YESTERDAY (November 22) a Supreme Court jury found David Eastman not guilty of the murder of the ACT’s top policeman Deputy Commissioner Colin Winchester, and now, the ACT Bar Association is asking why the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions decided to prosecute Eastman a second time.  

“There seems to have been little justification in pursuing a second trial in all the circumstances,” says president of the ACT Bar Association Steven Whybrow. 
 
“A judicial inquiry had raised real questions about the fragile forensic evidence and the effluxion of time had further undermined the prosecution case and the accused’s capacity to challenge it.”

A jury found Eastman guilty in the first trial in 1995 and he spent 19 years in jail until his conviction was overturned in 2014.
 
“Mr Eastman is in his 70’s and had already served 19 years in custody,” Mr Whybrow says.

“The prosecution was going to cost millions of dollars and perhaps most significantly acting Justice Brain Martin, who undertook the judicial inquiry into the original conviction, specifically expressed the view that even though he thought Eastman was probably guilty, he still had a nagging doubt (probably the same doubt the jury entertained) and in any event a new trial would be neither feasible or fair.
 
“The slaying of Colin Winchester was of course an abominable and serious crime that justified the significant resources that went into the inquest, police investigation and the original trial. 

“The heinous nature of the crime could not alone justify the retrial of the main suspect particularly where a judge has said such a trial would not be fair and where he had a nagging doubt about guilt.”

In a prepared statement the Winchester family disagreed with yesterday’s verdict.

“We believe the verdict is wrong and we are extremely disappointed given the significant volume of compelling evidence,” the statement says.  

“We acknowledge the DPP and the AFP for their professionalism and determination, in particular Ric Ninness and his team.”