00:00Her reaction is really that it feels, well, we all feel that it's profoundly unjust.
00:07I mean, she's a little bit more charitable than those around her.
00:11I think that we were even more shocked.
00:15It's really a profoundly unjust figure when you look at the other comparison cases and
00:23take into account what she has endured.
00:26She lost her four children.
00:28She was spent two decades in jail, vilified as Australia's worst female serial killer.
00:34And she's gone into a world that she doesn't know, that she can't get a job, that everything
00:40is so much more expensive than in 2003.
00:43But it's really not about that.
00:45It's not about that.
00:46It's about the government's responsibility for compensating people that they wrongfully
00:51convict.
00:53And it needs to be recognised the scale of what she has been through.
00:58And two million just doesn't cut it.
00:59And what are the similar cases you refer to?
01:03In particular, Lindy Chamberlain is the one that everyone compares with Kathleen Volbig's
01:08case.
01:09Lindy spent three years in prison for the wrongful accusation of killing Azaria, and she was awarded
01:16$1.7 million in 1994.
01:19So if we look at Kathleen's case, she lost four children.
01:23She was put away for two decades and has been offered or given almost the same amount of
01:30money.
01:31And that doesn't even factor into inflation, which the government know all about.
01:35And I would have thought that that would have been at the forefront of their mind.
01:38So if you look at that only, it's just not commensurate.
01:42And as someone who's worked on the cases you have for quite some time, how do you feel,
01:47as a legal professional as well, how do you feel about what's been offered?
01:51I think it's profoundly unjust.
01:55The government's only way of apologising for what they do is money.
02:00And coming in with two million is insulting.
02:03It is hugely insulting.
02:05The cases that I do, the wrongful conviction cases, Kathleen's in Australia is at the top
02:10of the list.
02:12Jo, if you had have seen the 100-page statement she submitted to the government detailing the
02:17experiences she went to, you would be horrified.
02:20And I imagine everyone listening and watching here today would be.
02:24And I'm just shocked that the Attorney-General, among all the other things that have happened
02:29to her, having read that, thinks that $2 million is fair.
02:33Yeah, after going through that compensation process, that application process, had you
02:39been optimistic that it would be more substantial?
02:45That's kind of a hard question.
02:48The government, irrespective of whether it's Labor or Liberal, have treated Kathleen with
02:52complete contempt the whole way through.
02:54So, I wasn't hopeful in that sense.
02:58But looking at the pure legal requirement, well, the legal case and the merit, I was very
03:05much hopeful that it would be substantially more.
03:08Because this is one of our worst wrongful conviction cases in Australia.
03:13And so, yeah, I was very much hopeful that they would come to the party with a figure that
03:17is far more fair and commensurate with what she has been through.
03:23You say she continues to be dealt with contempt.
03:26What do you think is behind that?
03:30Look, it's really hard to know.
03:32The Attorney doesn't speak to anyone, including me.
03:36So, it's really hard to know what is in their minds when they're making these decisions.
03:41But there is one thing, Joe, that I think that there's a lot of misconception in the public
03:46around how Kathleen was released and on what circumstances.
03:49So, the Bathurst inquiry conducted by the former Chief Justice of New South Wales found
03:55reasonable doubt.
03:56Now, that report was then the basis for the Court of Criminal Appeal quashing her convictions
04:02and entering in verdicts of acquittal.
04:04So, what that means now is that Kathleen has the presumption of innocence returned to her
04:09and she is no longer guilty of the crimes for which she was convicted.
04:14Now, as a lawyer, I'm not really able to say the term innocent for all reasons that will
04:18bore your viewers, but it's a technical thing.
04:22But to the public, they would understand she is innocent.
04:25Now, I think there are a lot of people who are trying to suggest that it's just reasonable
04:31doubt and therefore she's still substantially guilty.
04:35That's really misplaced.
04:37If you want to have faith in the criminal legal system, you need to have faith in all its decisions.
04:45So, a lot of people were convinced that she was guilty when she was convicted.
04:48Now, they're seeming to not wanting to be convinced that she is not guilty following the
04:55Court of Criminal Appeals.
04:55You can't have it both ways.
04:57If you have faith in the legal system, she is, in effect, to the lay people, an innocent
05:02woman.
05:03So, it is perhaps the Attorney-General.
05:07I would be interested to understand his view on that and where his position lies.
05:12And, Rani Rego, are you in a position to say today what you think would be a more appropriate
05:17figure to compensate her for what she went through?
05:20Rani Rego, That's the million-dollar question, right, Jo?
05:26As much as I'm her lawyer, I'm just another person and I really don't know the figure.
05:30All I can say is it should be substantially higher and we really should be leaving it to
05:35experts.
05:35So, we provided a 300-page expert report, actuarial and forensic accounting by one of the best
05:45experts in the country.
05:47And they did all these considerations around economic loss, about looking at Lindy Chamberlain's
05:54case.
05:55So, I would really like to know how the Attorney-General considered that and what he thought of that.
06:01But I think it's really up to experts who have far better mathematical skills than me
06:06to come to a more fair figure.
06:09So, it's pretty clear from what you've said that you plan to fight this in some way.
06:14What are your options from here?
06:17Oh, we certainly won't go down without a fight because we were told Kathleen would never get
06:22out of jail and we kept fighting and thankfully we succeeded.
06:25So, we hope that the government will change their mind.
06:27Unfortunately, Jo, in this country, except for the ACT, we don't have a scheme for compensation.
06:34So, it's up to the goodwill and charity of government, the very organisation or the very
06:39agency, the Attorney-General's Department, who usually takes a long time to recognise
06:44failures, up to the charity of them to give a payment.
06:48So, really, we don't have any legal recourse to challenge this, but I understand that Nationals
06:56MP Wes Fang has called for an inquiry into how the Attorney-General has decided this case
07:03and we very much support that call for that inquiry to understand the process of reasoning
07:09behind it.
07:10So, we are hoping that the Attorney-General will recognise that the public do not think
07:17$2 million is fair for the gravity of what the legal system did to Kathleen.
Comments