GUILTY Australia - Five Lin family members murdered, North Epping, NSW, 18 July 2009

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Seriously? Jury can't reach a verdict? Odd.
 
While I have no basis, makes me wonder about corruption and or jury tampering. JMO
 
drsleuth said:
Hung jury :gaah:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-01/jury-hung-in-robert-xie-trial/6989248
Click to expand...

'My husband is innocent,' Kathy Lin says

It has been nine months of evidence and 11 days of deliberations, but still a jury in the murder trial of Robert Xie has been unable to reach a verdict.

Now the 51-year-old is slated to face a fourth trial next year over the murder of five members of the Lin family.

His wife Kathy Lin, who has steadfastly supported him throughout the trial, told reporters on Tuesday as she left the Supreme Court: "My husband is innocent. We never, ever, give up."

This prompted Justice Fullerton to give a majority direction on Monday, paving the way for the jury to be split 11 to one.

But on Tuesday it was clear even that was not sufficient.

After the jury was discharged, crown prosecutor Mark Tedeschi QC told the court the DPP would proceed to trial at the earliest opportunity.


http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/12/01/10/43/jury-in-xie-murder-trial-discharged
 
Very disappointing. :(

IMO, the jury are having difficulty in believing one man could single-handedly kill the sleeping members of a family with a hammer (with gauze attached), without a fight or disturbance. I wish the jury members would research the amount of cases where the perpetrator has done just that, using a hammer is a very efficient method of silently killing multiple people while they sleep.
If they feel the evidence isn't enough, the bloody footprints and blood in RX's garage etc., I haven't a clue then.

They aren't going with 'not guilty', so something is wrong with the presentation of evidence, imo. They're overwhelmed. :/
 
PrimeSuspect said:
Very disappointing. :(

IMO, the jury are having difficulty in believing one man could single-handedly kill the sleeping members of a family with a hammer (with gauze attached), without a fight or disturbance. I wish the jury members would research the amount of cases where the perpetrator has done just that, using a hammer is a very efficient method of silently killing multiple people while they sleep.
If they feel the evidence isn't enough, the bloody footprints and blood in RX's garage etc., I haven't a clue then.

They aren't going with 'not guilty', so something is wrong with the presentation of evidence, imo. They're overwhelmed. :/
Click to expand...

Barrister says accused Lin family murderer Robert Xie must be released on bail

Within seconds, the state's senior Crown Prosecutor, Mark Tedeschi, QC, sprang to his feet to apply for a retrial at "the earliest opportunity" and asked on behalf of the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions that the accused, Robert Xie, "be remanded in custody".

If Mr Xie is denied bail again it is likely that by the time his fourth trial reaches its conclusion in late 2016 he will have spent five-and-a-half years in custody without having been proved guilty of an offence.

I think Turnbull did a good job of defending Xie and put doubt into some of the jury's minds. However, I read that he will not be representing Xie in his future trial to be held about February or March 2016.

Perhaps the Prosecution will by then be able to present less confusing evidence to the jury so that a majority verdict is reached.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/barrister...ed-on-bail-20151201-glcnxc.html#ixzz3t3aH902q
 
Mr Xie has pleaded not guilty to the crime, a position he has maintained since his arrest in May 2011.
Since that time the 51-year-old has faced trial three times, the first two of which were prematurely aborted.
He will return to court on February 19.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/man-accus...te_channel=edmail&mbnr=MzYzOTY3#ixzz48BdOMhKP

There seems to be no reporting on this trial. I wonder if it began on February 19.

Xie will briefly face the Supreme Court on February 19 next year, with a tentative start for the fourth trial on April 4, 2016.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-08/xie-granted-conditional-bail-over-lin-family-deaths/7006576

www.coffscoastadvocate.com.au/topic/robert-xie/
Accused murderer Robert Xie forks out $1m for bail ... Date Listed 09 May, 2016.
 
Robert Xie case prompts questions around trial by juryRobert Xie case prompts questions around trial by jury

ANDY PARK: Today's result has sparked debate about jury trials.

ANTHONY WHEALY: Some trials are difficult. The issue of whether, in a circumstantial case particularly, a serious crime has been committed is a very difficult decision to make. And we have jurors - 12 jurors in the end - who have to think about that very carefully and you will get different points of view.

ANDY PARK: Greg Barnes supports judge-only trials and says there needs to be reform in the jury system.

GREG BARNS, AUSTRALIAN LAWYERS ALLIANCE: Should we be able to know, as you can in the United States, why it was that a jury came to a particular conclusion or didn't come to a particular conclusion? We don't know that. We're not allowed to know that in the Australian and English system.

In the American system, there are some ways in which you can find that out. And that can sometimes be useful in determining how we run jury trials in the future.

ANTHONY WHEALY: I have always believe the jury system is a fantastic system. I would much rather have my fate in the hands of a jury than in the hands of a judge alone.

ANDY PARK: Robert Xie remains in jail. There will be another trial. In the meantime, there's no answers over the murder of a young family.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4363941.htm
 
4th trial? What kind of unholy mess is this, does prosecution even have a case?
 
Estelle said:
Robert Xie case prompts questions around trial by juryRobert Xie case prompts questions around trial by jury

ANDY PARK: Today's result has sparked debate about jury trials.

ANTHONY WHEALY: Some trials are difficult. The issue of whether, in a circumstantial case particularly, a serious crime has been committed is a very difficult decision to make. And we have jurors - 12 jurors in the end - who have to think about that very carefully and you will get different points of view.

ANDY PARK: Greg Barnes supports judge-only trials and says there needs to be reform in the jury system.

GREG BARNS, AUSTRALIAN LAWYERS ALLIANCE: Should we be able to know, as you can in the United States, why it was that a jury came to a particular conclusion or didn't come to a particular conclusion? We don't know that. We're not allowed to know that in the Australian and English system.

In the American system, there are some ways in which you can find that out. And that can sometimes be useful in determining how we run jury trials in the future.

ANTHONY WHEALY: I have always believe the jury system is a fantastic system. I would much rather have my fate in the hands of a jury than in the hands of a judge alone.

ANDY PARK: Robert Xie remains in jail. There will be another trial. In the meantime, there's no answers over the murder of a young family.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4363941.htm
Click to expand...

I would like to know why the jury came to a stalemate. :thinking:

Xie was granted bail 11 Dec, 2015.
 
Mrs G Norris said:
4th trial? What kind of unholy mess is this, does prosecution even have a case?
Click to expand...

The first was aborted due to the emergence of new evidence, while the second was aborted due to the ill-health of the then presiding judge, Justice Peter Johnson.
The marathon third trial ended after nine months on December 1 when the jury were unable to reach a verdict.
With Mr Xie's third retrial still up to seven months away and his mental and physical health ailing severely due to the effects of virtual solitary confinement, NSW Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Fullerton finally granted him bail on Tuesday.


http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/accused-l...ed-on-bail-20151211-gllhhj.html#ixzz4AV1ClUwP

The first 2 trials were on course, but the third trail failed due to the jury unable to reach a verdict. Luck seems to be on Xie's side, if he is indeed guilty. I wouldn't be surprised if he is found not guilty because of these failings. Hopefully, the next jury are unaware of the 3 trials because otherwise, this could sway them to go with not guilty no matter the evidence. JMO
 
Xie's fourth trial should be in progress now. Maybe the Judge has decided that there will be no media allowed there.

In the third trial, the crown alleged, that Xie left behind 24-bloodied footprints consistent with his favourite sporting shoe ASICS. Then when he got home, he unwittingly left a small bloodstain on his garage floor, containing the DNA of at least four of the Lin family victims, the crown said. The stain was found by police during a search of Xie’s home in May 2010.

But defence barrister Graham Turnbull SC said it wasn’t the work of a single killer. Nor was this a crime of passion but a cold-blooded slaughter.

http://www.australianetworknews.com/unable-reach-verdict-robert-xie-trial-jury-discharged/He also dismissed the three motives put forward by the crown.

This is why the jury could not reach a verdict.

He is the state’s top Crown Prosecutor and a go-to lawyer for the highest-profile murder trials whose scalps *includes serial killer Ivan Milat. But Mark Tedeschi QC will not *return for the fourth instalment of the marathon trial of Robert Xie, the man accused of bludgeoning to death five members of his own family. Instead, the NSW Director of *Public Prosecutions Lloyd Babb SC has handed the brief to highly touted, but relatively unknown barrister, Tanya Smith. It is now highly unlikely given Ms Smith will need to get across an enormous and complex brief of evidence, which insiders estimated could take more than two months. So that must be the reason for the delay. Ms Smith previously worked on appeals but had not been working a full week, which would have to change given the huge workload the Xie trial would require. The decision to appoint a prosecutor who was not a senior counsel or QC also raised eyebrows in certain sections of the DPP. After studying at Queensland University, Ms Smith began as a lawyer in 1997, becoming a barrister in 2007. It is understood that the enormity of the Xie trial has left a number of Crown prosecutors relieved they were not appointed to the case.

Xie, 51, also needs to find a new barrister after Graham Turnbull SC told the court he also would not be appearing when the trial restarts, meaning it could be delayed well into next year.

A DPP source said there was no limit to how many times the DPP could run a trial but “the general trend” has been that if a jury is unable to reach a verdict on two occasions the director will make a call on whether to continue the prosecution. The factors taken into consideration will be the strength of the Crown case, the circumstances of how the trial unfolded and the seriousness of the offence, the source said.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/ro...e/news-story/0a41ad78ba7973c674bc359415d66343
 
POINTS OF DISPUTE THAT CHALLENGED THE JURY

The deliberations of a jury are done in secret and the key points that divided the jury members in the Robert Xie trial will never be revealed. But these are the key disputed points in the case:

1. Was the mark on Xie’s garage a drop of blood that contained the DNA of at least four of the dead family members? The prosecution claimed it was. Xie’s lawyers argued that the sample was so small it could not be accepted as reliable evidence and disputed whether it was even blood.

2. Could the jury believe Witness A? Witness A was the inmate turned witness who claimed Xie confided key evidence to him while behind bars, including how he disposed of the murder weapon. Or was Witness A an unreliable opportunist willing to say anything to get a better discount for his own criminal actions?

3. The prosecution introduced evidence to the case alleging that Xie was motivated to kill because he had a sexual interest in a young woman associated with the family. Xie outright denied this.The newsagency in Epping owned by the Lin family before their deaths.

4. Was the jury to believe the Crown’s assertion that Xie was motivated to kill because he wanted to take over the Lin’s newsagency? Or should they have accepted Xie’s argument that he was financially secure and had no desire to take on the work required to run the business?

5. Was the evidence Xie’s wife Kathy credible? The prosecution claimed she lied for her husband while Xie’s lawyers told the court she had given consistent evidence and said the jury should believe her account that Xie had slept beside her all night

6. How did the killer get into the house? Did the killer have their own key as the prosecution suggested? Or is it possible that they entered the house through an unlocked door and waited for the perfect time to bludgeon the family to death as they slept?

7. Did the killer know the layout of the house? Had they been there before? Did they know where to cut the power? The prosecution said yes and argued this pointed to Xie. Xie’s lawyers claimed there was no proof to back this up.

8. Was Xie’s relationship with the Lin family good or bad? The jury was given two competing versions. The Crown claimed Xie felt intense bitterness and hatred towards the family and this fuelled his motivation to kill. The defence said Xie loved his in-laws and had no motivation to harm them.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/ro...e/news-story/0a41ad78ba7973c674bc359415d66343

This is certainly an interesting case where Xie had an excellent barrister and the Prosecutor is top class too.

However, it appears that the next Crown Prosecutor will be less experienced female who will need to bring stronger evidence to the next trial. .
 
In the third trial, the jury were told that a “small smear” of dried blood found on Xie’s garage floor had been subjected to world class DNA testing. Alleles in the smear, the jury heard, contained the same 75 variants that could be found in a combination of the five victims- with Terry Lin’s DNA matching part of the stain with a “one in 50 quadrillion chance” of it coming from another person. Mr Tedeschi said the Crown allege the stain would have been transferred onto the floor because Xie would have “placed some item, such as clothing, shoes or a weapon on the floor of the garage, thereby transferring a stain of the wet blood that had already been mixed during the attack.”

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...eapon-court-told/story-fni0cx4q-1226914455754

If I had been on that jury, just this evidence alone would have won me over to believing that Xie is guilty.

I wonder who will be Xie's next barrister?
 
One of the motives put forward by prosecutors is that Xie believed he was a better businessman and more intelligent than Min Lin, but this was never recognised within the family.

Prosecutors said Xie felt humiliation, anger and resentment about his brother-in-law being held in such regard, when in his mind, he was so undeserving.

The Crown also alleges there was a sexual motive, regarding a person who for legal reasons cannot be identified.

"The Defence case is that the sexual misconduct alleged, didn't happen," Mr Webb said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...lawyers-question-sole-killer-argument/7558384
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 204 more.
Total: 2,287 (members: 205, guests: 2,082)

Online statistics

Members online
205
Guests online
2,082
Total visitors
2,287
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,358
Messages
18,107,425
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top