Australian court verdicts seem to be something I find myself writing about with greater frequency. I don’t know if it’s because they just seem to keep getting it wrong or whether the media are giving greater coverage to seemingly bad verdicts.

Whatever the reason is last week alone there was more then a few cases in the media that I felt were complete and utter rubbish. Cases that just make you want to clench your fist and shout as they leave you wondering just how in the hell they happened.

Here they are:

1. Sharon and Blake Ward

After five days of deliberation I was extremely pleased to see a guilty verdict handed down to Sharon and Blake Ward, otherwise known as the murdering parents of Shellay Ward. Shellay Ward died of starvation at age seven and I’ve previously covered her story when I wrote about mental illness and parents (it’s the last one down the bottom).

Sharon Ward was found guilty of murder and Blake Ward guilty of manslaughter.

Upon hearing the news of the verdict last Monday I went home and wrote out a draft I intended to publish on Tuesday shortly after the sentencing of Sharon. After the verdict was read out Blake’s lawyers said they needed 6 weeks to pull the mental illness defense out before hearing.

Sharon’s lawyers on the other hand said they’d already prepared two such defenses and were good to go ahead with sentencing on Tuesday (her lawyers had obviously played this game before).

On Tuesday shortly before sentencing it was then announced that Sharon was “too physically and emotionally sick to take part in the sentencing hearing”. You’ve got to hand it to her lawyers, they played the cards just right.

First pretend everythings cool and then play the ‘overnight demise’ card and hope that it conveys remorse to everyone.

Sharon’s sentencing was postponed for 6 weeks to be delivered on the same date Blake’s is. I’m putting on my money on pretty big ‘waaah we have mental problems please don’t hurt us’ defenses from both of them and the judge buying right into it.

2. Donna Fitchett

Back in 2006 Donna Fitchett decided she’d had enough of life and decided to murder her two sons.

She gave her sons a “cocktail” of drugs, suffocated or strangled them at their North Balwyn home, and was found by her husband in a darkened house in her bra and underpants.


At her trial she pleaded not guilty to murder and tried to pull the mental illness defense but in a rare occurrence it was squashed and she was found guilty. Naturally her lawyers appealed and with the failure of the mental illness defense out the window somehow still managed to get their client off.

Justices Peter Buchanan, Frank Vincent and David Ashley found that Justice Geoffrey Nettle during the trial did not adequately inform the jury of the legal consequences if it found Ms Fitchett not guilty by reason of mental impairment.


…REALLY?!

Does anyone honestly think the jury had no idea what would happen if they returned a guilty verdict on a murder charge? Or that they would have changed their mind if they were “adequately informed” of finding her not guilty via mental illness?

The result of these findings is a complete mistrial and the chance to drag out the defense again for a second time and hope it works. Maybe this time Donna will get lucky with a few more bleeding hearts on the jury.

You’ve really got to feel for the ex-husband though, this is what he had to say at the conclusion of the original trial:

“I lost the two boys at the hands of my ex-wife. She knew all along what she was doing. 12 people today saw through a defence that was very shallow. They came to the right decision,” Mr Fitchett said.

He described having to sit through his ex-wife’s trial as “nerve-racking, highly-emotional”.


Imagine having to dig it all up and relive it again.

As far as I’m concerned juries should only be charged with finding someone guilty or not guilty. Their decision should be based on the evidence presented during the trial and possible sentencing should have absolutely no bearing on their decision. That’s at least how I thought the jury system was supposed to work.

3. Cameron Thomas

A term that gets bandied about a lot when we hear about frivolous court cases is ‘only in America’. Then a case like ‘Cameron Thomas vs. puberty’ comes along and totally redefines the depths of which we allow the Australian court system to sink to.

I originally wrote about the Cameron Thomas’ bunk bed case back in February;

So kid has a fall when he’s 10, subsequently goes through puberty and the resulting personality change, gets kicked out of school and parents come up with the first scapegoat they can think of, a fall Cameron had four years ago.

What an absolute crock.

If every parent decided to sue someone over why their precious turned into a teenage monster we’d have to establish an entirely new court system just to deal with the never ending onslaught.

My protests it seems were not shared by the judge who awarded a pay day to Cameron Thomas’ parents to the tune of $853,396. It seems puberty now has a price.

The judge even went as far as to paint a pathetic useless future for Cameron;

“His future is uncertain and likely to be difficult,” he said in his judgment.

“Especially if he experiences unemployment, which is likely, at least periodically.

“He will need to cope with the likely success of his brothers.


Well gee I didn’t know predicting the future came with the job description. Instead of helping Thomas get over his accident (remember that word?) like the rest of us when we were kids he’s instead sentenced him to a life of welfare dependency and hopelessness.

Fellow Australian blogger YoungandGrumpy points out precisely what is wrong with judgements like this:

Why does every accident have to have blame attached? This seriously wouldn’t have happened just 20 years ago. People would accept the fact that bad things just happen. If i had sued for every accident i had at school or at a friends place, id be very wealthy today. Hell, i have some mental health issues, maybe it was because i grazed my knee in Grade 2.


As if parents parents didn’t already have enough choice between blaming schools, the government or some video game their kid may or may not have played because they can’t handle their own children. Well done Kirby for giving them an avenue to get rich off it too.

I wonder how many xbox games you can buy for $800,000? He’s going to need them, who’d want to befriend the guy who’d sue you for having a bad dream in your house?


The Australian court system has been a giant let down this past week. Whilst I’m sure some justice was handed out it seems week in week out the news is full of absolute garbage verdicts, sentences or cases like the three examples above.

I don’t think the question anymore is ‘how can we avoid becoming like the litigious US?’ but more ‘how the hell do we move on from BEING the litigious US’.

Anyone got any answers? I’m all out of miracle juice.


Tweet

1. Religion has no place in Australian courts
2. Why Aboriginal law has no place in Australian courts
3. Australian courts encourage rampant Sudanese violence
4. My one week checkup after Lasik eye surgery