This was published 5 years ago
Eastman awarded $7 million for wrongful imprisonment
By Alexandra Back
Former treasury official David Eastman was not a wealthy man. Before his two decades in prison, and afterwards, he lived in public housing and survived on a government pension. Those days may now be over.
On Monday, in a landmark decision, the ACT Supreme Court ordered the ACT government to pay Mr Eastman, 74, more than $7 million in compensation in connection with his conviction for murdering Canberra's police chief Colin Winchester.
Mr Winchester was shot at close range as he got out of his car in Canberra about 9.15pm on January 10, 1989.
He was the highest ranking police officer ever to be assassinated in Australia, and the Australian Federal Police described his death as the "end of innocence" in Australia.
Mr Eastman, a disgruntled ex-public servant who had met Mr Winchester in his efforts to avoid an assault charge and return to work, became a suspect. He was charged with murder in December 1992 at the end of the massive police investigation and an inquest that ran for more than three years.
He has always protested his innocence.
However, he was found guilty by a jury in his first trial in 1995, and spent 19 years in jail until his conviction was quashed in 2014 following a judicial inquiry that found he suffered a miscarriage of justice.
After a second trial late last year, a jury found him not guilty of the same charge.
Mr Eastman then sued the government over the 19 years he spent in prison.
In a landmark decision delivered only two weeks after his compensation hearing began, Justice Michael Elkaim awarded Mr Eastman $7,020,000 in compensation, which the judge ruled he was entitled to under the territory's human rights legislation.
Mr Eastman was not in court to hear the result. His solicitor, Sam Tierney, said afterwards that the court had confirmed that the territory's Human Rights Act conferred a right on people wrongfully convicted to be compensated.
The ACT government has 28 days to appeal against the decision. Chief Minister Andrew Barr said in a statement: "The ACT government is considering the judgment and will respond promptly."
Outside court, Mr Tierney said, "Whether or not this is the end of the matter, we'll have to wait for that appeal period to expire to see.
"I think Mr Eastman's relieved and very happy that the court has so promptly considered his matter.
"He's lost a significant chunk of his life and he's obviously got some thoughts in mind about what he might do with it, but we'll have to wait and see.
"Mr Eastman also expresses his wishes that he would like to now get on with the rest of his life, if possible."
Justice Elkaim agreed with Mr Eastman that he had easily met the conditions in Section 23 of the Human Rights Act giving rise to his right of compensation for wrongful conviction.
The government's defence, that Mr Eastman's conviction had not been "reversed" and that there had not been a miscarriage of justice, was implausible, Justice Elkaim said.
"The plaintiff started off as an innocent person. He then became a convicted person. On 22 August 2014, he returned to being an innocent person. His conviction was unequivocally reversed.
"The fact that a second trial could perhaps have led to him returning to being a convicted person is beside the point. When the conviction was quashed, it was reversed."
As for the government's second point, Justice Elkaim referred to the judicial inquiry into Mr Eastman's conviction, and the court's decision to accept its findings. Both the inquiry and the court made it plain that the discovery of baseless evidence showed "conclusively that there had been a miscarriage of justice".
That baseless evidence was that of forensic expert Robert Barnes, who had linked gunshot particles from the scene of the shooting to Mr Eastman's car.
The court described the evidence as "completely untrustworthy, and ought not to [have been] allowed to enter into the reasons for any verdict of guilty".
The court heard Treasurer Andrew Barr had offered Mr Eastman an act of grace payment worth $3.8 million.
The payment, had Mr Eastman not rejected it, came with conditions that he discontinue his compensation suit against the government and sign away certain legal rights.
He had claimed upwards of $14 million in compensation.
After a murder investigation, two criminal trials, a coronial inquest and a civil trial, Mr Eastman, who once had a promising career as an economist in the Commonwealth government, can now turn his eye to the future.
The court at his compensation hearing heard he still hopes for employment, and a partner, although he accepts fatherhood is now likely out of reach.