Homicideinvestigationreview PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Homicideinvestigationreview PDF

Description

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

In this report I will be detailing the investigation that took place into one of the most publicized cases that sparked national outrage all across Australia. It was Father's day in 2005 when Robert Farquharson's Holden commodore, with his three children Jai, Tyler and Bailey - plunged into the Winchelsea dam. Farquharson was supposed to be driving the children back to their mothers (Cindy Gambino) after their day spent together (Moles,  2009). What followed was a complex police investigation to get to the truth of what happened on that Fathers’ day evening in 2005.

In this case the main elements of the investigation process were most definitely comprised of a few factors that indicated to foul play, firstly we will delve into the car and how it came to be immersed in the Winchelsea Dam. Robert Farquharson claimed to have had a coughing fit which caused him to ‘black out’ and lose control of the vehicle resulting it in the car plunging into the Dam (Medew,  2006). When he awoke from his black out he claimed to have been immersed in water up to his chest, he claimed he opened his car door to escape the vehicle and then swam up to shore to try and flag down assistance from a passing vehicle (Moles, 2009).

During the investigation, the police tested the car in every possible way to determine whether the car could have ended up in the Dam if Robert Farquharson really did ‘pass out’. The lead witness who presented all this investigative evidence to the court during the trial was Acting Sergeant Glen Urquhart who conducted the many trials and tests of the vehicle going along that road and entering the Dam (Moles, 2009). When testifying, Sergeant Urquhart stated that the results of the tests all pointed towards there having to be manual intervention to change the course of the vehicle from the road to the Dam, during

1

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

which time Robert Farquharson is supposed to have been unconscious due to his coughing fit. Sergeant Urquhart went on to say that the car would have naturally veered to the left and that it would have taken the steering to be changed to have the car drive across the highway to the right, Sergeant Urquhart said that the car, after crossing the highway would have had to then be straightened and then steered slightly to the left and then steered to the right again to avoid crashing into a tree (Moles, 2009). This steering of the vehicle would, of course, have been impossible to undertake if you were unconscious.

Sergeant Urquhart had undertaken a recreation of the drive he called a ‘drive through’ which involved him driving the car at various speeds down the same road without any steering or manipulation from him, these results were either that the car would go so far to the left side that if he didn’t intervene, the car would have run straight of the road (the opposite side from the Dam)(Moles, 2009). At other times the car would continue in a straight line. None of these recreations would allow the car to possible go into the lake without manual intervention. (Moles, 2009). Two scenarios were run through a program called ‘PC Crash’ that simulated the cars journey down the road and tested the situations in which the car could have gone off the road and veered into the Dam. The results of this simulations were that it would have taken three steering changes to have the car enter the Dam. (Moles, 2009).During the investigation, great attention was paid to the marking on the land that surrounded Winchelsea Dam. This area had many tyre markings that could help distinguish whether this was an accident or purposeful. The prosecution had vehicular accident reconstruction experts who testified that Robert Farquharson cannot have been unconscious during the crash due to the tests that Sergeant Urquhart presented to the court and the rolling car track marks in the banks of the Dam (Medew, 2006). The police also had a witness who provided a key piece of evidence, a statement apparently made by Robert Farquharson to a friend named Greg King outside of a fish and chip shop just three months before the car went into the dam. Robert Farquharson allegedly told Greg King that he was going to "take away the most important thing that means to her" as well as detailing that there would be an "accident involving a dam where I survive and

2

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

the kids don't" (Rout & Wilson, 2009). This was obviously huge in the case against Robert Farquharson, it was a huge point in the trial and had the power to potentially sway any juror that was on the fence or had doubts on Robert Farquharson’s guilt.

During the trial it came about that Sergeant Urquhart had not used the police evidence photos of the actual crash in his simulations of the crash, he said that the photos had only “come about” recently (in the time during the trial in 2007). The defences lawyer, Peter Morrissey said that this was “gross incompetence” on Sergeant Urquharts behalf. (The Age, 2007).

It also came to light after the trial and after Robert Farquharson’s verdict of guilty that Greg King, who gave testimony of the comments that Robert Farquharson had made outside the fish and chip shop, the comments that showed clear premeditation of murder, had pending charges against him that were not disclosed by the prosecution and police. (Rout & Wilson, 2009). This was then, in 2009 found to be a miscarriage of justice and Robert Farquharson was granted a retrial and given the opportunity to apply for bail. Meaning that not only was Robert Farquharson able to be bailed and walk free, he also was able to potentially be found not guilty in this new trial (Milovanovic, 2009).

This retrial could have been avoided by the police simply disclosing that they suspected the charges that were eventually laid upon Greg King so they could openly discuss it in court or have the judge omit it as irrelevant in relation to the Robert Farquharson trial, as the defense would certainly have gone after Greg Kings character to try and undermine the statement he had given as this statement was such a huge piece of the trial(The Age, 2009).

The issue regarding the photos of the Holden Commodore that Robert Farquharson crashed is also something that could have been avoided in trial and after with simple transparency and perhaps a retrial of the simulation to include this ‘new’ evidence. It was

3

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

also pointed out by the judge that it was potentially unacceptable and inadmissible that the evidence provided by Sergeant Urquhart was presented as if he were an expert witness, which he is not. An expert witness is someone who has undertaken specified training, study or experience in a particular area (Moles, 2009). Sergeant Urquhart was not technically an expert witness and was somewhat presented as such. This is not ideal as it gives the wrong impression to the jury, and could have been taken in a different direction by employing an actual expert witness who is specifically trained and has experience in this exact subject (Moles, 2009).

Various Australian medias covered this case throughout the investigation and trial of Robert Farquharson, the coverage was constant and changed the public’s view of the case and Robert Farquharson himself. The media had people questioning if Robert Farquharson was guilty or if he was in fact a grieving father falsely accused of murdering his three beloved children. Firstly the media labeled it as an ‘accident’ as Robert Farquharson was still supported by Cindy Gambino and attended the funeral of his children as a grieving father (Garner,  2014). Once the results of the investigation came to light and the public discovered that Robert Farquharson had in fact killed his 3 sons they started to ask why. Why would a man who had never shown any signs of wanting to ever harm his children, intentionally drive them into a Dam and escape the car so they would surely drown? (Medew, 2006). When the media began to report Robert Farquharson’s bizarre behaviour in the following minutes from escaping the vehicle, it caused him to be seen as already guilty by the court of public opinion. People could not believe a father would not try to seek emergency services immediately, or allow others to go down into the water. (Medew, 2006) This is always dangerous because it makes it harder for the accused to receive a fair trial. This issue is only increasing as social media takes a front seat into how we receive our news (Byrne, 2017). During the trial, this case was already publicized so widely that everyone had ideas about what had transpired and if they thought that Robert Farquharson was guilty or innocent, if he really did have a coughing fit or did he purposefully set out to get revenge on his ex-wife for wanting a divorce and

4

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

taking the house and newer car (Medew, 2006). However, news articles that have the power to sway a person in a certain direction doesn’t just involve the specific case that the jury is currently on, it can also be another case where the content is similar and can trigger. During Robert Farquharson’s second trial, an article was ordered to be struck from the newspaper and was not released in Victoria. This article was about another case involving the murder of children, so supreme court judge Lex Lasry banned the publisher The Weekend Australian, from releasing the story in Victoria so the jury would not read  and and form an undue opinion of Robert Farquharson’s guilt. (Merritt, 2010)

5

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

References:

Byrne, E. (2017). Is Facebook ruining the chance of a fair trial?. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-20/concern-over-jury-trials-in-internet-age/8543466

Devic, A. (2012). High-profile group in bid to free dam dad killer. Herald Sun . Retrieved from http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/high-profile-group-in-bid-to-free-dam-dad-kille r/story-e6freuzr-1226291209224

Garner, H. (2014). Why did Robert Farquharson take an evil turn on that country road?. The Australian . Retrieved from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/weekend-australian-magazine/why-did-robert-farquharson-t ake-an-evil-turn-on-that-country-road/story-e6frg8h6-1227024398116

Medew, J. (2006). 'Tragic accident or wicked revenge'. The Age . Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/tragic-accident-or-wicked-revenge/2006/08/17/115540 7956875.html?page=fullpage

Merritt, C. (2010). The story a judge wanted banned. Retrieved from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/the-story-a-judge-wanted-banned/news-story/ddb6f5cd5 be4cbf786e89e35d6354fab

Moles, R. (2009). Victoria reports: The Queen v Robert Farquharson [2009] VSCA 307 - 17 December 2009. Retrieved from http://netk.net.au/Victoria/Farquarson2.asp 

6

RUNNING HEADER: The Robert Farquharson Case

Milovanovic, S. (2009). Farquharson granted retrial. Retrieved from https://www.smh.com.au/national/farquharson-granted-retrial-20091217-kzbh.html

Tyson, D. (2009). Questions of Guilt and Innocence in the Victorian Criminal Trial of Robert Farquharson and the Fact Before Theory Internet Campaign. Retrieved from http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/CICrimJust/2009/25.pdf

The Age. (2007). Police officer denies incompetence. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/police-officer-denies-incompetence/2007/09/18/11898 81479386.html

The Age. (2009). Farquharson appeal: Police 'withheld' investigation into witness. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/national/farquharson-appeal-police-withheld-investigation-into-witne ss-20090601-bsub

Rout, M., & Wilson, L. (2009). Dams death dad wins retrial. Retrieved from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/dams-death-dad-robert-farquharson-wins-retrial/n ews-story/fe729601f1f0e348b6e0268ab05afdc0

7...