This week, a suspect was arrested and charged in a murder investigation that, according to the media, "had sparked the interest of the entire nation."
I refer to the tragic murder of mother-of-three Allison Baden-Clay. This week, her husband was arrested on charges of murder.
I read the reaction across the social media scene with intense interest. Comments ranged from "I knew it was him all along" to "rot in jail you bastard" to "I hope they get him in jail". Now I know that this is a very hot topic and that there was a great deal of media interest from the moment that Allison was reported missing. Speculation was rife right from the beginning about her husband's involvement in her disappearance and it seemed like everyone had an opinion.
Me, I thought he might have been involved, but interestingly, when it was announced I did not feel any of the feelings vented above. In fact, when I began to read the impassioned comments made, I found myself not taking his side, but at least empathising with him.
Our justice system is based on the premise of innocent until proven guilty. Most of the people who made these statements have immediately written him off as guilty purely because he has been arrested. I hope none of them are called up to serve on his jury, cos it would be a safe bet that they have already pronounced guilt on him and are ready for sentencing.
It's pretty fair to say that a lot of innocent people are arrested and charged in our legal system. It's one of the reasons I don't support capital punishment - after all, it's much harder to say "Sorry we got it wrong" to someone who was executed years ago for a crime that they didn't commit. And if you think that doesn't happen, try googling Timothy Evans - he was executed following trial for the murder of his wife, only for it to be discovered years later that she was the victim of infamous serial murderer John Christie. Ironically, Christie testified against Evans at his trial, which lead to Evans' hanging execution.
But I digress. I have no doubt that the police have done a thorough investigation and collected the evidence necessary to support a conviction. However until that verdict is found either by a judge or a jury of his peers, I'm happy to sit back and watch what rolls out. If he is found guilty, he will be jailed and will pay for his crime behind bars. If he is found not guilty (not innocent you'll notice, because he is actually innocent until proven otherwise), there will no doubt be many choruses of "he got out of it", but when push comes to shove, if they can't prove it, he can't be convicted.
Either way, his life has pretty much ended. Jail if guilty, but if not, how will he rebuild a shattered life that may result in up to two years of his life in incarceration before he even goes to trial. He will forever have the shadow of murder hanging over his head. People will continue to judge him as a murderer. Look at Lindy Chamberlain, I'm sure there are plenty of people who still secretly believe she was involved in her daughter's death. It doesn't matter that a coroner has finally identified a dingo as the culprit, that cloud will always hang over her in some people's minds.
Until the evidence has been presented and the trial is complete, I'll reserve my verdict. It's what I'd hope people would do for me if I ever found myself in the same situation.
You are very wrong in this case and your inability to discern the differences between this domestic killing and the violent confused Evans. It is the extreme hesitance of persons like you that complicate the processes of justice. This managing to act as if blind to even such narrow number of variables that cannot help but strongly implicate Gerard, a clone of Scott Peterson. Nothing like the poor addled, often aggressive alcoholic Evans. It would appear that Gerard had murder on his mind, but not a hasty chaotic one that resulted that night. The fact is no one really wants Gerard to be the actual perpetrator because of the exorbitant costly impact on three children loosing both parents. Unfortunately there is no one else probable, unless it had been Ms McHugh who would still needed assistance from Gerard to dispose of the body. There is no information to support that. Allison was a real innocent, a proper optimist hoping to overcome serious marital issues who did not ever place herself in any outside risky behaviours. Gerard had given every indication of guilt. He appears to even initially anticipate being fully caught out, only gaining confidence after getting lawyers and nothing appeared to happen. Locals who'd wish he didn't do this, as well as the Dickies, realise earlier worrying indicators as well as other local knowledge mean they were forced to respond to his likely guilt. So he has been ostracised in respect for Allison who did not deserve anything of it, and neither the children. The world has become fed up with perpetrator rights. Where victim family members suffer often as long in a nomans land as years go by. It's often no less years than the sentence given when the perpetrator finally gets justice, if at all. Think of the confusion and lies that the children would live if Gerard was not arrested. If by the remotest chance Gerard is not the killer though strongly involved in assisting another in disposal and concealment with plans for a joint future, I'd trust that in the remote chance of his innocence of killing in his "vigorous defence" would divulge any alternative truth resulting in lesser charges. Gerard is one who does know what happened, charging him is the first step to moving towards a revelation of truth, getting justice for Allison and reality for the comencement for healing of the children. No one has wanted Gerard to be proven the killer, but no one wants the killer to destroy more than they already have. Gerard is very guilty in what happened to Allison, one needs to be twisted in not seeing that. Gerard lacks respect for Allison and his daughters in not manning up to whatever role he played. So, yes we celebrate that Gerard after two months opportunities to tell the truth has finally been arrested to end that part of his sick game. If there are more mitigating circumstances or other facts that contradict his guilt for murder presented properly and truthfully, people would shift their views to the appropriate point. Don't underestimate current internet users and the cautiuos media who do see Gerard as Allison's killer now, obvious by current facts and Gerards responses. These are the astute ones, who whenever are given solid alternatives are the ones who have the capacity and integrity to move with such. Able to re evalutate and take a new view. Don't insult an intelligent mass response when times are moving towards justice and no to making excuses to killing others. Society isn't so simple anymore. We've learnt that focusing on accused rights has in recent times caused far more harm to victims, to hurt and perpetrators to think they can make more victims at no cost to themselves.
ReplyDeleteI like your site and my comment while strongly different isn't meant to be negative towards you in any way.
ReplyDeleteI'd say:
"Judge with confidence,
Condemn with caution"
No offence taken at all - that's the beauty of blogging - if I'm getting comments, it means I'm being read! I guess my only comment in response to my softness is that while studying law I learned that our judicial system is based on a premise that eleven guilty men may be set free such that one innocent man should not suffer. While I'm not declaring anyone's guilt or innocence in this particular case, if I'm that one innocent person accused, then I'd be glad of that so-called soft justice.
ReplyDelete