Teacher's Pet - the Chris Dawson case

[TurkeysGhost]

"While the sentence carries a no-parole period of 18 years, a new “no body, no parole” state law means Dawson, 74, won’t be eligible for early release as long as the body remains missing." CNN

Seems a fair enough rule. Hard to believe a murderer is remorseful and reformed if they won't even have the decency to tell the public where their victim's body was dumped. I don't think parole boards look favorably on convicts who insist on their innocence.

 

[lionking]

"Dawson's legal team has argued the witnesses' testimony has been contaminated because they had talked about the case with each other and had listened to The Teacher's Pet podcast about the case, arguing it was broadcast with an assumption that her husband was guilty." DailyMail.

Firstly to Jeremyp, there was no jury in the Dawson murder trial.

Secondly, the judge addressed The Teacher’s Pet podcast comprehensively in his judgement. I seriously doubt any Appeals judges would disagree with him.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

corroboration or contamination

Firstly to Jeremyp, there was no jury in the Dawson murder trial.

Secondly, the judge addressed The Teacher’s Pet podcast comprehensively in his judgement. I seriously doubt any Appeals judges would disagree with him.

It was the issue of possible witness contamination that caught my eye. I seem to recall reading that if there are several witnesses, one separates and interviews them individually. The situation of having multiple witnesses to a single event is probably different from the Dawson case. However, the problem of witness contamination is likely to be general in my non expert opinion.

A link to Brian Leslie's essay is here. From a presentation to Texas Law enforcement: "Separate the witnesses. Independent witness statements can be used as corroboration/ confirmation. Witnesses should not hear others’ statements because they may be influenced by that information." And "Fourteen of those studies found that witnesses were significantly more likely to report information they had not directly observed during an event when they were exposed to co-witnesses during or before giving their own account." College of Policing

 

[lionking]

It was the issue of possible witness contamination that caught my eye. I seem to recall reading that if there are several witnesses, one separates and interviews them individually. I am having difficulty finding the quote that I initially read. I will have to substitute in some other quotes along similar lines. For example, there is Brian Leslie's essay here.

From a presentation to Texas Law enforcement: "Separate the witnesses. Independent witness statements can be used as corroboration/ confirmation. Witnesses should not hear others’ statements because they may be influenced by that information."

"Fourteen of those studies found that witnesses were significantly more likely to report information they had not directly observed during an event when they were exposed to co-witnesses during or before giving their own account." College of Policing

Dawson’s conviction did not rely on witnesses. It’s very long but I listened to the whole judgement ad found it very compelling.

 

[jeremyp]

Firstly to Jeremyp, there was no jury in the Dawson murder trial.

I was making a general point. Another example was the pedestrian manslaughter thread in which people were arguing that the evidence didn't meet the reasonable doubt bar without having access to all of it - unlike the judge and jury (there was a jury in that case).

 

[lionking]

Chris Dawson has been sentenced to 3 years in jail for unlawful sexual activity with a former student, no doubt the one he was having sex with when he murdered his wife. That term will commence when his current 24 year murder term finishes. So now very little chance he will ever be released. A great outcome.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-15/nsw-chris-dawson-carnal-knowledge-sentence/102859712

 

[lionking]

Dawson’s appeal has been comprehensively rejected.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/...s-dawson-s-murder-appeal-20240612-p5jl3a.html

Justice Ian Harrison found Dawson, a former teacher and rugby league player, killed Lynette “for the selfish and cynical purpose of eliminating the inconvenient obstruction she presented” to a new life with JC, his former student and babysitter to the couple’s two young children. JC moved into the couple’s home within days of Lynette’s disappearance.

Harrison sentenced Dawson to a maximum of 24 years in prison with a non-parole period of 18 years

Rot in jail murderous scumbag. Any of the few fanbois who may be reading this, you were completely wrong. Suffer.