The Lloyd Rayney Case

In this project, we learnt 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 Lloyd Rayney and analysed 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 this essay I will be providing information to you about why Lloyd Rayney had a fair trial by explaining key principles of justice that were portrayed in this case. Lloyd Rayney was charged with the murder of his wife Corryn Rayney. Corryn Rayney was announced missing when she did not return home from her weekly boot scooting class on August 7th, 2007. Corryn and Lloyd had been fighting and thinking about getting a divorce. In the beginning of the mystery police thought Lloyd may have lashed out and killed Corryn in their own home while fighting. But forensics swept the whole house, and no evidence pointed towards this. Corryn’s body was found buried in bushland in King’s Park on august 17th 2007. The body was buried upside down, supposedly to help with decomposition.

Rayney trial: Junk science or forensic evidence?
How Corryn Rayney’s body was positioned when buried.

The first principle of justice I will be discussing is the Presumption of Innocence. Presumption of innocence entails that the suspect is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This principle was supported in the case as Mr Rayney was not arrested until the police had enough evidence to do so. Throughout the whole process Lloyd remained calm and never fought against the police and acted as innocent someone could act in his position. Barely any evidence pointed towards Lloyd, but he was the only person who they could have done it. Even though there were other people they were never counted as suspects. In the end Lloyd was not found guilty and remained innocent.

The next principle I will be addressing is, Reliable Evidence. This principle was both supported and compensated in this case as the police found very sufficient evidence but not all of it pointed to Mr Rayney. Another reason I believe this principle was compensated because when Mrs Rayney’s body was found the coroner,, who was appointed to the case did a preliminary autopsy report and followed his normal procedure. He found nothing out of the ordinary on the body or in its hair. The next day the same coroner did the official autopsy report and found 3 large liquid amber seed pods tangled in the victim’s hair. The coroner was sure those were not in her hair the previous day. Forensics ran some tests and concluded that the seed pods were not from King’s Park, but the Rayney’s back yard. This means the seed pods were either planted by police or the coroner missed an extremely crucial piece of evidence.

Another principle of justice I would like to present is the Right to a Fair Trial. I don’t believe this was supported in the case because Lloyd Rayney was named the prime and only suspect of this case on the 20th of September 2007, even though there were multiple other people who could have committed the homicide. The police only targeted Lloyd as he was believed to be fighting with Corryn at the time and may have lashed out. The other people who could have committed the murder should have been counted as suspects and been treated equally to Mr Rayney.

The last principle I will be discussing is Equality before the law. This principle was supported in the case as he was treated equally by the police to any other criminal in his position. The police respected him, and he respected them back, especially when he had to give them full access to his house to collect evidence. The police a great amount of evidence in their house but not all pointed to Mr Rayney as the killer. In the end he was put on trial in 2007 and finally found guilty in 2012.

In conclusion I believe Lloyd Rayney had a fair trial, there were 4 main principles of justice portrayed in this case. These were, Presumption of Innocence, Reliable Evidence, The Right to a Fair Trial and finally Equality before the law. Presumption of Innocence was supported in this case as Mr Rayney was not arrested until they had sufficient evidence. Reliable Evidence was supported and also compensated at the same time, as police found an abundance of evidence but not all of it pointed to Lloyd. The Right to a Fair Trial I believe that this principle was not supported because Lloyd Rayney was named the prime AND only suspect of the crime when there were other people who could have done it. The last principle I discussed was Equality before the Law, this principle was supported as Lloyd was treated equally to police and other criminals. Some of these principles were supported and some were not. Whether they were supported in this case or not they played a very important part to the mystery.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *