Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Free Despite Murder Confession (Murderer free because evidence is too compelling)
The Daily Telegraph [Sydney, AU] ^ | March 12, 2005 | Unattributed

Posted on 03/12/2005 1:34:40 PM PST by quidnunc

A man who confessed to killing two women walked free from court yesterday when a judge ruled the evidence too damning.

Father-of-two Lyle Simpson admitted being a killer, DNA evidence proved he was at the scene of one murder and he tried to commit suicide a day later.

Yet after three days of legal argument in the NSW Supreme Court, Judge Anthony Whealy ruled some evidence was just too damning and ran the risk of "unfair prejudice'' to the accused.

A married Simpson was accused of murdering his mistress Rhonda Buckley, 51, in September 2001 in Georgetown, Newcastle.

But the family of the victim were devastated by the decision which enabled Simpson, 45, to go free after 16 months in jail awaiting trial.

Ms Buckley's daughter Suzy Westgarth said: "I am bloody angry, so angry."

Outside the court yesterday, Simpson said: "I'm relieved to go home. I've got two disabled kids and I just want to live my life and be left alone by the police," he said.

-snip-

But in court, his defence team led by legal aid solicitor Joanne Harris successfully argued the evidence would unduly prejudice the jury.

A court source said: "The evidence would be too prejudicial for the jury to hear, they would naturaly assume from some of the evidence, that he was guilty.

-snip-

What that means, is if the a single piece of evidence is so overpowering it would sway a jury from giving a fair trial, it cannot be used.

-snip-

(Excerpt) Read more at dailytelegraph.news.com.au ...


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catch22notguilty; lunacy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last
To: Sonny M
Its pretty safe to say, from reading the article, if one were to commit murder in front of a camera, the videotape would have to be inadmissible.

I wouldn't be surprised if the victim's family has thought of that.

41 posted on 03/12/2005 3:28:51 PM PST by Celtjew Libertarian (Shake Hands with the Serpent: Poetry by Charles Lipsig aka Celtjew http://books.lulu.com/lipsig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Hey, gotta save that prison space for people who commit really, really serious offenses, like smoking in bars and not wearing their seat belts!!!


42 posted on 03/12/2005 3:31:42 PM PST by djf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

43 posted on 03/12/2005 3:33:41 PM PST by SeaBiscuit (God Bless all who defend America and the rest can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

WTF?

Hey, a judgeship just opened up in Atlanta. Maybe he's hoping to impress one of the idiots there.


44 posted on 03/12/2005 3:34:10 PM PST by Tall_Texan (If you can think 180-degrees apart from reality, you might be a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
Sorry - unbelievably the link looks legit.
The end of civilization as the Aussies know it. 'Course we won't be far behind now that we're using international opinion polls to "interpret" our Constitution. :-(
Judicial insanity bump!
45 posted on 03/12/2005 3:44:17 PM PST by Tunehead54 (I'm not winking - this way I only have to hit the shift key once - so I'm lazy! ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
There ought to be more than the article, at least I hope so. Otherwise, this is just too damn fked up.
46 posted on 03/12/2005 3:45:00 PM PST by sagar (Straight trees are cut first and honest people are screwed first_ Chanakya, 4th c. BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

"A man who confessed to killing two women walked free from court yesterday when a judge ruled the evidence too damning."

WHAT?

"The evidence was too damning"?

So sentence him.


47 posted on 03/12/2005 3:45:54 PM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dighton; general_re; Poohbah; BlueLancer; hellinahandcart; Constitution Day
NSW Supreme Court, Judge Anthony Whealy

Whealy, whealy stupid.

48 posted on 03/12/2005 4:04:46 PM PST by aculeus (Ceci n'est pas une tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Wow this is extremely insane.


49 posted on 03/12/2005 4:27:53 PM PST by Mount Athos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: imskylark

I thought that was the sort of evidence that prosecutors and courts WANTED - evidence that clearly points to guilt.


50 posted on 03/12/2005 4:32:14 PM PST by TheBattman (Islam (and liberals)- the cult of Satan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
wow

totally speechless

so, the victim's family is free to commit the vigilante killing with only one precaution: tape the killing so it will be too damning to convict them too

surrealism
51 posted on 03/12/2005 4:38:58 PM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
Whealy, whealy stupid.

I whealy, whealy wish you hadn't done that...

52 posted on 03/12/2005 4:52:46 PM PST by Krodg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

bump


53 posted on 03/12/2005 5:20:39 PM PST by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

you gotta be kidding me!


54 posted on 03/12/2005 5:21:38 PM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mhking

just damn!


55 posted on 03/12/2005 5:22:46 PM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc; diotima; HangFire; dead; feinswinesuksass; dighton
What that means, is if a single piece of evidence is so overpowering it would sway a jury from giving a fair trial, it cannot be used.
...and then my brain exploded.

56 posted on 03/12/2005 5:57:58 PM PST by AnnaZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ

I'm still not believing what I just read...:-{


57 posted on 03/12/2005 6:21:27 PM PST by HangFire (Imagine a world with no hypothetical situations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ

So what if someone killed the murderer, then confessed???


58 posted on 03/12/2005 6:28:28 PM PST by HangFire (Imagine a world with no hypothetical situations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: HangFire

Wow - I think this judge missed Evidence 101. Sure the evidence is prejudicial to the defense - because its probative value is devastating! He seems to have missed the first part of the balancing test in their statute (which is similar to that under the US Rules of Evidence). So I guess a confession would be just too "prejudicial" under his logic. Unbelieveable!!!


59 posted on 03/12/2005 6:33:59 PM PST by rockvillem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: rockvillem

Exactyly. The key word is "unfair" prejudice. How is any of this evidence "unfairly" prejudicial.


60 posted on 03/12/2005 6:41:04 PM PST by TexasAg1996
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson