The 2003 conviction of Kathleen Folbigg for the smothering deaths of her four children over a 10-year period branded her Australia’s “worst female serial killer”, despite there never being any evidence to support the supposed cause of death. Almost two decades on, new clinical research and expert evidence shine a light on what really happened and expose crucial flaws in the criminal justice system.
Earlier this year, a legal team behind Ms Folbigg circulated a petition containing new research into an unreported cardiac mutation found in two of her children, Sarah and Laura, that explains how they likely died from natural causes. In a development shared with Lawyers Weekly, that mutation has been added to the list of mutations in ClinVar, a worldwide authoritative database used by clinicians and geneticists.
Alongside barrister Dr Robert Cavanagh, Ms Rego has prepared a submission for pardon on behalf of Ms Folbigg and has handed it over to NSW Attorney-General Mark Speakman. In this exclusive interview, Lawyers Weekly breaks down the submission, including more on the research that designates a natural cause of death to two children. We also look at where the justice system got it wrong the first time and the ramifications should it falter again in deciding Ms Folbigg’s future.
Since releasing the petition earlier this year, Ms Rego and Dr Cavanagh have pulled together expert reports – discussed below – to support the submission to Mr Speakman. As part of that, they explored where and how it went wrong at both the initial trial and the 2019 inquiry. For example, the argument that there were no known cases of three or more infant deaths became a focal point for the prosecution.
Another major flaw in the prosecutions’ argument was that it heavily relied on Meadow’s Law, the now-discredited theory that “one infant death is a tragedy, two is suspicious and three is murder until proven otherwise”. Although discredited prior to Ms Folbigg’s trial, Ms Rego said it “pervaded the tone and approach of the case”.
Source: EXCLUSIVE: Major developments in Kathleen Folbigg’s case may prove her innocence – Lawyers Weekly
Wonderful news if Kathleen is guilty or not guilty… she has suffered too much if innocent and enough if guilty!
The tragic case of Kathleen Folbigg should never have occurred, because of the following reasons:
1. Putting babies to sleep on their abdomen is life-threatening, because babies cannot turn their heads around in infancy and simply suffocate in the mattress, cushion and/or blanket
2. Suffocation of small infants in this manner was already known in the late 1940s in Europe
3. Swaddling of babies (ie. putting arms and legs along its body inside a tightly wrapped blanket) was also not done for the same reasons, also to help the limbs to move and develop
4. Babies who already had breathing problems would certainly suffocate as a result of the above the question is thus whether there was any study about this in her court case?
I just hope that Folbigg will get the research she would have needed to prove her innocence!