Robert Farquharson was convicted for murdering his three sons after driving into a dam on purpose on Father’s Day in 2005. A fresh appeal sparks debate over whether the notorious killer could be innocent.
Today, Farquharson maintains that he was wrongfully convicted. His legal team are reportedly planning a third appeal under a new law.
Crime journalist and author Megan Norris covered the original criminal trials and criticises newfound evidence put forward by Farquharson’s lawyers.
Crime reporter Megan Norris joins The Briefing to deep dive into Farquharson’s case:
Farquharson’s legal team claim new compelling evidence could show a substantial miscarriage of justice.
The Australian Academy of Science’s chief executive, Anna-Maria Arabia, warned courts are susceptible to “junk science”, called for law reforms and declared “any one of us could be Robert Farquharson”.
Reporter Megan Norris told The Briefing Farquharson’s original statements need to be closely examined. “Even if he’d only steered twice to get where he got, he still got in the dam,” she said.
“He gave the 60 Minutes [interview] and said, the science has changed, but his story has never changed. Which one? He gave five different stories.”
Farquharson was accused of looking up “cough syncope” before the accident, a medical condition that can cause a loss of consciousness. He wasn’t in the at-risk age category.
“He had no history of it. There was no sign of it immediately after the crime. They did tests in the hospital. He wore a halter monitor. He had heart tests.”
Subscribe to The Briefing, Australia’s fastest-growing news podcast on LiSTNR today. The Briefing serves up the latest news and deep dives on topics affecting you, all in under 20 minutes.