Prosecutors have argued David Harold Eastman's murder conviction should be upheld due to the ''overwhelming'' circumstantial case against him.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Lawyers for the Director of Public Prosecutions have this week continued their last-ditch bid to keep Eastman behind bars for the assassination of ACT police chief Colin Stanley Winchester in 1989.
Eastman was given another chance to clear his name when Acting Justice Brian Martin recommended his conviction be quashed following a five-month inquiry which ended in May.
Acting Justice Martin found a substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred, largely due to deeply flawed forensic evidence used to link Eastman to the Deakin murder scene, as well as failings by the prosecution and police.
The full bench of the ACT Supreme Court – comprised of justices Michael Wigney, Steven Rares and Dennis Cowdroy – now has four options to consider as it decides Eastman's fate.
They can quash the conviction, quash the conviction and order a retrial, confirm the conviction, or confirm the conviction and recommend a pardon.
DPP senior counsel Jeremy Kirk on Tuesday outlined before the full court the circumstantial case against Eastman, and argued the conviction should be upheld.
Mr Kirk pointed to threats Eastman had made in the lead-up to the murder and his growing hatred towards police, which was focused on Mr Winchester.
He also raised evidence which linked Eastman to the murder weapon and scene, his inability to recall where he had been the night of the shooting and a series of lies and admissions he made after the incident.
Earlier the court had been closed as the judges decided whether DPP lawyers should be given access to secret evidence about the alternative hypothesis that Mr Winchester could have been targeted by Calabrian mafia figures.
The lawyers were denied access to the documents.
In his closing submission, Mr Kirk said the case against Eastman was strong, even without taking into account the tainted forensic evidence.
''One has to look at the totality of the case; drawing all those matters together it was an overwhelming case that Eastman was guilty of murdering Assistant Commissioner Colin Winchester on January 10, 1989,'' Mr Kirk said.
Mr Kirk pointed out Acting Justice Martin had said in his final report he was left with a ''nagging doubt'', as opposed to ''a reasonable doubt'' over Eastman's guilt.
He argued Eastman's murder conviction should be confirmed without qualification and, if the conviction was quashed, the court should order a new trial.
While that did not mean a retrial would go ahead, it would leave the option open, Mr Kirk said.
The court heard any retrial could not include forensic evidence, as the samples had since been destroyed.
Eastman's counsel, Mark Griffin, QC, is yet to make his submissions on how the matter should proceed.
The hearing, which had been set down for two days, will continue in the Federal Court building next Thursday..