Prosecutor (61:03)
Listening to this episode's ads. By supporting our sponsors, you support Casefile to continue to deliver quality content in 2016 award winning investigative journalist Caro Meldrum Hannah opened a letter addressed to her at the Australian Broadcasting Commission offices in Sydney. Dear Ms. Meldrum Hannah, the letter read, my name is Kelly Lane and I have been wrongfully convicted of murdering my baby in 1996. I believe if the public knew the real facts, had all the information and saw the errors and questions that still remain in my case, they may be able to help perhaps come forward with where Andrew Norris, our child or his family are. Ultimately, we are trying to locate Andrew, our daughter or a family member. Caro wasn't sure what to make of the letter. She was well known for her work on the ABC's popular current affairs program Four Corners, but she'd never covered Tegan Lane's case before, so her first thought was that the letter must be a prank. Caro contacted Kelly in prison and confirmed the letter was legitimate. When asked if there was any way she could have harmed Teghan, Kelly responded firmly, there is no way. There is no way. If Andrew didn't turn up, I would have just left her there or I would have gone down the exact same path as before. I would have asked for some help, I would have asked to see an adoption agency and I would have done the exact same thing I did 18 months earlier. I remember that day clear as I know a lot of people think I'm cold and callous, but those children were very important to me and I loved them. I thought I was doing the right thing by them. Caro agreed to make a documentary about the case, which would be titled Exposed the Case of Kelly Lane, but only under the condition that no topic was off limits and she would follow the truth wherever it led. Kelly agreed and in turn, she handed over her entire case file and court records, including private correspondence sent between herself and her defence team. Caro and a small team fully immersed themselves in the case. They tracked down and interviewed anyone and everyone from Kelly's past who was willing to speak with them, including former water polo coaches, teammates, boyfriends and even her parents. They spoke to the coroner, prosecutors and homicide squad detectives who worked on Kelly's case and were handed a USB containing exclusive confidential police files from a secret informant. After nine months of intense research, the exposed team identified several holes in the investigation as well as questionable legal tactics that had them asking, was Kelly Lane wrongfully convicted? During Kelly's trial, police claimed that exhaustive efforts had been made to interview all the former tenants of the apartment building on Wisbeach street where Kelly said Andrew Norris had lived. None of the tenants recalled ever seeing Kelly there, nor did they have any knowledge of a resident called Andrew Norris. One former tenant did testify to seeing mail addressed to Andrew Norris as well as Andrew Morris, but his claims were discounted as he'd given various inconsistent statements over the years. However, the exposed team discovered that there was at least one tenant who had never been questioned, a man named Daryl Hansen. The team tracked Daryl down on Facebook and organised a video meeting. When Caro Meldrum Hannah showed Daryl a photo of Kelly Lane taken in about 1996, he claimed he remembered seeing her around the building. Daryl said he used to spend a lot of time in the downstairs car park working on his car late at night. He remembered seeing Kelly exit the building through the car park several times, sometimes as late as 1am Daryl claimed he saw Kelly so many times that he thought she must have lived in the building. When pressed by Caro as to whether he could be misremembering in hindsight, Daryl insisted Kelly Lane was the person he had seen. He was so sure that he said he'd happily testify that in a court of law. The exposed team also interviewed a childhood friend of Kelly's named Natalie McCauley who had recently appeared on 60 Minutes. In Kelly's defence, Natalie claimed that she remembered the summer of 1996 very clearly, as it was the year that she and all her friends had turned 21. Early in the year, Kelly allegedly confided in Natalie that she was having a fling with another man. She mentioned it at least three times over a one month period. Natalie said she remembered the name of Kelly's secret lover clearly, as he had the same first name as Natalie's brother Andrew. Natalie claimed that she'd provided police with this information during the investigation and she'd also been willing to testify in Kelly's defence. At trial. However, she believed the police weren't interested because they were already convinced of Kelly's guilt. Adamant that she wouldn't lie about such a thing, especially given her profession in child protection, Natalie told Exposed I am passionate about children's rights. I love children. Every day my waking hour is about protecting kids. I'm not about to let my friend get off easy if she's hurt a child. During the search for Teghan's father, police had also spoken to a man named Andrew Morris, who recalled visiting Sydney's Northern Beaches for a surf life saving competition in the mid-1990s. When shown a photo lineup of several young women, Andrew Morris recognised Kelly Lane but couldn't be sure how or why. He told the exposed team that the police then began drip feeding him information about Kelly until he put two and two together and realised that they once had a random one off sexual encounter at the North Narrabeen Surf Club. It had happened around the same time that Teghan would have been conceived. Andrew had been scheduled to testify for the prosecution at Kelly's trial, not to suggest he was Teghan's father, but to explain how Kelly came up with the Andrew Morris or Norris Persona in the first place. Then, at the last minute, a deal was made between both legal teams. Andrew wouldn't testify and neither would Natalie McCawley. This was just one of several factors that led Kelly's case to being taken on by the Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative, an organization dedicated to examining possible wrongful convictions. A spokesperson for the initiative told Exposed about the deal relating to Natalie McCauley and Andrew Morris. For Kelly's supporters, these allegations of witness coaching, witness swapping and deals struck between the prosecution and defence were further evidence that Kelly hadn't received a fair trial. Exposed also unearthed records from Auburn Hospital that cast doubt on the timing of Kelly's departure with baby Teghan. Notes made by a registered nurse had Kelly leaving at 2pm that same nurse later provided a statement saying Kelly was discharged between 11am and 12 midday. If the hospital records were correct and Kelly really had left the hospital at 2pm and was home in Fairlight by 3pm, then exposed posited that Kelly wouldn't have had time to kill Teghan and dispose of her body. Even investigators who worked on the case were critical of the way things were handled. Various individuals involved expressed their discomfort with Kelly's conviction. The detective who led the investigation into Teghan's murder had since retired from the force. She told Exposed that police had no evidence against Kelly and weren't ready when the DPP decided to proceed with the murder charge. I used every trick in the book, the former detective explained. An undercover strategy. Covert DNA samples, every resource that was available. There was nothing, absolutely nothing. We didn't have anything. The Exposed team also highlighted the fact that for all the digging police did to find Tegan's biological father, they never organised for a composite sketch to be made. They questioned why such an image wasn't broadcast around Australia, asking anyone who had seen such a man to come forward. The Exposed team organised for a former police officer turned forensic artist to visit Kelly in prison. Kelly recalled Andrew's physical features in detail and a clear composite sketch of Andrew Norris was created for the first time. The forensic artist, who had 18 years experience creating sketches believed Kelly was truthful in her description. She was consistent throughout, he said. She didn't sway at all. In a phone call from prison, Kelly told Caro Meldrum Hannah that from a very young age, her athletic training taught her to hide her emotions. She was excellent at filing feelings away and being a different person for different people. She also revealed that her first sexual experience was being date raped while intoxicated. At the age of Kelly explained, I don't think I valued my body and my choices and my boundaries because everybody just seemed to be so frivolous with it. She struggled upon learning that several people in her life had indeed suspected she was pregnant at times, but never reached out. While Kelly made it clear she didn't want to shift the responsibility onto others, she asked, wasn't I worth asking? Why were people afraid or why did they not want to ask me? It's kind of sad to think that no one reached out and said, you seem different or you look different or are you okay? As part of the documentary, Kelly agreed to meet face to face with Dr. Anne Buist, a forensic psychiatrist who specialises in women's mental health and the relationship between mother and baby. Throughout her career, Dr. Buist had worked with hundreds of women who'd been accused of abusing their children, but she said that Kelly was her hardest, most difficult case. Dr. Buist told exposed that she didn't find Kelly to be a pathological liar, a narcissist or mentally ill. She thought the secret pregnancies could be explained by Kelly's upbringing, during which she'd received the message that her family didn't like dealing with negative emotions. Dr. Buist couldn't find a coherent narrative that Kelly could have killed Teghan, aside from the fact that she had demonstrated the capacity to detach from her other children. For Dr. Buist, one thing in particular stood out during her interviews with Kelly. When Kelly started talking about Andrew Norris, her body language changed. The way she spoke about him seemed superficial. Dr. Buist told exposed there was something there that didn't ring true. Exposed was released by the ABC in 2018 to rave reviews, propelling Kelly's case back into the spotlight. Members of the public hotly debated Kelly's guilty verdict and shared outrage over what many now viewed as a wrongful conviction. Thousands turned to social media to accuse the prosecution of misconduct and Kelly's defence team of negligence. Calls were made for Kelly to be exonerated, or at the very least, retried. But the documentary wasn't without its critics. Many were quick to point out that Crucial information was withheld from the viewers, with some accusing the ABC of provoking public excitement at the expense of accurate reporting. Retired Australian barrister Simon Davis was one such critic. Simon hadn't been involved in Kelly's trial in any capacity, but after watching Exposed, he was shocked by the trial's flaws and felt compelled to look into the case in detail. Simon essentially fact checked the claims made by Exposed, then published a book titled on the Case of Kelly Lane and the ABC in which he debunked each one, casting doubt on the claims made by former Wisbeach street tenant Darryl Henson. Simon said it was hard to believe a witness could so confidently recognise a stranger two decades after the fact, especially when the alleged interactions occurred in the dark of night. Furthermore, while Daryl claimed Kelly usually left in the middle of the night, Kelly had told police that when she'd stayed at Andrew Norris Place, she left in the morning and went straight to water polo training. Simon Davis concluded, ultimately Henson's evidence was of such low probative value that it is questionable whether it would even be admissible at a trial. Simon Davis rejected the claims about witness swapping and game playing between the opposing legal teams. He pointed out that Exposed had failed to tell their audience several important details regarding Natalie Macaulay's claims. Firstly, in Natalie's original police statement, she made no mention of Andrew, despite later stating Kelly told her about Andrew at the time of their affair. Secondly, Natalie was cross examined by the prosecution at Kelly's pre trial hearing before the jury was sworn in. Some of the responses she gave led to doubts about her credibility. She was therefore deemed unreliable and not called to testify during the trial. Thirdly, and to Simon Davis, most importantly, police had asked Kelly if any of her friends knew about her affair with Andrew. At no point did she mention Natalie's name. Fourthly, if Kelly really did think Natalie's testimony would have been crucial, then why did she make no mention of it when appealing her conviction? According to Simon Davis research, the Andrew Morris, who appeared unexposed, wasn't prevented from giving evidence due to some kind of witness swapping deal. He was stopped because shortly before the trial commenced, it emerged that the random sexual encounter Andrew had at the beach couldn't possibly have been with Kelly. Thus his testimony was irrelevant. As for the claim that Kelly left Auburn Hospital with Teghan at 2pm Kelly herself told the police she'd left the hospital, quote before 12:00 sometime. The patient sharing her room also testified that Kelly and teghan left by 11amthe nurse had listed eight other matters on Kelly's file at 2pm not just Kelly's departure, Simon Davis pointed out that all these matters hadn't taken place simultaneously. Many likely occurred before 2pm and the nurse simply recorded the time she was making the notes. Taking these factors and several others into account, Simon Davis concluded that Exposed was inaccurate and misleading. He stated, legitimate questioning of a jury's verdict is one thing. However, questioning of a verdict which has twice been the subject of appellate review without real reference to the appeal judgements, and by apparently suppressing many of the relevant facts is quite another. Ultimately, Exposed was little more than a recycling of old arguments long since rejected by the courts or disavowed by Kelly herself and placing them in 2018 and presumably hoping no one noticed their antiquity or knew they had been rejected. Regardless of its criticisms, Exposed raised some thought provoking questions and led many to wonder if the prosecution really had met the standard of proof required to reach a conviction. The Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative petitioned the Attorney General of New South Wales to open a full inquiry into the investigation, prosecution and conviction of Kelly Lane. They also called for an urgent review into the policing and prosecutorial practices that led to Kelly being charged in the first place. Dr. Michelle Reuters, a lawyer and spokesperson for the group, told 60 Minutes, one of the things I've found the most extraordinary about Kelly Lane's case is that people find it easier to believe that a young mother would kill her child. Then they would believe her father would accept responsibility for that child and disappear. Forensic criminologist Dr. Xanthe Mallett spent two years looking into Kelly's case and agreed that an urgent review was needed. She believed that just because Kelly was a liar, it didn't make her a murderer, Dr. Mallett told 60 Minutes. I'm not saying Kelly is innocent. I'm not saying she is guilty. All I'm saying is if she is going to be in prison, let there be evidence for that or let her out. For the Australian public, one of the most scandalous details about the case was the fact that Kelly had become pregnant five times in seven years despite being on the contraceptive pill. The fact that she determinated two pregnancies in the past, one of which was considered a late term, left people wondering why she didn't just do so again instead of proceeding with three secret pregnancies. Others questioned why Kelly didn't abstain from sex entirely if she kept finding herself in an undesirable predicament. But the ongoing interest also prompted conversations about whether Kelly Lane was unfairly judged based on her sex life, which ultimately had nothing to do with whether or not she was capable of murder. Many argue that she was subject to trial by media and the prosecution used slut shaming as a strategic device at her trial. Even the DPP who charged Kelly with murder admitted that her case was prosecuted because it raised all sorts of values. The same DPP came under fire from the public when he told ABC's Exposed that he didn't think Kelly presented a risk to other people's babies, but, quote, she seemed to be a bit of a risk to the virile young male portion of the community. But the judge who oversaw the trial said it was necessary to lay the facts of Kelly's personal life bare. While he acknowledged this would have been a humiliating and intrusive experience for Kelly and her family and that the media excitement led to Kelly's life being examined at a prurient level, the fact remains that there is a need to gain insight into the offender's behaviour in an endeavour to gain an understanding of the level of culpability involved in the murder itself. Some of these matters might at first blush seem peripheral to the ascertainment of culpability and the assessment of the objective criminality involved. But in truth, I think that the answers to these troublesome questions are highly relevant in that regard. Dr. Xanthi Mallett is one of many who believe Kelly Lane was a victim of trial by media. She has compared Kelly's situation to that of Lindy Chamberlain, whose wrongful conviction for the murder of her baby Azaria was covered in episode 136 of Case Files. Dr. Mallett believes that, like Lindy, Kelly was scrutinised for not being emotional enough or responding in the way people thought a mother should. She told Women's Weekly. Clearly Kelly was never in line to win a Mother of the Year award and she disgraced herself by lying so often and so flagrantly. But it's still a big leap to say she killed her baby. Caro Meldrum Hannah told Mamma Mia. That judgement of Kelly's sex life remained one of the prominent discussions when it came to this case. There was a lot of slut shaming back then, she said, and it's clear there's a lot of slut shaming now. Nevertheless, Caro told the abc, I can understand why people are haunted by this case. There's a two day old baby at the centre of it. Where is Tegan and what happened to her? There's nothing more vulnerable than a newborn baby. These factors aside, one of the biggest Criticisms about Kelly Lane's case is the police handling of the investigation and why it took them so long to commence a search for Teghan or question Kelly in the first place. Those who believe Kelly was unfairly convicted don't think enough was done to find Andrew Norris, and are critical of the fact that investigators were still searching for Andrew and Teghan while both the coronial inquest and murder trial were underway. But as the prosecution argued, Kelly essentially sent police on a wild goose chase when she told them Teghan was taken by her father and any delays were therefore Kelly's fault. Others commended the police's intensive search efforts, attesting they did the most thorough job possible, given they were searching for a needle in a haystack. While Kelly's case is polarising, even many who believe in her innocence have serious doubts that Andrew Norris ever existed. As Simon Davis stated in his book, one is driven to conclude that if Andrew and his mum and Mel do exist, they must be huddled together under a proverbial rock. Never in the annals of crime in Australia, or perhaps anywhere, would there have been so much reaching out, searching for or imploring of a human being to come forward, as there has been for Andrew Morris Norris. The case would arguably be the most publicised murder conviction in Australian history. And yet still no sign of Andrew Morris Norris. In a phone call to Kelly in prison, Caro Meldrum Hannah said that something didn't add up about the Andrew Norris story. I'm not convinced on this name, caro told Kelly, and I need you to help me. Kelly became somewhat defensive, insisting that the name of Teghan's father was Andrew Norris, emphasising it was spelt with an N. Caro pressed on, asking if it was possible that Andrew Norris might not be his real name. For the first time in over two decades, Kelly said, Absolutely, absolutely. I don't know 100% if his name was Andrew Norris, because I don't know if what he was telling me at the time was the truth or if I've made a mistake. Of course that's a possibility. If Teghan's biological father was really out there, he never came forward. By March 2024, Kelly Lane was 48 years old. She had served her minimum period of 13 and a half years and was eligible to apply for parole. But just two years earlier, New South Wales passed the no body, no parole legislation, which prevented any prisoners convicted of murder from receiving parole if they hadn't cooperated by identifying their victim's location. A statement released by Kelly's parole board read the authority is not satisfied that the offender has cooperated satisfactorily in police investigations or other actions to identify the location of Teghan. With that, Kelly's bid for release was denied. Public debate followed, with one New South Wales politician describing Kelly Lane as a political prisoner. She told the Guardian the no body, no parole law undermines the fundamental objective of parole to support community safety with a focus on the rehabilitation of the offender. At their core, they further punish the person who has served their time. The fact is, Kelly Lane has done her time and she has been an exemplary prisoner and she should not remain in prison any longer. Justice Anthony Wheeley, the former Supreme Court judge who oversaw Kelly's trial, agreed. In the years since Kelly's conviction, he'd publicly admitted that Kelly's case affected him emotionally. While he accepted the jury's verdict, Justice Wheeley said he wasn't convinced that the Crown had proved its case, and he voiced his misgivings about aspects of how the trial was conducted. Since the no body, no parole legislation was passed, Justice Wheeley joined many others in calling for changes to this new law. After Kelly's parole was denied, Justice Wheelie told A Current Affair that the law shouldn't be applied to Kelly's case. Not only did he call the case enigmatic and say there was a question mark surrounding her guilt, he pointed out that the law wasn't intended to apply to people like her, stating because of the way it was worded, it slammed her back inside for four more years. I believe that had this law not been passed, then she would be back in the community where she belongs. He told the ABC that this law was particularly problematic in cases where the offender maintained their innocence. What is the point of judges making the sentences if the legislation extends the time they spend in prison? Justice Wheelie asked. We shouldn't increase the time they spend in jail if they're maintaining their innocence because if they didn't commit the crime, they have no idea of where the body might be. One of Kelly's Most vocal supporters, Dr. Xanthi Mullet, told the ABC that the point of the no body, no parole law was to to provide closure for victims families. Dr. Mallett said that didn't apply in Kelly's case because the family of Teghan is also Kelly's family and they believe in her innocence. You have to wonder, if we keep Kelly in prison, who is that serving? Kelly Lane is due to be released in 2028. She continues to maintain her innocence while Kelly's critics often point out that she has never shown any remorse. Her supporters rebut that Kelly didn't kill Teghan, so she has nothing to be remorseful about. If Tegan Lane is still alive, as Kelly claims, she would be 28 years old at the time this episode goes to air. To this day, no evidence of Teghan's existence beyond the day she left hospital with Kelly has ever surfaced. Over the years, many have discussed the significance of the mother daughter relationships highlighted by this case, by Kelly keeping her pregnancy secret from her own mother. She severed any potential relationship with Teghan, and the choices she made in that regard then impacted her relationship with her daughter Emily. During her incarceration, Kelly has only been allowed to speak to Emily for 10 minutes a day. When Kelly was sentenced, Justice Wheeley remarked, it is a tragedy at three levels. This case reflects the most profound tragedy of the relationship between mother and daughter. Kelly's parents continued to support her. When asked by 60 Minutes if they believed Kelly's story about what happened to Teghan, her mother, Sandra, responded, yes, I do. It sounds improbable, but a lot of improbable things happen in life. Kelly's father, Robert, agreed, adding, the truth is stranger than fiction, isn't it?
