickly.
However I had bought one for my first baby, a daughter, because they are so cute. So this nagged at me - if she was lying, why be so specific about the size?

Anyway, heavily pregnant, she was packed off to jail to serve life with hard labour, where she gave birth to her second little daughter and the baby was taken away from her.
Around this time the eye witnesses - the six families who had been at the campsite - went on an Australia wide tour protesting her innocence. I went off to see what they had to say at the Melbourne Town Hall. They were ordinary people, a cross section of Oz society, no axes to grind. After hearing their accounts I had no doubt whatsoever that the jury verdict had been unsound. I even paced out at my own home the distance they described from the BBQ area to the tent where the baby had been taken. It was 20-25 metres. It would have been impossible for Lindy Chamberlain to do what the Crown alleged and forensic said she had done without any of them sensing something was not right.

So, for first start time I started talking about it to friends and family. Was aghast to discover they would begin literally shouting at me - "dingos don't do that", "of course she did it" - and some of these were my oldest feminist friends!
The most shocking was at a family lunch, where my father and my brother - both educated, rational men (I thought) as one, screamed at me "that's (killing babies) is what women do".

It was hateful. To me it felt like a kind of primal male phobia about mothers. Worst of all, I felt that if this had happened to one of my children, my own father and brother would not have believed me.

So, stopped talking about it, instead donated money to the legal fund the Seventh Day Adventists had set up for the Chamberlain's legal defence.
Made a couple of new friends , work colleagues, and we discovered we were of same mind. Can't begin to describe my relief and theirs. They too had had the experience of being abused and vilified simply for suggesting the the verdict was "not beyond reasonable doubt." We were like a secret society, sharing obsession with each other. Later I met John Bryson who wrote the book Evil Angels in 1985. He was another secret society member.

Time went on. The appeal was dismissed the following year after trial, '83. After that, Lindy Chamberlain's incarceration and notoriety was becoming an embarrassment to the NT government. Suggestions were made she would be pardoned if she acknowledged her guilt. She refused to do so.
This is when I really started to get obsessed and depressed. Knew enough about the NT rednecks they would never release her unless she confessed and this she would never do. So that mean't life was going to be life for Lindy Chamberlain.
At this point moi, who had been irreligious ever since leaving school, actuall started praying. True! Without any hope or belief whatsoever - there simply was not any way out of it for the Chamberlains that I could see.

And then, not all long afterwards, out of the blue, in 1986, the most amazing f*cken thing I've ever experienced in my life happened. A big story was breaking from the Northern Territory.
A pommy backbacker had fallen off Ayres Rock to his death, and when the searchers were gathering up his remains one of them had found, sticking up out of the sand, not far from a dingos den .....

A bloodstained matinee jacket. A f*cken Size ooo matinee jacket.

The rest is history.

One little detail about that pommy backpacker. He was an eccentric, loner type, maybe unbalanced, who too was obsessed with the Chamberlains. He hitch-hiked around Australia to Ayres Rock, climbed it and either fell or threw himself off the Rock to the place where the matinee jacket was found.

Truly, life is stranger than fiction.

 

[skilts]

You only have to look at the Joanne Lees case to realise that justice is optional in parts of Australia. And that little has changed since the Chamberlain case. The police services are sub standard and the media does the rest

Not enough is made of this in the Azaria case. The conduct of the police in pursuing this woman is nothing short of disgraceful. That they had:

1) No motive.

2) No opportunity.

3) No weapon.

4) No body.

5) No witnesses.

concerned them not at all. They were pissed off with Lindy because she wouldn't nod her head to infanticide, for which she would not have done any gaol time. Given the absence of the most basic (and vital) evidentiary requirements listed above, they decided to manufacture evidence, with the complicity of 'scientists' who were at best incompetent, and more probably, part of a conspiracy with police. Every time people point to the unimpeachable nature of the scientific method I think of this case.

From the moment accusations against Lindy arose and rumours were mongered, my only thought was, "What if she didn't do it?" To lose your child is hideous enough. To then be hounded with these accusations for years by arseholes from the police and media is unimaginable. To have been exonerated in the first inquest, then pursued further, until the preferred outcome for the police was achieved, amounts to torture. Then you deprive her family of their mother and her of them.

That she hasn't topped herself speaks volumes for the character and strength of the woman. These are the same characteristics which caused such consternation among those imbeciles who thought themselves able to analyse her 'body language' as a dead set indication of her guilt. A combination of such imbecility, vicious determination to convict despite evidence to the contrary, and the milking of the story on a slow news day that lasted thirty years could easily bring about a similar result today.

 

[skilts]

Very moved today, especially the coroner being so emotional.

Truly, life is stranger than fiction.

Great post GJ. It makes me proud I almost know you.

 

[Chief]

I think I was in grade 5 around that time? I remember another kid saying "oh yes, she definitely did it" - obviously we all just parroted our parents view at the time. My parents didn't swallow the police line so we ended up being a bit scorned on that point.

 

[fishardansin]

Just had an hour long debate with a facebook aquaintance who actually believes she is guilty. I presented him with the findings of the 1987 inquiry:

The short period during which Mrs. Chamberlain was absent from the barbecue made it only barely possible that she could have committed the crime alleged against her. On the Crown case, in the 5-10 minutes she was proved to have been absent from the barbecue she must have-

• Returned to the tent;
• Done whatever was necessary to ensure that Aidan did not follow her;
• Donned her tracksuit pants;
• Taken Azaria to the car;
• Possessed herself of a murder weapon;
• Cut Azaria's throat;
• Allowed sufficient time for Azaria to die;
• Secreted the body
• Done at least some cleaning-up of blood in the car;
• Removed her tracksuit pants;
• Obtained a can of baked beans for Aidan;
• Returned to the tent;
• Entered the tent and done whatever was necessary for several articles in it to be spotted with blood;
• Collected Aidan; and
• Returned to the barbecue.

from: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/chamberlain/moorlingreport.html

He still stated that he was allowed to have his opinion. I was flabbergasted.

For those conspiracy theorists out there perhaps this is to your taste:
http://evilladies.com/child-killers/is-lindy-chamberlain-an-evil-lady/

 

[Upton Sinclair]

Every time people point to the unimpeachable nature of the scientific method I think of this case.

Don't mistake the machinations of the legal system for impeachability the scientific method

 

[Old Skool]

Don't mistake the machinations of the legal system for impeachability the scientific method

That's my take too.

An item shifted here, a fingerprint there, cut and paste a telephone intercept. Voila!

Believe me, it happens.

http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotland.org.uk/inquiry/25.23.html

 

[fishardansin]

It is when the Scientific method his hijacked by rhetoric that we get problems.