Shadow of Doubt jury never heard girl’s memories were ‘recovered’

Serious questions surround the defence case mounted on behalf of parents Martin and Susan Johnson, who say they were left bewildered by the court case. LISTEN TO EPISODE 7 NOW.

Episode 7 of our gripping investigative podcast Shadow of Doubt is live now. Illustration and design by Emilia Tortorella.

Lawyers who defended a couple accused of sadistic abuse by their daughter believed she was suffering “false memories” but abandoned their plans to raise that issue only weeks before the trial.

The couple’s lawyers decided not to call evidence from a psychiatrist, a forensic doctor and a friend of the daughter who all raised questions about the accuracy of her claim that she had been raped and tortured from the age of five to adulthood.

The parents were later convicted of 86 charges and are currently serving long jail terms. The Australian’s Shadow Of Doubt podcast is investigating their claims of innocence.

The couple say they spent more than $900,000 preparing for their trial in the NSW District Court, before running out of money.

Legal Aid NSW refused to fund their existing legal team and a new one was appointed a month before the scheduled trial start.

Two days before an important pre-trial hearing, the father’s barrister told the court he had “barely touched the surface” of the case.

The mother’s barrister had not read any of the medical files a week before proceedings began and told the judge that “some of this brief, almost as I speak, is still being made up”.

The father’s barrister initially assessed that it was a “false memory” case.

A forensic psychiatrist, Dr John Roberts, and a forensic doctor who had examined the young woman, Dr Maria Nittis, had provided reports supporting that argument.

A friend of the daughter had signed an affidavit saying they discussed her repressed memories.

But the lawyers never called those witnesses, and shortly before the trial they advised prosecutors that they would not raise the repressed memory issue.

Dr Roberts described the decision not to call him as “somewhat inexplicable”.

He said he had never understood how the violent assaults that the couple’s daughter reported could have occurred without any of her three siblings noticing.

Dr Nittis, who examined the couple’s daughter for the prosecution but agreed to write a report for the defence, said she believed the jury would have benefited from hearing her evidence.

The reports of Dr Nittis and Dr Roberts were commissioned by the Johnsons’ original solicitor, Andrew Bale, along with the affidavit of their daughter’s friend. Mr Bale expressed surprise that the evidence wasn’t used in the trial.

Repressed memories should have been the basis of the defence case, says lawyer Andrew Bale.

“I couldn’t imagine running this trial without putting those things into evidence,” he said. “I couldn’t see how you had realistic prospects of success without doing that.”

The Australian sought comment from the couple’s trial solicitor, but he did not respond.

The barristers for the parents said they had no interest in discussing the case.

The mother’s barrister said it was one of the most distressing matters he had ever handled, and he didn’t like to think about it.

Speaking from prison, the parents said they were bewildered by their lawyers’ decisions and had limited time to consult with counsel before the trial started.

“I never even knew what recovered memory was, or repressed memory,” the mother said. “ … If they’d asked me to rely on that, I would’ve absolutely said ‘Yes’. All I kept saying was ‘We have to run the mental health angle’. I didn’t know what it was called … I just knew we had to go down that road.”

The mother is currently serving a 16-year sentence and is not eligible for parole until 2027. Her husband is serving a 48-year sentence, the longest for child abuse in Australian history. He is not eligible for parole until he is 95.

*The images used with this podcast investigation are for illustrative purposes only and bear no resemblance to the real people in this story, who cannot be identified for legal reasons.

–

Shadow of Doubt is available on The Australian’s app and shadowofdoubt.com.au

Subscribers hear episodes first and get access to all our bonus content including video, explainers and articles.