The
July 12 2001
New wave of innocence
Editorial
A new wave of
convicted criminals declaring their innocence can be expected in the wake of
David Dougherty yesterday being paid almost $870,000 in compensation.
He also got a public apology for three and a half years he spent in prison for
a crime he did not commit.
Not since Arthur Allan Thomas was freed by the Muldoon government and paid $1
million in compensation has there been a case quite like David Dougherty's.
Justice Minister Phil Goff, announcing the compensation and making the apology
on behalf of the Government and justice system, said Mr Dougherty was clearly
innocent.
He'd spent 1241 days behind bars after being convicted in 1993 for abducting
and raping an 11-year-old girl living next door. A 1997 retrial acquitted him
when it was found that DNA semen evidence on the girl's pyjamas could not have
come from Mr Dougherty.
Police have now accepted his innocence. There seems little doubt that Mr
Dougherty's criminal past may have coloured their earlier opinions of his guilt,
despite his record relating to property offences, not any sexual or violent
crimes.
Clearly, there is a message for all in the justice system that someone's past
history is not necessarily relevant in considering whether they are innocent or
guilty of new crimes.
Mr Dougherty's freedom and now compensation is in large part due to a
commendable campaign by the Sunday Star Times.
It saw flaws in the original case which convicted Mr Dougherty, based largely
on the complainant's mistaken belief that he was the offender.
There seems an increasing trend for someone to take up the cudgels on behalf of
people convicted of high profile crimes.
Joe Karam has become a tireless campaigner on behalf
of David Bain, convicted of murdering his
In
Obviously, not every person who declares their innocence is
in fact not guilty of the crimes for which they were convicted.
This newspaper has had no serious misgivings about Watson's conviction. Not
only was there a strong case constructed against him, his behaviour in sailing
at dawn on New Year's morning from one side of the Sounds to the other and then
painting a boat is simply inexplicable.
Mr Goff made the point yesterday that mistakes are made in the administration
of criminal justice but by and large it operates effectively and fairly.
When a faulty conviction is proven, it is appropriate for those who have been
wrongly imprisoned to be compensated.
David Dougherty's lawyer suggests his client is still trying to rebuild his
life after his time in prison.
The compensation included nearly $170,000 for lost income, legal and other
costs. The balance of $700,000 is for the loss of liberty, reputation and
interrupted or lost relationships, mental and emotional harm.
Another larger sum had been sought but Mr Goff suggested the lower figure was
determined because Mr Dougherty's previous convictions and jail time meant he
would have been less traumatised in jail than someone who'd never been there.
That's a rather odd argument. An innocent man is an innocent man, whether he's
had a chequered past or not.