December 13th 2024.
Spectators in the courtroom were left stunned as one of the men convicted of the brutal murder of bank teller Janine Balding was excluded as a match to key DNA evidence. Stephen Wayne "Shorty" Jamieson, who is currently serving a life sentence for his role in the 1988 abduction, rape, and murder of the 20-year-old woman, has maintained his innocence despite signing a confession. He has pointed to a bandana used to gag Balding as evidence of his innocence.
Today in the NSW Supreme Court, the results of DNA retesting on the bandana were presented, and it seemed to support Jamieson's claim of being wrongfully convicted. Expert Clint Cochrane from the NSW Forensic and Analytical Science Service stated that Jamieson was excluded as a contributor to the DNA found on the bandana. This resulted in audible gasps from Jamieson's supporters in the courtroom, while the family of Balding remained unmoved.
The DNA evidence in question was a partial profile lifted from the bandana, which involved 11 genetic markers. Cochrane explained that assuming the sample from "area eight" came from one person, the partial profile was expected to match about one in five million individuals. Jamieson was also excluded from a weaker DNA profile that matched about one in 10 males, further strengthening his case.
However, Cochrane could not definitively determine if the partial profiles belonged to multiple individuals, but there were no clear indications that more than two people were present. In addition to comparing the DNA results to Jamieson's known profile, Cochrane also compared them to the profiles of his co-offenders, Bronson Blessington and Matthew Elliott, who were 14 and 16 years old at the time of the murder and are also serving life sentences.
Cochrane confirmed that both Blessington and Elliott were excluded as contributors to the DNA found in "area eight" on the bandana. This raises the question of who the DNA does belong to. Elliott's DNA was found in other areas of the bandana, but the identity of the contributor(s) to "area eight" remains unknown.
Jamieson has maintained his innocence from the beginning, claiming that he was a victim of mistaken identity. He argued that he was confused with another man known as "Shorty" and requested that his DNA be compared to the bandana samples. However, there is a dispute over the legality of using the DNA profile of Mark "Shorty" Wells, who has denied any involvement in the crime and has never been charged.
The presiding judge, Justice Ian Harrison, acknowledged the sensitivities surrounding this case and the possibility of injustice. He stated that his concern is for justice to be served, and he is mindful of the possibility that an injustice may have occurred. The hearing continues, and the court will carefully consider all the evidence before making a final decision.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
