Josephus,

I think it is purely historical now but it does seem strange that SDAs were considered to be into baby sacrifice when their close religious relatives the Jehovah's Witnesses were merely seen as an annoyance. Maybe the JWs escaped that perception because their door knocking was so annoying to people that they focussed completely on it.

Hi (again) MJPB...

Thank you for your latest thread. You know, I reckon you're right.

Those famous 'Scales of Justice' have overwhelmingly come down in favour of the Chamberlains, there's no doubt about it.

I'm must confess too, I only had a single (though protracted) conversation with this senior detective, and it was in 1983, a couple of years after the initial investigation.

And, human nature being what it is, none of us like to admit we may be erroneous in our assumptions, least of all coppers who may be just a little too close (emotionally) to an investigation.

Whether or not this NT bloke was, I dunno, he did speak with some conviction.

You cannot, you must not, allow your own personal emotions/feelings/prejudices/bigotry or anything else, to influence your thinking, in a job. You do, you'll pay a hefty price.

I've also heard many people assert, police are demonstratively immune and impervious to the feelings of others, particularly those people who may well be considered, the author of a serious crime.

I don't really know about that, though I've got to say...we all bleed, when we're cut...!

o sung wu,

Thanks for the latest comments. Obviously I'm not going to argue with you. I can imagine the dangers of having too much emotion in that role.

"Those famous 'Scales of Justice' have overwhelmingly come down in favour of the Chamberlains, there's no doubt about it."

True. From what I've seen of the evidence indicating a dingo did it and the lack of opportunity for Lindy to do it and eyewitnesses who contradicted key parts of the prosecution case I'm not surprised. I believe the scales of justice went something like this:

1. Coronial inquest finding dingo did it.
2. Coronial inquest with flawed forensic evidence found grounds for trial.
3. Trial with flawed forensic evidence.
4. More evidence found years later that was consistent with defence version.
5. Governmental report
6. Conviction quashed based on new evidence and awareness that flawed forensic evidence used at trial.
7. Coronial inquest that returned an open finding and considered that making a finding on the dingo would reverse the onus of proof.
8. Coronial inquest that found a dingo did it.

"I've also heard many people assert, police are demonstratively immune and impervious to the feelings of others, particularly those people who may well be considered, the author of a serious crime.

I don't really know about that, though I've got to say...we all bleed, when we're cut...!"

It is a job where you presumably have to subdue natural responses to things. The attempt to present professional neutrality probably gets misconstrued.

Cheers

Hi there MJPB...

In conclusion, I can only imagine many of those undertaking an LLB or perhaps a Masters will study in detail the events touching on the world famous 'Dingo Case'.

There's sufficient material there to write a doctoral thesis amounting to a thousand no, ten thousand pages of quality arguement, without the need to in anyway regress.

In hindsight, basket weaving is a much more attractive pursuit, one may consider in retirement ! Though I'll miss the sometimes feral like, 'cut 'n thrust' of a good criminal trail, it sure takes a lot of beating I must say.

Many thanks MJPB too, for your thoughtful arguements and opinions in this, Australia's most controversial criminal case ever, in the history of jurisprudence.