Judge finds Reece Watherston not guilty of manslaughter after Jack Hanley died in Hindley St fight
The man who threw the single punch that killed Jack Hanley on Hindley St has been found not guilty of manslaughter by a judge — and the victim’s family reacted with tears and anger.
- Read Justice Bampton’s full judgment here
- The prosecution: Jack Hanley killed by ‘single, powerful punch’
- Watherston’s evidence: ‘I was scared for my safety’
The man accused of killing Jack Hanley with a single forceful punch on Hindley St has been acquitted of manslaughter in a decision that sparked angry and emotional scenes in court.
On Monday, Supreme Court Justice Anne Bampton found Reece Watherston not guilty after ruling prosecutors had failed to prove the case against him beyond reasonable doubt.
In her written judgment, she found that prosecutors had not adequately disproven Mr Watherston’s claim that he acted in self-defence.
Independent witness told the court Mr Hanley had made no aggressive moves towards Mr Watherston during the incident.
Prosecutors asserted their evidence was supported by mobile phone footage of the incident.
Justice Bampton disagreed, saying two key frames “appear” to show Mr Hanley “punch toward a figure with blonde hair”.
“There is no dispute that Mr Watherston delivered the single punch to Mr Hanley’s face causing him to fall backwards and sustain the blunt head trauma that caused his death,” Justice Bampton said.
“Having regard to the whole of the evidence, and submissions of counsel, in this matter, the prosecution has not satisfied me beyond reasonable doubt that I should reject Mr Watherston’s evidence as a reasonably possible version of the facts.
“The prosecution has not excluded as a reasonable possibility that Mr Watherston, when confronted by Mr Hanley ... fought back because he believed he had to, and that that belief was reasonable and genuine, and that his conduct was proportional to the threat he perceived.”
Mr Hanley’s mother, Julie Kelbin, was distraught after the verdict, leaving the court in tears and saying authorities needed to take a stand against street violence.
Mr Watherston and his family left court with arms locked together — but they refused to acknowledge Mr Hanley’s family as they loudly demanded an apology.
Outside court, Ms Kelbin read a heartfelt statement.
“Where is the justice?” she asked.
“How many more deaths on our streets is it going to take before our legal system starts to take this seriously? Why isn’t my son’s life important enough to warrant adequate justice?”
Mr Watherston, 22, pleaded not guilty to one count of manslaughter.
Prosecutors alleged he struck Mr Hanley “with all possible force” after their respective groups of friends had scuffled on the corner of Hindley St and Morphett St in December 2017.
Multiple eyewitnesses gave evidence that Mr Hanley was struck even though he did not take part in the aggression.
They also said the sound of his head striking the pavement was so loud that it was audible across the Hindley/Morphett St intersection.
The court heard all the men involved in the events had taken drugs including MDMA, cannabis and “nossies”, or inhaling small canisters of nitrous oxide.
Mr Watherston insisted he was acting in self-defence, saying he did not want to fight but was in fear of a “huge male” with clenched, swinging fists.
He told the court he was “never angry, aggressive or violent” but, in cross-examination, prosecutors suggested he was “exaggerating” the situation to justify his actions.
In her judgment, Justice Bampton — who heard the trial in the absence of a jury — said she had “cautiously” assessed the evidence.
Many witnesses, she said, claimed “lack of recall” either due to self-interest or the effects of intoxication, and she rejected some of their evidence as unreliable.
Justice Bampton said Mr Watherston had given his evidence “honestly”, been “frank” about his drug and alcohol use and “did not waver” from his version of events.
That version, she said, was “arguably supported” by the video footage, which she broke down by timestamps in her judgment.
Justice Bampton has twice declined The Advertiser’s application for a copy of the footage.
She said the prosecution had not addressed two moments in the footage, identified by Mr Watherston in his evidence, prior to the fatal punch.
“(Mr Hanley’s) back is to the camera and he appears to be thrusting his body forward and thrusting his right arm over in a punching motion, towards the figure with blonde hair and a black top whom, I suspect, is Mr Watherston,” she said.
“He appears to be thrusting his body forward and throwing a punch at Mr Watherston who is near the green signal box.”
She said it was “arguable” that incident caused Mr Watherston to retreat — and then return to deliver the fatal punch.
“It cannot be excluded that Mr Hanley, consistent with Mr Watherston’s evidence, was acting aggressively,” she said.
“The reasonable possibility that Mr Watherston defended himself in response to the charging by Mr Hanley by engaging in what has been described as ‘haymaker’ punches ... has not been excluded.
“The reasonable possibility that Mr Watherston genuinely believed that his conduct was necessary in self-defence has not been excluded.”
Outside court, Ms Kelbin insisted her son “had never had a violent fight in his life”.
“He was a gentle soul ... (Mr Watherston), who took my Jack’s life, has the rest of his life,” she said.
“While I visit a cemetery to sit at my son Jack’s grave, he gets to live his life freely.”
She said she had lived “568 days of hell” since her son’s death.
“I know the offender didn’t intend on killing my son, but he did – where is the justice?” she asked.
“How can a person kill another with one punch and be found not guilty?
“Is that all my precious son’s life is worth?”