Australia Australia - Tegan Lane, 2 days old, Sydney, 14 Sept 1996 *K. Lane guilty*

[JLZ]

Just back to the consciousness of guilt lies. Keli Lane sure looks guilty and it is circumstantial evidence that she did murder Tegan and can be put forward by the Prosecution. The jury is legally able to find that she is guilty from the evidence of these lies too.

But consciousness of guilt lies can be rebutted. There could be an innocent explanation. Keli is definitely very dysfunctional in this period of her life.

How should the Defence have approached this?

The onus and burden of proof is on the Prosecution to prove the elements of murder. The lies look like Keli has the mens rea to commit murder but surely, the Prosecution is not under any duty to rebut the lies. As far as they are concerned their view on why she lied is the correct one.

When consciousness of guilt lies are in evidence, is the onus then on the Defence to present evidence to rebut those?

The Defence never lead any evidence. They have no burden of proof in relation to the offence at all but should they have had or did they have an onus of proof here? Is any one in the know able to answer? I am thinking they do, but I certainly don't have a good knowledge of these technical aspects.

What evidence would have rebutted those lies?

The Court and the jury need some evidence before they can make a finding.

In my view, something very dysfunctional in Keli's personality lead her to lie at this time. The only evidence I can think of that Keli could have possibly lead in her defence would have been a psychiatric assessment. She downright refuses to be assessed. A person like Professor Buist may have actually been able to help her at this stage. Who knows? All a moot point now.

Looks like this case might provide an answer to my question. Consul Development Pty Ltd v DPC Estates Pty Ltd (1975) 132 CLR 373 at 391-392. Yes, it is the Defence that needs to present evidence to rebut the lies. I definitely need to read more on this. I don't know why a civil case is quoted as a precedent on this. Need to find out.

Keli fails to rebut the consciousness of guilt lies. It is obvious how that looks for her.

I think Consul Development etc is a civil case and so the onus of proof would be different.

There are a lot of interlocutory judgements in Lane, some of them on the issue of the lies, and I haven't finished reading them. Tentatively, I don't think the onus is on the defendant to disprove consciousness of guilt. I think the issues are, first, whether the "evidence" is allowed to be presented at all. This was admissible because it was found capable of showing "consciousness of guilt", and was therefore relevant to what was at issue. Secondly, it is up to the jury to decide whether the "consciousness of guilt" material together with the rest of the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the defendant.

Actually, although the defence did not present evidence, the jury heard about Keli's shame, distress, incompetence in regard to her various pregnancies that might have allowed them to come to a different conclusion about the motivation for her lies.

 

[Bohemian]

Ahh I didn't understand what you were asking for. No, I tried to look for the full letter but couldn't find it either. Guess it will come out "in due course".

When the press release came out, I had mentioned that the reasons were basically everything raised in Exposed, that's why I wondered if they were working together.

I think the formal grounds for a judicial review will be based on the alleged non-disclosure of evidence by the Prosecution (see paras 2 & 3 of the PR below), namely the hours of telephone intercepts; especially if anything is found which would have been favourable to the Defence during the trial.



Source: Blog

 

[Via Marple]

I think she left that baby in the hospital because I don’t think the adoption was finalised and ready to go by the time she was ready for discharge.

That makes one wonder - again - why didn't she do the same with Tegan, even if making it to the wedding or whatever her hurry was a factor? Why couldn't she leave Tegan at the care of the hospital? Even if she didn't wish to go through an adoption, just to leave her at the hospital for half a day?

Was there a solid promise to deliver the baby to someone on exactly that day?

Or.... Did she actually mean to take Tegan home?

I am changing my thoughts all the time...

 

[CuriosityKilledtheCat]

I think Consul Development etc is a civil case and so the onus of proof would be different.

There are a lot of interlocutory judgements in Lane, some of them on the issue of the lies, and I haven't finished reading them. Tentatively, I don't think the onus is on the defendant to disprove consciousness of guilt. I think the issues are, first, whether the "evidence" is allowed to be presented at all. This was admissible because it was found capable of showing "consciousness of guilt", and was therefore relevant to what was at issue. Secondly, it is up to the jury to decide whether the "consciousness of guilt" material together with the rest of the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the defendant.

Actually, although the defence did not present evidence, the jury heard about Keli's shame, distress, incompetence in regard to her various pregnancies that might have allowed them to come to a different conclusion about the motivation for her lies.

Thank you. That makes sense. The consciousness of guilt lies here in this case is so strong. I am not really surprised the jury came to the conclusion they did.

 

[The Observer]

Ahh I didn't understand what you were asking for. No, I tried to look for the full letter but couldn't find it either. Guess it will come out "in due course".

When the press release came out, I had mentioned that the reasons were basically everything raised in Exposed, that's why I wondered if they were working together.

It had me wondering what had BOHII been doing all this time. They've been on the case longer than the ABC team.

 

[Via Marple]

I think the formal grounds for a judicial review will be based on the alleged non-disclosure of evidence by the Prosecution (see paras 2 & 3 of the PR below), namely the hours of telephone intercepts; especially if anything is found which would have been favourable to the Defence during the trial.

View attachment 153181

Ok, let's hear them! Look forward to the review.

 

[Bohemian]

That makes one wonder - again - why didn't she do the same with Tegan, even if making it to the wedding or whatever her hurry was a factor? Why couldn't she leave Tegan at the care of the hospital? Even if she didn't wish to go through an adoption, just to leave her at the hospital for half a day?

Was there a solid promise to deliver the baby to someone on exactly that day?

Or.... Did she actually mean to take Tegan home?

I am changing my thoughts all the time...

Keli had done that before, hadn’t she? By that I mean, had left her infant at the hospital to attend a social gathering? Why didn’t she do that with Tegan? I think she wanted to avoid the emotional pain of another adoption process and had the idea to keep Tegan, freaked out at the last minute and decided to abandon her with the thought someone would find her and, thus, Tegan’s birth would be anonymous. The only other option (other than handing her over to ‘Andrew’ et al or someone else) is that Keli is a cold-blooded killer, abandoning Tegan to the elements where she wouldn’t be found or murdering her.

 

[Bohemian]

Ok, let's hear them! Look forward to the review.

Yeah, me too. If there’s anything favourable on the tapes

 

[Bohemian]

It had me wondering what had BOHII been doing all this time. They've been on the case longer than the ABC team.

I read two years. I can’t remember where. I thought that was interesting given Caro et al have been on the case for about the same amount of time

 

[The Observer]

Ummm..

Associate Dean of Criminology and Justice Studies, Dr Michele Ruyters, said it was vital to obtain access to the recordings as they may have contained information that exonerated Lane.

“There has been significant interest in the case with good reason,” she said.

“With the ABC running a three-part television series about our investigation, we hope to shine a light on the potential injustice that has occurred here,” she said.

Source: Protecting the innocent - RMIT University

Exposed was presented as an investigation of Caro's stemming from a letter from Keli herself.

 

[Via Marple]

I read two years. I can’t remember where. I thought that was interesting given Caro et al have been on the case for about the same amount of time

Yes Caro got Keli's letter late 2016. I was thinking that she must be dying from frustration for the ABC investigation to take this long.

 

[sosocurious]

Ummm..

Associate Dean of Criminology and Justice Studies, Dr Michele Ruyters, said it was vital to obtain access to the recordings as they may have contained information that exonerated Lane.

“There has been significant interest in the case with good reason,” she said.

“With the ABC running a three-part television series about our investigation, we hope to shine a light on the potential injustice that has occurred here,” she said.

Source: Protecting the innocent - RMIT University

Exposed was presented as an investigation of Caro's stemming from a letter from Keli herself.

"They did look for an 'Andrew Norris' but they didn't contemplate any variations – perhaps whether that was his real name. We worked with the ABC to give them access, with Keli's permission, to help them launch the investigation. But being the dogged journalists they are, they uncovered the most amazing pieces of information."

ABC's Exposed: Academics call for judicial inquiry into Keli Lane case

 

[sosocurious]

"It's overwhelmingly frightening to think you can be tried and convicted on no evidence at all simply because a decision to prosecute was made. Miscarriages of justice do happen."

ABC's Exposed: Academics call for judicial inquiry into Keli Lane case

So the finger is being pointed where?

 

[Bohemian]

Looks like non-disclosure is the issue at hand:

Why police and prosecutors don’t always disclose evidence in criminal trials

btw Interesting ABC ‘Life Matters’ radio program re true crime podcasts and their impact that mentions Keli’s case:

True crime: an insight into our justice system

 

[Bohemian]

"It's overwhelmingly frightening to think you can be tried and convicted on no evidence at all simply because a decision to prosecute was made. Miscarriages of justice do happen."

ABC's Exposed: Academics call for judicial inquiry into Keli Lane case

So the finger is being pointed where?

Police, the ODPP and the Crown Prosecutor. (If I was a cynic, I’d say anywhere.)

 

[sosocurious]

But even before she convinced the sceptical award-winning reporter to investigate her 2010 conviction, Lane had enlisted the help of a group of Melbourne law students and their lecturer.

Researchers from RMIT University’s Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative have been quietly and painstakingly sifting through hundreds of pages of evidence and trial notes since receiving an impassioned letter from Lane in 2015.

“I’ve spent a lot of time with Lane since writing about her case in 2014, and actually it doesn’t matter if, after getting to know her, I think she is innocent or not. What matters is that someone can be found guilty of murder when no evidence exists to demonstrate murder took place.

‘Keli Lane believes she is innocent’

 

[CuriosityKilledtheCat]

"It's overwhelmingly frightening to think you can be tried and convicted on no evidence at all simply because a decision to prosecute was made. Miscarriages of justice do happen."

ABC's Exposed: Academics call for judicial inquiry into Keli Lane case

So the finger is being pointed where?

Fairly and squarely at the DPP.

 

[CuriosityKilledtheCat]

But even before she convinced the sceptical award-winning reporter to investigate her 2010 conviction, Lane had enlisted the help of a group of Melbourne law students and their lecturer.

Researchers from RMIT University’s Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative have been quietly and painstakingly sifting through hundreds of pages of evidence and trial notes since receiving an impassioned letter from Lane in 2015.

“I’ve spent a lot of time with Lane since writing about her case in 2014, and actually it doesn’t matter if, after getting to know her, I think she is innocent or not. What matters is that someone can be found guilty of murder when no evidence exists to demonstrate murder took place.

‘Keli Lane believes she is innocent’

It is frightening. I believe she was convicted on the strongest evidence, and that was her lies. She looks as guilty as hell. I still believe she didn't do it.

 

[Bohemian]

It is frightening. I believe she was convicted on the strongest evidence, and that was her lies. She looks as guilty as hell. I still believe she didn't do it.

Can I ask why you don’t believe Keli ‘did it’ CKTC?

 

[Bohemian]

I find it tragic that so much suffering could have been avoided if Keli told the truth and took responsibility for her wrong actions. Whatever pain she was (or still is) avoiding has grown exponentially to affect so many others. The second degree of suffering is always more painful and wide-ranging than the first.