Bowraville double jeopardy

The weekend gave Crikey readers ample time to unpack what was a big week in Australia. Predictably, the debate surrounding Australian media's race problem (interrogated by Ruby Hamad) caused the comments section to balloon. Elsewhere though, there was insightful conversation taking place in responses to Kishor Napier-Raman writing on the role of double jeopardy laws in Australia, and Guy Rundle responding to Richard Cooke on the liberal handling of Trump's presidency.

On Bowraville and double jeopardy.

Niall Clugston writes: Kishor Napier-Raman concludes his article on the Bowraville murders by saying that “the fight for justice continues”. This underlines the need for the double jeopardy rule. Napier-Raman says that in the Bowraville case “the initial investigations have been widely criticised as lacklustre, and hamstrung by entrenched racial attitudes within the NSW Police Force”. However, the suspect was charged with murder a few months after the bodies were found in 1991 and tried for murder in 1994. That is not slow by the standards of homicide cases. But he was acquitted. And this is the problem.