|
|
|
|
|
OPEN PUBLIC STATEMENT THE TRIAL OF WILLIAM KAMM IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DOWNING
CENTRE, On the 3rd June at the District Court, William Kamm's Barrister, Mr. Greg Stanton, went to Court to request a "Stay" of the Trial from three to six months. This was due to Media attack upon the 'Pebble' from the "Current Affairs" Programme, which, due to its implications, would have influenced the Jury. The Judge at that time, Judge Shadbolt, rejected the appeal. On 10th June the three Judges of the Appeals Court rejected the same Appeal, stated the Appeal had merit, but still ordered the Trial to start on the 14th June. On the night before, 13th June, another trial begins. Current Affairs is aired once again, which indirectly relates to the previous programme, thus once again influencing a Jury. At the beginning of the Trial on the 14th June, Mr. Stanton representing Mr. Kamm, again requested a "stay" due to the continued Media attacks. This was denied by Judge John Williams, and the Trial commenced. The "alleged" victim is Gabrielle O'Shaughnessy. Details of the Charges were not put in the Press. Instead they were portrayed as "Aggravated Indecent Assault" and "Aggravated Sexual Assault". Most people believe that aggravated assault is forcible sex, when in fact the Police use this way of expression under the Law to bring a higher charge, which in turn brings a higher Court, or District Court, so that the sentence will be longer should the person be convicted. Here are the actual Charges: Charge 1 -- 5th July 1993 -- September 1993 William kissed Gabrielle on the lips in his office -- using his tongue. Pushed his body against her. Charge 2 -- 5th July 1993 -- 30th August 1993 William Kissed Gabrielle in the office. Touched her breast and her shoulders over her clothes. Charge 3 -- 1st August 1993 -- 30th September, 1993 William picked up Gabrielle from TAFE, drove her to Wollongong. Touched her leg near groin on the outside of her clothes, while driving. Kissed her when he stopped to get fuel; fondled her breasts. Charge 4 -- 1st September 1993 -- 30th September 1993 William picked Gabrielle up at Bomaderry TAFE at 4pm. Parked car near Nowra car park. William kissed Gabrielle, rubbed her leg, and then digitally penetrated her vagina -- 15 minutes. On the stand Gabrielle said that William picked her up from TAFE between 3.30pm -- 4pm, and they picked up Alexandra between 4pm and 5pm at Nowra TAFE, and the sexual "alleged" attack occurred between 4pm and 5pm Charge 5 -- 1st September 1993 William visited Gabrielle's home -- mum and dad were present. William went into Gabrielle's bedroom and kissed her and fondled her body outside her clothes. The Charges and evidence revealed in Court: It was claimed the events occurred in 1993. The Charges were laid in August 2002 -- about nine years later. Gabrielle went to the "Current Affairs" Programme before she went to the Police. A Contract was signed with Channel 7, and executed by a Broker by the name of Shane Coombridge, who received twice the amount of money that Gabrielle received. Gabrielle said that she lost her Contract, and so did Channel 7. Facts not printed in the Press -- the evidence: Judge Williams's summing up of the Trial was very good, but the Press did not print it. He said that Mr. Kamm was much disadvantaged due to the length of the delay of the events and the Charges laid. He further expressed that the letters written by Mr. Kamm to Gabrielle of themselves are not evidence -- only Gabrielle's word against Mr. Kamm's word, however, he said the letters can corroborate the claims of Gabrielle due to time and events. Charge 1: - No evidence -- Gabrielle's word against Williams'. Gabrielle stated on the stand that she knew nothing about sex. It was put to her by Mr. Stanton that on her 15th birthday she and Alexandra (witness for Mr. Kamm) went to see the movie, "Indecent Proposal". The Prosecutor checked Paramount Pictures who confirmed that the movie was shown around April-May 1993. Gabrielle said she did not remember. Gabrielle further stated she knew nothing about sex, but Mr. Stanton read three letters to her -- two of the letters she had written to Mr. Kamm where she asked Mr. Kamm if she could sleep with him; the other where she asked if she could have his baby; the third letter was written to Christine Donoghue where she stated that her mum wanted her to lose her virginity to William. Charge 2, 3, and 5 -- No evidence: The Prosecutor asked for an Indictment date to be changed as the timing of the offence did not fit in with the three above Charges. Judge Williams accepted the change. Charge 4 -- No evidence, only that Gabrielle went to TAFE: Gabrielle stated that William picked her up, then Alexandra. Alexandra -- witness for the Defence -- gave evidence on oath that she went to an evening class at TAFE. The following documents of proof were made available:
Also, a letter from William to Gabrielle telling her he would pick her up at TAFE as he had to drop the car off for service. In Law, this Charge refers to 66C(4). However, Mr. Stanton and the Prosecutor advised the Judge that this Law did not exist in 1993, therefore a Charge of this nature had no validity. It became a defect in Law where Mr. Kamm should have been acquitted of this Charge. On 1st July 2004, Judge Williams amended the Indictment to 66C(2). Mr. Stanton advised Section 20 of the Criminal Procedure Act does not allow an amendment of a defective Charge. Charge 3 -- Gabrielle claimed William drove her to Wollongong: He was to visit his children by his previous wife. The children were in a Day Care Centre -- in the afternoon. Mr. Stanton advised Gabrielle that William never saw the children in the afternoon, but early evening; that the children were never in a Day Care Centre - and William always saw his children at K.F.C. or McDonalds etc. The Prosecutor produced a document signed by William's previous wife stating that he saw his children early in the evenings between 5pm and 6pm at KFC or McDonalds. In the assessment by the Sex Assault Counsellor, Mrs. Moon, it was revealed that the assault happened on one occasion -- including kissing and touching. That William wrote letters to Gabrielle forcing her into sexual intercourse. However, the twenty or so letters read out in Court from William to Gabrielle revealed nothing that coincided with what was written by Mrs. Moon. Gabrielle told Mrs. Moon she was fourteen (14) -- the evidence given in Court was that she was fifteen (15). During the course of the four-week Trial Mr. Stanton reported to the Judge that a Juror was not concentrating, and making obscene gestures -- even drawing and showing the gallery what he was doing. This happened four times. Even members of the Press noticed this behaviour and 16 Affidavits were handed to the Judge from the gallery. The Judge marked them and placed them aside. At the end of the Trial a final witness was brought in by Mr. Kamm -- Jacquie Topia. She gave evidence of conspiracy relating to the Contract of Channel 7 concerning the programme "Today Tonight", as she was invited to be part of it -- but refused. Her evidence revealed that there was a Contract of $60,000 per person with a bonus of $60,000 on conviction. The Judge dismissed this evidence. It is to be noted a Non-Publication Order was given at the time concerning much of what is written here, by Judge Williams -- though the Press were present. The Jury were not present when most of these matters were discussed, thereby not being aware of what transpired. Finally His Honour, Judge Williams, delivered his summary of the proceedings, which was a wonderful expression of how the Jury were to proceed in judgement. In some fifteen (15) or so cases, the Judge advised the Jury that they were to remember that if their verdict is not beyond reasonable doubt, and the dates and places did not line up with the victim's claim, then they must acquit Mr. Kamm. The Jury went out on Tuesday at 3pm, and on Wednesday the Jury came back and stated that the facts do not line up. The Judge said you must acquit. On Thursday morning the Judge said if the Jury cannot come to a conclusion by 3pm, the Jury would be dismissed. The Jury requested more time, and the Judge gave them until Friday morning. The Jury asked for the transcript of the Judge's summary. The Judge advised that it could not be given as it would take two weeks. It is interesting to note the previous days transcript of the trial proceedings always became available the next day for the Jury. At 2pm Friday the verdict was reached. One of the Jurors wept, as the verdict was read -- Guilty!! The matter will now go to an Appeal. William Kamm August 2, 2005 [Reviewed and accepted by my Legal Advisors] |
|
Send mail to
mwoa@shoal.net.au with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
