The evidence against David Eastman for the murder of the ACT's police chief was ''overwhelming'', even without the now shaky forensic work, lawyers for the Director of Public Prosecutions have argued.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The inquiry is now drawing to a close and each party is delivering a final submission to Acting Justice Brian Martin before his final report.
The head of the Eastman inquiry was told on Tuesday he would need to say whether he thought the former Treasury official was guilty of the murder of Colin Stanley Winchester in 1989.
Counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions Peggy Dwyer told the inquiry that the circumstantial evidence against Eastman was overwhelming, even with the problems now being identified with the work of the case's most crucial forensic expert, Robert Collins Barnes.
Dr Dwyer said there was ''cogent evidence'' against Eastman, including on a motive for the killing.
She suggested that even if procedural defects with the trial gave rise to a miscarriage of justice, the conviction should not be interfered with.
Acting Justice Martin has sent out a series of notices to parties that may be criticised in his final report, to give them the chance to respond.
Dr Dwyer urged the inquiry on Tuesday not to criticise the DPP for any inadvertent failures to disclose some information on the case to the defence.
She urged Acting Justice Martin to be cautious in making an adverse finding against the ''conscientious, excellent'' prosecutors.
Dr Dwyer described the DPP team – Michael Adams, John Ibbotson and Jennifer Woodward – as ''dutiful and committed, and under considerable difficulty, they did everything they could to make sure Mr Eastman had a fair trial''.
''Your honour is dealing with lawyers who have a reputation for professionalism and attention to ethical concerns,'' she said.
She urged the inquiry head not to make conclusions with the benefit of hindsight, or to look at any failings through a prism of what had since come to light about Mr Barnes' work.
Dr Dwyer said the prosecution had, at the time, thought Mr Barnes was a credible, professional expert.
She also said the DPP had never become aware of any potential problems with Mr Barnes' independence.
The prosecution, she said, was not made aware of a recorded phone conversation between police and Mr Barnes, in which the forensic expert described himself as a ''police witness''.
''It never occurred to the prosecution that he would be biased towards the AFP or the DPP,'' she said.
Another area of interest in the inquiry has been the trial judge's possession of mental health reports on Eastman.
It looked at whether he had come into possession of those reports inappropriately, and whether there may have been a question of apprehended bias.
But Acting Justice Martin said on Tuesday he was ''strongly inclined'' to think there was nothing improper in the way they came into the judge's hands, and that there was no question of bias.
Counsel for the Australian Federal Police, Lionel Robberds, QC, began his closing submission on Tuesday afternoon and will continue on Wednesday.
