In this project, we learnt about the principles of justice and how they work in real life cases. The principles of justice are used in the Australian legal system to make law fair for everybody. For example, if somebody was a different race or gender they must be treated the same as everyone else in the court room. There are seven principles of justice, everyone is equal before the law, everyone has the right to a fair hearing, the judiciary is independent and impartial, the right to an appeal, the right to silence, the presumption of innocence and high quality evidence.
I studied the case of Andrew Mallard, an innocent 33 year old man that was arrested and sentenced a life-time of jail for a serious crime and that he never committed. On the 23rd of May, 1994, Pamela Lawrence was murdered in her own jewellery shop called flaw and Metallica – gold and jewellery. Finally, after 12 years of jail, Andrew mallard was found innocent after he filed for one of many appeals. This case led on until 2006 when Simon Rochford was found guilty to the murder of Pamela Lawrence. The principles of justice that relate to this case are, the right to an appeal, high quality of evidence and everyone has the right to a fair hearing.
The right to an appeal is a request for a higher court to look at a case, to see if the decision was unfair. To file for an appeal you have to have reasonable grounds, for example, if you have evidence that the party may have been bias or unfair, or if your party didn’t get an equal opportunity to present their case. This occurred in Andrew’s case, when he was wrongfully pressured into giving a ‘confession’, which wasn’t even enough evidence to be jailed. Andrew was a suspect in Pamela’s murder and had to go through many interviews. Andrew was interviewed by the police for nine continuous hours, and he was unsure what had happened on the day. On top of these nine hours, he struggled with severe mental health issues such as bi-polar disorder. A recording shows him tired, and stressed sitting in a waiting room, he made a theory about how Pamela may have died, The police then took this as a confession and sentenced him a life-time of jail. He soon after filed for an appeal and almost straight away, it was dismissed. Andrew felt as if he was not heard and he had no way out of this crime he had not even committed. After a few years of fighting, his appeal was finally accepted, however this didn’t mean he had full freedom yet. Andrew went to court and fought for his case until the police found out that Simon Rochford was the murderer of Pamela Lawrence and Andrew mallard was innocent. Finally, in May 2009, after 15 years of punishment, he was compromised with $3.25 million settlement. Shortly after he was released from 12 years of jail, in 2019, Andrew got hit by a car in LA and sadly passed away.
Reliability of evidence is crucial when dealing with law. This can include evidence that is proved to be correct such as DNA, Fingerprints, security footage and so on. Andrew mallards case was violated in this principle of justice. The police accused him of murder with little to no real evidence. The evidence that the cops used was a theory he had made the day he was interviewed. Andrew was in the neighbourhood when Pamela was murdered and with his past record of drugs and the fact that he was homeless, the cops instantly made him a prime suspect. These examples demonstrate that when Mallard was jailed for 12 years, the cops still had no reliable and strong evidence to prove the murder, meaning, he was wrongfully jailed and should not have been in prison for that long.
In conclusion, Andrew Mallard was an innocent man who was violated through principles of justice such as the right to an appeal and the reliability of evidence.