Not Another One...

[longqi]

Well if the Chamberlains have the chance to reach closure by presenting new evidence good luck to them
It destroyed their family
Removed a mother from her kids
In most peoples minds there was doubt

Reasonable Doubt is all that is required in a court of law to declare innocence or direct a jury to acquit
But in this case doubt was not used

The vast majority of the forensic evidence used to prosecute was found to tainted by poor testing and/or straight out negligence and publicity seeking

So if this gives Lindy closure and lets her sleep at night knowing she has done her best Good luck to her and a few thousand is a cheap price to pay

 

[GeckoJosh]

that was a long read!
does anyone know what phalanges are? are they like feet of an animal or something?

They are the bones of the fingers and toes

 

[Snakewoman]

dingos attack and kill people ...... for goodness sake YES they do but it does not mean a dingo took this baby, the fact there had not been previous evidence of these attacks prior to this incident means the tax payers are going to spend thousands just to hear someone say a dingo 'might' have taken this child

personally i have NEVER believed the story and nothing that has come to light since has changed my mind one little bit, i can remember where i was and what i was doing when the 'newsbreak' came on the tv and my first words were bull****

Please read the following exerpts from the analysis and findings of the third Coroner's inquest, coroner John Lowndes:

In reaching the conclusion that there was a reasonable doubt as to the Chamberlain's guilt; Commissioner Morling found it unnecessary to consider the possibility of human intervention (other than by the Chamberlains) in the time between Azaria's disappearance and the finding of her clothes. However, he said that it was not impossible to imagine circumstances in which such intervention could' have occurred. He said: "It was not inconceivable that an owner of a domestic dog intervened to cover up its involvement in the tragedy or that some tourist, acting irrationally, interfered with the clothes before they were later discovered by others. (at 340 of the Report). Although there was not the slightest evidence to support either of those hypotheses, Commissioner Marling considered that the possibility of human intervention (other then by the Chamberlains) was another factor, which must be taken into account in considering whether the evidence established the Chamberlain's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

However, it must not be forgotten that Commissioner Morling was not commissioned to inquire into and determine the cause and manner of death of Azaria Chamberlain for the purposes of the Coroners Act, in respect of which a different standard of proof, viz, the civil standard applies. Against that background it would be open to the present inquiry, applying a civil standard of proof, to record a coroners finding of death by violent means due to human intervention (without ascribing criminal responsibility to any person), despite the fact that the convictions against the Chamberlains were quashed. Such an outcome would not be illogical given the different objectives pursued by\ the criminal process and the coronial one, and the divergent standards of proof. However, for the reasons, which follow, even applying the civil standard of proof, the evidence does not reasonably support a coroner's finding of death by violent means due to human intervention.

I have reached those conclusions after having regard to the considerations referred to in Briginshaw and Briginshaw (supra). I do not consider that the evidence is sufficiently clear or cogent, or that material facts have been strictly proved to such an extent, as to lead me to be reasonably satisfied that Azaria died at the hands of her mother. In reaching that conclusion I have had regard to the whole of the evidence, that is to say, all the evidence pointing to the involvement of the Chamberlains, and all the evidence given on the matters, which bear upon the dingo hypothesis. In relation to the involvement of the Chamberlains in the death of Azaria Chamberlain, I have reached the same conclusion as Commissioner Morling: the only difference is that the Commissioner was applying the criminal standard of proof whereas I have applied the civil standard of proof on the balance of probabilities.

I would add that if one were to reject the "belief' approach to the civil standard of proof, and apply to the evidence in the present case the "objective probability" approach, which merely requires a probability greater than 50 percent of the event in question having occurred, the same result would obtain: I would still be unable to conclude that Azaria died at the hands of Alice Lynne Chamberlain. Applying once again the "belief' approach to the civil standard of proof to the evidence, I am unable to be reasonably satisfied that Azaria Chamberlain died accidentally as a result of being taken by a dingo from her tent at the camp site at Ayers Rock.Coroner's Inquest in the Lindy Chamberlain Case 1995

He was not able to conclude that a dingo killed the baby, and he was also not able to conclude that Lindy killed the baby. Since you believe so strongly that she did, could you supply the evidence for your belief that proves she did it that the coroner didn't have?

Just because you personally don't believe the story it doesn't mean it didn't happen, nobody has ever supplied evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that she killed her child. It seems that she was convicted on prejudice rather than evidence, the evidence in the trial wasn't exactly solid.

I'm in agreement with the coroner, you can't say either way what happened because there isn't enough evidence to prove it, if evidence came to light that proved she did it I would accept it.

Lets say for arguments sake that you were accused of something you didn't do, and people didn't believe your story about why you didn't do it. The negative press and opinions from people who don't hold the same standard of proof that the court does would convict you in the court of public opinion, and it could ruin your life completely, simply because people were willing to convict you despite not having any solid evidence to do. How would that make you feel? Is it fair?

 

[The Devil]

This subject seems to be almost as controversial as, who shot J.F.K. or dare I say, should jags be allowed.

I was one of the nay sayers. I grew up and worked in south western Qld, participated in the odd dingo hunt and thought no way would a dingo enter a tent and snatch a baby.

In more recent times following a number of dingo attacks including 1 fatality on children holidaying on Fraser Island I have changed my mind as to what may have happened 30 years ago.

One of the (many) Coroners stated that it was his belief that a person or persons unknown had found the remains of the baby and taken them off site.
There was also some mention about the buttons or studs on the jump suite being either still done up or undone.
I can't remember which way that was.

What really sank Lindy was the so called British forensic expert imported to testify. She testified that stains found up in the front passenger foot well were from human blood.

Not only was she positive that these were human stains but the also still retained some of the characteristics of human foetal blood and therefore these so called blood stains had to have come from Azaria.

Some please correct me if my memory is wrong. If I recall correctly subsequent testing some years later showed that the stains were not from human blood and I think they were from paint over-spray used to repair some accident damage....

The media as usual looked for and ran with the most bizarre and sensational aspect of the story and played a large part in the course this event took.
But hey they have to sell papers and advertising and so don't have need or wish to let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

[Snakewoman]

The Devil:

I found this site, which speaks in depth about the problems with the blood evidence in the car:

Northern Territory reports: Morling Commission Report on Lindy Chamberlain case - 22 May 1987

Here's some info about Dr. Robert N Moles who prepared the edited version of the report:

Curriculum Vitae - Dr Robert N Moles

 

[Dipcdame]

No matter what is said by however many experts and otherwise, there are only two people on this earth who know the real truth, and that is Lindy and her husband.
There will never be anything conclusive on this case, not now, people have held their own opinions for years. Let it be, I say, why drag it all up again. What happened, happened, mistakes were made at that time, but no amount of investigations will change anyones minds now.

 

[Jeannine]

sorry but my feelings on her guilt are my own opinions, something im entitled to have

not one ounce of evidence has ever supported the dingo story, no one else seen this dingo enter the tent or leave it except her, bit sus with SO many people around at the time

we will all believe what we want to believe and my belief is she should still be scrubbing floors in prison

even with all this new 'evidence' they can NOT say positively that a dingo took this baby, on that it 'might' have which would leave it as still 'open' on the documentation and death certificate

for goodness sake all the 'new' evidence anyway is 'dingos attack and kill' why yes they do but it does NOT mean a dingo took and killed this baby does it?

waste of tax payers money or else send the bill to the Chamberlains

 

[Jacquie]

I was 10 when this happened and it still affects me. We went camping at Myall Lakes 2 years ago. The kids went to sleep as soon as the sun went down so I zipped up their part of the tent and my husband and I read by lamplight in another part of the tent. At one stage a dingo came up to the fly screen and just stood there staring at us panting for about 5 minutes. The first thing I did was go check on the kids in case it took one! I know I was being irrational but it gave me the creeps.

 

[The Devil]

The Devil:

I found this site, which speaks in depth about the problems with the blood evidence in the car:

Northern Territory reports: Morling Commission Report on Lindy Chamberlain case - 22 May 1987

Here's some info about Dr. Robert N Moles who prepared the edited version of the report:

Curriculum Vitae - Dr Robert N Moles

Thanks for the links, too long and too involved for me to read and understand.
This subject will be like the shooting of J.F.K., there will always be doubt and different theories.

I'm quite satisfied with my thought that on the balance of probability a dingo took Azaria.

It will be a curiosity to see what the so called new evidence is after all these years.

 

[FAY]

Because it had not happened before, People think that it can NEVER happen.
And since an 11-12 year old boy was killed by a dingo on Fraser Island..

 

[Snakewoman]

sorry but my feelings on her guilt are my own opinions, something im entitled to have

not one ounce of evidence has ever supported the dingo story, no one else seen this dingo enter the tent or leave it except her, bit sus with SO many people around at the time

we will all believe what we want to believe and my belief is she should still be scrubbing floors in prison

even with all this new 'evidence' they can NOT say positively that a dingo took this baby, on that it 'might' have which would leave it as still 'open' on the documentation and death certificate

for goodness sake all the 'new' evidence anyway is 'dingos attack and kill' why yes they do but it does NOT mean a dingo took and killed this baby does it?

waste of tax payers money or else send the bill to the Chamberlains

You are entitled to an opinion, but from what you’ve said it doesn’t seem particularly fair, you said you never believed the story, you said that as soon as you heard the story you called bs on it. Why? The incident hadn’t been properly investigated yet. As for being suspicious about nobody else seeing the dingo come out of the tent with the baby, according to witness Sally Lowe, Lindy went to the tent and Sally was involved in conversation with other people and wasn’t paying attention to what Lindy was doing. From the map of the area it looks like the BBQ area was far away enough that in the dark it would be difficult to see, depending on which BBQ area they were at. See the map of the area:


Plan-of-Barbecue-Area by TahliaH, on Flickr

(Click the picture for a clearer view)

Testimony of Sally Lowe, examined by Thomas Pauling

Mrs. Chamberlain had the baby in her arms, and Aidan was close behind her. I recall them walking along the footpath area towards their tent. I don't recall anything much after that. I have forgotten most of it. And I was involved in conversation. The next I recall is them coming back, along the same path. About halfway along that path, I suppose, I recall seeing them again. And they walked back to the barbecue. Mrs. Chamberlain had a tin of something in her hand, and I saw a can-opener, or perhaps something else, in her other hand. Aidan was behind her. And the next I recall, he was beside me, between myself and the second barbecue, which Mr. Chamberlain had been using, and Lindy was just inside the railing, near the barbecue.'


Q: 'Are you able to tell us how long Mrs. Chamberlain was away from the barbecue area?'
A: 'Well, it's a fairly short period of time. But I've stated before, six to ten minutes would be roughly correct. Five to ten minutes away....
The Trial of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain: Selected Excerpts

At least two people testified that they saw or heard dingoes in the area:

Testimony of Judy West, examined by QC Thomas Pauling

Q: 'You say you heard a dingo outside your tent on the Sunday night.'
A: 'I did hear a dingo. I heard it growl.'


Q: 'And you later heard Mrs. Chamberlain call out.'
A: [I heard her cry] 'My God, My God, the dingo's got my baby.'
Q: 'How long was that after the dingo growled?'
A: 'I don't know, five to ten minutes, perhaps...'

Cross-examination by Andrew Kirkham:

Q: 'Could you tell the jury what time you arrived at Ayers Rock.'
A: 'The Friday, in the afternoon, about five o'clock.'


Q: 'On the Saturday, did you see a dingo in close proximity to your tent?'
A: 'It would be about sundown. Catherine and I had climbed the Rock. She'd had a shower and was sitting outside the tent.'
Q: 'Did your daughter call out to you in a loud voice.'
A. 'Yes.'


Q: 'Did you see a dingo in the immediate vicinity of where your daughter was seated?'
A: 'Yes.'


Q: 'What did you do?'
A: 'I chased it away. It wouldn't go. It just stood there, and I was quite frightened. It moved, in the end, but it was just like shooing off a dog.'
Q: 'How long did you have to exert yourself to shoo the dingo away?'
A: 'Not long, because I did not want it there.'
Q: 'In which direction did it proceed?'
A: 'It went around behind our tent. East.'
Q: 'Were you in the concluding processes of washing-up when you heard the growl you have told us about?'
A: 'No, I had given coffee to Catherine, and I had sat outside, myself, drinking coffee. Then I moved into the tent and was just sitting inside the door when I heard the dog growl.'


Q: 'I do not want to put words into your mouth, and if I am wrong please tell me immediately, but did the sound appear to come from the general area to the rear of the Chamberlains' tent?'


A: 'About half way.'
Q: 'Half way what?'


A: 'Between our tent and the Chamberlains'.'
Q: 'Would you be able to describe the growl?'


A: 'It was a low, deep growl. It was the sort of growl our dogs give when Bill is killing on the farm and he gives them - '
Q: 'You may have a little difficulty making the jury hear you. It is a growl like your dogs give on the farm, when Bill is killing, you say.'


A: 'Yes. Bill will give them a bit of offal while he is killing, and one dog will be sort of scared that another dog will get a bit more, so it growls to keep it off.'


Justice Muirhead: 'A type of threatening growl is that it?'


A: 'Yes.'


Q: 'You told the coroner at the first inquest, that Mrs. Chamberlain's cry seemed to come fairly quickly after the growl of the dog, although you could not estimate the precise time. Was that true?'
A: 'Yes.'
The Trial of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain: Selected Excerpts

Testimony of Murray Haby, examined by Thomas Pauling


Q: 'Were you sitting with your family in the Combivan, with the door open, at about eight o'clock, after you had finished your dinner?'
A: 'We were still in the middle of the meal. While we were having the meal, a dingo came up to the van. We had the sliding door open. It came up, and I took a couple of photographs of it. It was dark, so I used a flash.'
This is what he had to say about looking for the dingo and baby:
A: 'I went back to my vehicle and got a torch, and then proceeded up the sand-dune. There were two other torch-lights flashing around on the dunes. I looked around on the lower part, and we called to each other a couple of times - had we found anything? - And the answers were no. Then I thought, Well, if there was a dog carrying something, it would have to cross the ridge of the sand dune, so I'll go up the dune. And I went to the top of the sand-dune and walked along it until I came across some tracks.'
'There were a lot of tracks down lower,' he said, 'but this track stood out because it was a little bigger than the others, and quite easy to follow, and came along to an area where obviously it had put something down, this dog or this dingo, and had left an imprint in the sand which, to me, looked like a knitted jumper, or a woven fabric. And then, it obviously picked it up, because it dragged a bit of sand away from the front, and kept moving. And I followed it around past the Anzac memorial, to where a car-park comes off that road to the south of the sand-dune, and lost it in the car-park.'
The Trial of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain: Selected Excerpts

Here is what was said about markings in the sand:

Testimony of Ranger Derek Roff, cross-examined by John Phillips


Q: 'You likened the impression you saw in the sand, to a crepe bandage?'

A: 'Yes, Sir.'


Q: 'Is a knitted garment equally valid, Mr. Roff?'
A: 'I think it could very well be. Yes.'


Q: 'Whatever the object was, it had some weight to it?'
A: 'Yes, Sir.'


Q: 'The dog or dingo pad-marks associated with this drag-mark; did they run on either side of it?'
A: 'Yes, I ascertained that the following day, really, more than that night. '
Q: 'Mr. Roff, the clear inference you drew was that the object causing the drag-mark was being carried by the animal in its mouth?'
A: 'That was the clear inference, yes. But of course, you know, it could have been an object carried by anything.'
Q: 'Did you find more than one area where the object had apparently been put down?' The answer was a surprise.
A: 'Yes, Sir, three areas....'


Q.'Because you knew that dingoes bury their prey, you took pains, did you not, to indicate to the searchers that they should look for signs of anything having been buried?'
A: 'Right, Sir.'


Q: 'Nothing of the sort was found in the searches you were involved in?
A: 'No. It was very difficult because the country, you know, was obviously torn up from tourist activities, before and during.'


Q: 'But the fact is?'


A.'We found nothing.

The Trial of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain: Selected Excerpts

You also said there had not been previous evidence of these attacks prior to this incident. According to Trevor Morling there were dingo attacks prior to 1980:

Before August 1980 dingoes in the Ayers Rock area frequented the camping area. At that time there were many dingoes in the area, some 18-25 of which were known to visit the camping area. A number of attacks were made by dingoes on children in the months preceding Azaria's disappearance. In none of these did any child suffer serious injury.

On the night of 17 August dog tracks were observed on the southern side of and very close to the Chamberlains' tent. The same night Mr. Roft and Mr. Minyintiri, both experienced trackers and familiar with dingo behavior, saw tracks of a dog carrying a load, which they believed to be Azaria. It was within the bounds of reasonable possibility that a dingo might have attacked a baby and carried it away for consumption as food. A dingo would have been capable of carrying Azaria's body to the place where the clothing was found. If a dingo had taken Azaria it is likely that, on occasions, it would have put the load down and dragged it. Hairs, which were either dog or dingo hairs, were found in the tent and on Azaria's jumpsuit. The Chamberlains had not owned a dog for some years prior to August 1980.

Morling Report in the Lindy Chamberlain Case

I'm not saying this proves a dingo did it, but it isn't outside the realm of possibility.There was conflicting opinions from experts, and the case is considered unsolved.

 

[Darlyn]

I have met two people that served on the jury and both had
the belief she was guilty before the case even began.
I also believe the police investigated the case believing she did it.
I think if the same thing were to happen today there would be a much different
conclusion.

I also recall the ridiculous rumours and innuendo regarding their religion
and the smear campaign waged in the media.

High time they were given a bit of closure.

 

[Aussieninja]

Hi guys, long time lurker, but I had to sign up on this one. I actually dated the daughter of a QPS officer who had helped with the investigation on this side of the border. Due to the fact they lived in Mt ISA, QPS was also involved in the investigation. Now he claimed he had interviewed her, and she showed no sign of grieving at all. He found this very uncommon. He also said she was very defensive on questioning and her general demeanor was not helpful, if anything it was hostile towards the questioning. He also said her husband downright refused co-operation this side of the border. Now onto small town rumors. Allegedly Lindy Chamberlain was in the maternity ward after having given birth to Azaria, and was told some sort of bad news. She was wheeled away in hysterics screaming " why me, why my baby?". The township offered conjecture that the child suffered from brain damage due to the birth.

What new mother is not absolutely distraught at the loss of her newborn daughter? She reacted with no emotion. That itself was odd, show me any mother in that situation that wouldn't be a crying, screaming hysterical mess..

I personally don't believe a dingo was involved. Her human reactions WERE out of the scope of that of a reasonable person. Plus she really seemed to cash in on it. If that was me, I'd want to disappear forever, not stay in the media spotlight(which miss chamberlain doesn't shy away from). Actions speak much louder than words. While her words said one thing.. Her actions(and that of her husbands) were not what is considered "reasonable" to most people. Especially under the circumstances. She just lost her first born female child and she didn't go into hysterics?

A dingo cannot be convicted beyond reasonable doubt, but neither can lindy. Her and her husbands actions certainly did not help them at all. Especially with the media. However, judging from human reactions, both Lindy and her husband knew there was more involved, however it couldn't be proven.

Hi guys, long time lurker, but I had to sign up on this one. I actually dated the daughter of a QPS officer who had helped with the investigation on this side of the border. Due to the fact they lived in Mt ISA, QPS was also involved in the investigation. Now he claimed he had interviewed her, and she showed no sign of grieving at all. He found this very uncommon. He also said she was very defensive on questioning and her general demeanor was not helpful, if anything it was hostile towards the questioning. He also said her husband downright refused co-operation this side of the border. Now onto small town rumors. Allegedly Lindy Chamberlain was in the maternity ward after having given birth to Azaria, and was told some sort of bad news. She was wheeled away in hysterics screaming " why me, why my baby?". The township offered conjecture that the child suffered from brain damage due to the birth.

What new mother is not absolutely distraught at the loss of her newborn daughter? She reacted with no emotion. That itself was odd, show me any mother in that situation that wouldn't be a crying, screaming hysterical mess..

I personally don't believe a dingo was involved. Her human reactions WERE out of the scope of that of a reasonable person. Plus she really seemed to cash in on it. If that was me, I'd want to disappear forever, not stay in the media spotlight(which miss chamberlain doesn't shy away from). Actions speak much louder than words. While her words said one thing.. Her actions(and that of her husbands) were not what is considered "reasonable" to most people. Especially under the circumstances. She just lost her first born female child and she didn't go into hysterics?

A dingo cannot be convicted beyond reasonable doubt, but neither can lindy. Her and her husbands actions certainly did not help them at all. Especially with the media. However, judging from human reactions, both Lindy and her husband knew there was more involved, however it couldn't be proven.

 

[Darlyn]

Um? Why would a cop from Isa interview someone in Alice Springs or Darwin?
Bit out of his territory I would think.

 

[Aussieninja]

Please re-read my post. I stated that QPS were involved as the Chamberlains were still living in Mt ISA. Just like qld cops are powerless elsewhere, same for their NT brethren. Mt ISA is this side of the qld/NT border, but the incident happened at ayers rock, which the closest police to respond would be Alice Springs..

Just another point, who takes a three month old baby camping in an area with noted sub zero temperatures all night. Does no one else find this odd? June 11 the birth was recorded in Mt ISA, yet august 17 was when she went missing. Who takes a newborn 2 month and 6 day old out to the desert(with noted cold temps). Does this strike anyone else as not quite normal behavior?

I also believe my contact was involved on the police raid of their residence in Mt ISA.

 

[Darlyn]

Yes, you are correct I missed that whilst reading the rest of your post I apologise.

QUOTE : "What new mother is not absolutely distraught at the loss of her newborn daughter? She reacted with no emotion. That itself was odd, show me any mother in that situation that wouldn't be a crying, screaming hysterical mess..End Quote

I have worked in a maternity ward where women lose their babies. Not everyone reacts the same way.
Life is not the same as US sitcoms, it's much more complex.

You have joined this forum purely to write nasty gossip, interesting motivations but each to their own.

 

[Renenet]

Whatever the truth, the original trial was a farce. Being a farce, it did not do justice to Lindy or her dead child.

We cannot know what happened. But that is true of many crimes. Our criminal standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt". It's higher than the civil standard of proof, which is "on the balance of probabilities". I have no doubt that sometimes that allows the guilty to go free. But even if you believe she did it, in the eyes of the law Lindy Chamberlain is innocent. Her conviction was quashed and she received compensation. As is the case with all who are declared innocent by a court of law, she has every right to get on with her life. That is our system. If, as part of that life, she decides to bring new evidence before a court, all power to her. With her name still vilified by many - witness some of the responses on this thread - is it any wonder she wants a conclusive finding?

Personally, I have no doubt that a dingo, especially one that is emboldened by interaction with humans, would be capable of picking up a baby and carrying it away. Tahlia, do you know if anyone bothered to ask the local Aborigines what they thought of the possibility? Not that, sadly, their opinion would have carried much weight in court compared to the imported British "expert".

Aside from the farcical trial, which helped cement doubt about Lindy's account, I think people have such strong opinions about this case because of the possibility that a mother killed her child, and a helpless baby at that. Society has strong ideas about a mother's role. It's hard for some to imagine a mother abandoning her children; for a mother to murder her baby is beyond the pale.

 

[Bel03]

Well said Darlyn, i mentioned something similar earlier.......NO ONE can say what is the NORMAL reaction when losing a child........not even a mother who has! Each & every human has a different way of handling and coping with pain, & i know very well, from my own experiences, that sometimes tears will just not fall, while other days i could cry you a river! I am so sick of this 'oh she didnt even cry' argument......you seen her at what times? When she was alone? In her house? In her cell? Maybe the public didnt witness alot of tears, but no one can tell me that women didnt cry for her baby at some point, im sure she still cries today! Oh, & as for 'who would take a 2mnth old camping'.....wherever it may be.....i did, my daughter's first camping trip, she was 6wks old, & it poured rain the entire time! But guess what, my daughter is now going on 10.......she is fine! My son's first camping trip was when he was 9wks old, temps were cold.......thats what blankets & warm clothing are for! Does that mean i am not a 'normal' mother? What kind of an argument is that, babies are not made of fine china, they are not as breakable as people imagine, & to say she looked suss right from the beginning for taking a newborn camping is ridiculous!

As for the above comment.......yes, it is really a hard thing to think a mother could take her own babies life.......but unfortunatley, it does happen. I just dont believe that is what happened in this case!

 

[Snakewoman]

Tahlia, do you know if anyone bothered to ask the local Aborigines what they thought of the possibility? Not that, sadly, their opinion would have carried much weight in court compared to the imported British "expert".

Here's what I've found:

I didn’t underline anything that was written here, I quoted it exactly the way it was from the website:

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Chapter Fourteen – other significant evidence[/FONT]
Tracking evidence: Constable Morris said he saw some tracks near the tent going off towards the dunes and which some distance away had the appearance of an animal dragging something and some further drag marks further on. Mr Roff had enlisted the aid of an aboriginal man Nui Minyintiri who followed the drag marks with Roff. At one place it looked as though the item had been set down, and left an impression of a crepe bandage. He told the Commission that the tracks he saw were of a dingo carrying Azaria. The failure to find tracks near the entrance of the tent is not surprising given the number of people who had been in that vicinity. Mr Minyintiri was not called at the trial but it was his view that the dingo had walked carrying a load with it. He said he thought it was carrying the baby for sure. Mr Harris said that a dingo carrying something would keep its head erect and not leave drag marks. Before the Commission other experts disagreed with him as they thought the dingo might put such prey down to rest or change its grip. I prefer the opinion of the other experts especially as it is consistent with the evidence of the aborigines.
Sgt Lincoln found tracks near the tent and some droplets in the sand which tested negative for blood on the haemastix strips which they had with them. The camera they had with them failed to work. A number of aborigines gave evidence to the Commission. Mrs Winmarti said she found an impression of the baby’s body in the sand hills east of the tent and after following the tracks for some time lost them. Their evidence was given in Pitjantjatjara and translated into English. It may have been that the people who actually did the tracking were not questioned by police until 1983. Some of this evidence was unsatisfactory and clearly mistakes could have been made. However there is some degree of corroboration which is entitled to consideration. Some trackers said that the tracks near where the clothes were found were made by the same dingo whose tracks were found near the tent. Counsel for the Crown said I should place no weight on the tracking evidence. I found Roff an impressive witness, not prone to exaggeration, his veracity was not attacked and is beyond question. The first statement from Mrs Winmarti was not taken until July 1983 and clearly the police may not have known about her view as to the identity of the dingo tracks prior to that. It is suggested that the aborigines had some incentive to implicate a dingo to take the attention away from their own dogs. Some of their camp dogs were under threat and two of them had been shot. Yet Minyintiri’s comments to Roff were made before the incident with the camp dogs. Minyintiri was an impressive witness and Mrs Winmarti had the reputation of being an excellent tracker. It is important to remember that the Chamberlains have never had the onus of showing that a dingo took Azaria or that the tracks were made by a dingo. The evidence before the Commission gives greater credence to dingo involvement than it did at the trial.
[FONT=&quot]Northern Territory reports: Morling Commission Report on Lindy Chamberlain case Part Two - 22 May 1987[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
There were Aborigines at the Rock, and one Nui Minyintiri found tracks of a dingo carrying a heavy load which it rested in the sand, leaving tracks leading from near the tent. Next day Nipper Winarti and his wife Barbara Tjikadu traced the same tracks from the tent out into the sand hills. The tracks were verified by Derek Roff, the head ranger, who himself had learned tracking in Kenya and from the Aborigines. Another tourist also found the place where the dingo rested an object which left a cloth imprint in the sand. It is a pity that Nipper Winmarti had weak eyes and wore glasses, and also loved the cup that cheers. Not unnaturally the defence did not call him as a witness. They were not informed about Nui and Barbara whose evidence at the Royal Commission was impressive.
In the soft sand which was ideal for tracking, the trackers could hardly be mistaken and they said that a dingo had taken the baby. Of course, Lindy would be innocent on that scenario. She herself would not countenance the idea that a camp dog had taken the baby. She maintained that it was a fine look dingo, like the one she saw at Maggie Springs.
[FONT=&quot]GAILMC 10 - PAPERS - Porter[/FONT]

Aboriginal Trackers:
Page 5
http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewconten...arch="azaria chamberlain aboriginal trackers"
Very bottom of page 8, and page 9:
http://www.lindychamberlain.com/files/'Why_Australia,_Why'-Innocence_Regained.pdf
NMA Collections Search - Copy of statement of evidence from Nipper Winmarti at the Morling Royal Commission into Chamberlain Convictions

 

[RHCP1]

This has been an emotive subject for the past 30 years and will continue that way for the next 30.