In this project, we learned about the principles of justice that uphold Australia’s legal system, such as the presumption of innocence, an impartial judiciary, and the right to legal representation. I studied the case of Andrew Mallard and analyzed how these principles were both upheld and violated in this case. After writing an essay on the topic, we were required to incorporate feedback and edit the essay so that it was fit for online publication. This essay is the end result of that editing process. It demonstrates my ability to take feedback, and to refine a piece of written work to produce a professional result.”
In 1994 a lady by the name of Pamela Lawrence was brutally murdered in her upmarket store in Perth. Our Australian Legal system aims to follow the four main principles of justice. These principles are the right to appeal, the right to a fair trial, equality before the law, and an independent and unbiased judiciary. Unfortunately for Andrew Mallard most of these
principles were not carried out. Andrew was 33 years of age when he was falsely accused of murdering Pamela Lawrence and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. He had to go through a very long process to finally clear his name.
The principle of equality before the law was mostly compromised in Mr. Mallard’s case. Mr. Mallard had a mental illness which police used against him. The principles of equality before the law is supposed to ensure that no matter your race, age, gender, and mental state everyone must be treated equally. Police locked Andrew Mallard in a room for 8 hours slowly feeding him information about the murder like how Pamela may have been killed, so that his description of what he thought the murder was, somewhat matched what happened to Pamela Lawrence. During this 8-hour time span, Mr. Mallard did not have a representative or a lawyer with him to defend him. Many precautions could have been put in place to prevent this all from happening, for example, Mr. Mallard should have had a representative with him at all times. The police were very prejudiced towards Andrew Mallard and did not treat him with equality.
The right to appeal is a very important principle in our legal system and In Andrew Mallard’s case, this principle was mostly upheld but slightly compromised. In 1996 when Andrew Mallard and his family applied for an appeal after being sent to jail it was denied, this happened because there was not enough evidence to prove that he was innocent. Andrew Mallard’s family and lawyer decided to take a big leap of faith and team up with the police defense lawyer. They did this because they believed that the police’s lawyer would have a lot more understanding of the case. In 2003 their second appeal finally got accepted with some of the key evidence being that the police hid a test that they did from the court. This test showed that what Andrew Mallard said was the murder weapon possibly couldn’t have been the murder weapon. Without the police defense lawyer, Andrew Mallard would have never been able to walk free.
Andrew Mallard being interviewed after getting let out of jail. 
Andrew Mallard walking into court.
The principle, an independent and unbiased judiciary was mostly compromised in Andrew Mallard’s case. This principle is very vital in a court system because people otherwise will become very biased. The Judiciary in a court is a person that makes sure that no one is being biased in a court case. However, the Judiciary was completely unaware that outside of the court the police were being far more than biased towards Andrew Mallard. The Judiciary was unaware because they aren’t involved in what happens outside the court. The police as stated earlier withheld vital information like the trans script and instead wanted their names on record as solving a big murder case. They could have prevented all of this by bringing in police from overseas because it was such a large case therefore Mr. Mallard would have had a higher chance of being treated equally. This principle was upheld by the judiciary but compromised by the police.
The right to a fair trial is so vital in a legal system, without this principle being upheld a court case becomes far from fair. For Andrew Mallard this principle was mostly compromised. This principle is supposed to ensure that even if you have a mental illness you are supposed to be treated with respect and fairness. The police who are supposed to keep us safe instead contributed to locking up an innocent man in prison. This principle was only slightly upheld when after Mr Mallard walked free from prison, he was awarded 3.25 million dollars. The police were far from fair and they ruined and innocent man’s reputation.
After 12 long years in prison, in 2006 Andrew Mallard was finally set free from prison. His pain and suffering was far from over as he had to move across the world to America as he was tried to start a new fresh life. Our Australian legal system let us down the day Andrew Mallard was sentenced to prison after being falsely accused of murdering Pamela Lawrence. Many Principles were unfortunately compromised like equality before the law and independent and unbiased judiciary. The principles that were upheld were the right to a fair trial and the right to appeal. However, our legal system has improved since then and the principles of justice aim to protect us as individuals inside and outside the court system.
Fount Page of Australian Story