Monday, August 9, 2010

Lindy Chamberlain

Recently the jury notes from the trial of Lindy Chamberlain which found her guilty were accidentally released.

I must confess that I was under the impression from the rumours I heard from a policeman friend of the family (from what he'd heard from other police men on the case), that there was something suspicious about this case.

My opinion of this case changed quite early in the piece when I not only realised that the source of the rumours I had heard was not reliable, and when I found out that the police investigation wasn't thorough. The police didn't interview all the witnesses, they didn't search all the places where dingoes lived around the rock for evidence like teeth and bones. I recalled stories my father told me of dingoes in the Northern Territory entering his campsite at night and stealing food, leaving footprints all around their swags where they were sleeping. One night I believe he woke and a dingo was licking his fingers, he feigned sleep until the dingo moved away.

It is quite common in history for aboriginal babies and small children to be taken by dingoes, these attacks were not talked about by aborigines and probably in many cases any authorities were not interested.

I read Lindy Chamberlain's book, Through My Eyes, many years ago and I understood what her life was like with Michael and the boys and the stigma of the gaol time she served. There are still many people who believe that Lindy, Michael, or one of their sons murdered Azaria.

Lindy didn't behave as many people thought she should have, she showed no emotion - but that was just the way that she was, she had her faith to keep her strong. Lindy didn't want people to see her pain, her weakness. (Note: many people also thought that Joanne Lees somehow was involved with the disappearance of Peter Falconio because she didn't behave in a certain way for the media.)

I hope one day that something is found which will remove all doubt from the minds of those who still disbelieve the Chamberlains story.

Clinton Gage, nine, was mauled to death by a dingo on Fraser Island in March 2001. This is the event which I point to when people say that a dingo couldn't take a baby. Dingos kill and eat baby goats, they attack sheep and cattle. The linked article accessed by Fraser Island covers several maulings by dingoes.

People don't realise that dingoes are wild animals and quite capable of killing a human.


Kaboom said...

Ahh, yes, but read R v Chamberlain & Chamberlain No.2 in the High Cort, where the wise judges plough through all the trial evidence.

That will be an epiphany for you, Kae.

Lindy Chamberlain is as guilty of infanticide as Keli Lane or Kristi Abrahams. Talk about the serendipity of 30 years......

You need to get out more. Mothers kill their children all the time.

Just go to any SIDS site. These pricks are still begging money from the public, because there is a whole industry built around them believing that they have singularly stopped SIDS in its tracks.

What abject bullshit.

SIDS peaked Australia-wide at over 500 child deaths in the late 1990's, and plummeted to 18 in 2009.

The prime causual factor in this reduction is the "CSI factor" - (from October 2000), where people could see on their own TV sets how good the CSI teams were....

Shit! I'd better not put that pillow over that kid's face, because the CSI people will work out that it wasn't SIDS!

End pet hate.


kae said...

I know that mothers commit infanticide.

But in this case I must disagree with you.

Kaboom said...

Kae, just read:

We have two "current news" infanticide cases, and you are in denial???

Killing children has been a past-time of poor folk for centuries past.

*Shakes head sadly*

kae said...

So what in R V C & C No.2 was convincing?

kae said...

OK I'll read it (thanks for finding it for me), but I'd prefer some guidance to exactly what it is that convinces you that the crime of infanticide occurred.

The car "blood" evidence was later shown to have been a false positive from the material sprayed inside the car to prevent rust.

Lexcen said...

It's sad to read that people like Kaboom and their opinions exist. Maybe Kaboom believes that wild animals (especially dingos) are like those cartoon characters in a Disney movie that talk and sing and behave like humans.

Anonymous said...

How can people STILL believe that Lindy is guilty of this?? Haven't the NT government and police cock ups been enough for you lot? It's mind set like some of you out there that had "witches" burnt at the stake! Have you ever seen a dingo "peel" a rabbit out of its skin? What about the poor little Aboriginal babies that have been taken by these animals? Why are there still so many ignorant people out there who are so ready to believe the worst. I listened to people who lived up that way, they tried to tell the police how dangerous the dingo is but authorities did not want to know. Perhaps the tourist dollar was more important than ruining many peoples' lives. Shame!

stackja1945 said...

She was innocent, she is innocent. End of discussion.

cav said...

If Lindy Chamberlain had pleaded guilty she would have been let off because of post natal depression. She would not have served any jail time.

The fact that she stuck to her guns to prove here innocence and clear her name demonstrates to me that she did not kill her baby.

There was no evidence to link the death of the baby to Lindy.

Cav (student of Perry Mason school of law)

Kaboom said...

It is interesting to note that most potential jurors out there (i.e. you commentators above who are not convicted felons, bankrupt nor insane) have absolutely no idea whatsoever about "circumstantial evidence".

Here is a clue - at the moment, we have another mother facing trial as to whether or not she murdered her inconvenient child.

Keli Lane's case is quite similar to Lindy Chamberlain's - in each, there was no body found of the recently murdered child.

The police, when faced with no body, no confession, and no witnesses, either have to brief the prosecution on the result of their investigations, or let a malignant, lying, manipulative media whore get away with murder.

You choose. Should we as a society ignore murders that are "too hard" to prove (e.g. cot death murders of 500 chilren a year) or should we have a go, and speak for the murdered children, to bring their insane parent or parents to account?

You choose.