My wife Felicity was directly involved with the Gwaze case. As this case may still be subject to legal proceedings I better only publish information which is already in the public domain:

What the public didn’t hear about the death of Charlene Makaza

GP and forensic physician Felicity Goodyear-Smith, the medical adviser for the defence, believes that once sexual abuse had been raised, other possible explanations were never considered.

And because Charlene’s care was handed over between shifts, those on duty later lost sight of her first symptoms. “They were well-intentioned but totally wrong. The fact that she was admitted with sepsis and hypovolemic shock was lost in the retelling.

“Once you get a particular line of thought, like this is sexual abuse, it colours thinking,” she said. “And these were very senior people saying it was abuse. If it IS sexual abuse that doesn’t matter, but suddenly the possibility that it might not be isn’t on the table any more so everything is focused on looking for evidence of it and this is really what this case typifies.”

Goodyear-Smith says at first, she too thought the odds were stacked against Gwaze.

“It looked very damning, and very difficult. But when I went through it bit by bit and produced a timeline it all fell into place and then it became incredibly compelling that there was actually no crime. Even though there may be strange coincidences, there are explanations for all of it.”

On her timeline, the turning point in medical opinion as to the cause of Charlene’s death came at around 1pm when a rectal probe was inserted to take a more accurate temperature. Nurses alerted consultants to what they thought was a “meaty open wound” in her anus, or a rectal tear. A paediatric consultant put the size of the wound at around 7cm while a nurse described it as “a wound you would never forget”.

Quickly, attention switched to a possible sexual assault and the infection being caused by the anal injury. By the time Charlene took her last breath 12 hours later, with Sifiso holding her hand and the rest of her family looking on, police were stationed outside.

And when pathologist Martin Sage reported the results of his autopsy the following day that Charlene had likely been suffocated and her genital injuries were consistent with forcible penetration the prosecution had its murder victim.

But when the jury delivered its not guilty verdicts on Wednesday afternoon, the Gwaze case became a judicial rarity a murder trial without a murder. There was a victim, but no crime.

There were no gaping genital wounds, either, says Goodyear-Smith. She believes what the doctors and nurses were actually seeing was a swollen and distended anal canal caused probably by a combination of the severe diarrhoea, Charlene’s HIV-Aids status, and the fact she was being pumped with litres of fluids to increase her blood pressure. “There was no 7cm laceration. There were lots of tiny fissures but there wasn’t a big tear. But that’s what they thought they saw and they went `gasp’.”

Sage’s autopsy report made no mention of a 7cm tear, referring only to cracks in the anal tissue, the largest of which was 5mm. But he thought these could not be explained by natural causes.

What the doctors were in fact looking at was a very rare HIV-related death in an untreated child. Charlene, who arrived in Christchurch with Sifiso and Charmaine in October 2005, had never had an HIV test.

Though tests in Zimbabwe showed her immunity was lowered and HIV was suspected, she didn’t have an Aids-defining condition that would have triggered treatment. And because she came here on a student visa, she didn’t have an HIV test.

The family probably knew Charlene was infected, but chose to treat problems as they occurred, pointing to Zimbabwean children dying with Aids despite aggressive treatment.

Goodyear-Smith says she approached HIV experts and pathologists to help but found it difficult to get experts willing to testify. “It is very difficult because if you do come out for the defence against your colleagues you may end up as a pariah.”

Goodyear-Smith has tracked Charlene’s 18 hours in hospital, almost by the minute. Every test, every scan, every examination.

“Their attempts to save Charlene’s life were heroic,” she says. “They did everything right. The only thing wrong was the diagnosis.”

Dr Patrick Kelly - witness for Kahui prosecution

Medical experts struggled with age of injured twins

Dr Terrence Donald, a forensic paediatrician from Australia, told the High Court it was very difficult to pinpoint when the Kahui twins were fatally injured but believes a seizure by one of the boys may have happened hours after the initial assault…Dr Donald disputed evidence by crown witness Dr Patrick Kelly that the twins would not have been able to feed after being assaulted.

Brain specialist on Kahui jury

A doctor with specialist knowledge of brain injuries was on the Chris Kahui murder jury, one of Kahui’s lawyers has revealed…Medical evidence on the timing of the injuries was at the crux of the Kahui case. The Sunday Star-Times has been told the twins’ mother, Macsyna King, was the prime suspect before Auckland paediatrician Patrick Kelly said he believed baby Cru was most likely injured minutes before he stopped breathing and was resuscitated.

DSAC member Dr Patrick Kelly spends a lot of his time giving evidence in court. Also in the last Star-Times article:

Patrick Kelly’s evidence is being challenged in the death of a Pukekohe toddler Arwen Fletcher, who died in March 2006, three months before the Kahui twins died. Her stepfather, Warick Broadhurst, 18 at the time, was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 7 1/2 years in prison, but has appealed on the grounds that Kelly could not accurately predict the timing of the injuries.

Rosie, you wouldn’t see sexism if it hit you at a 100km/h head on.

A fact is that a statement was made to police that Ms King confessed to the killings and that her alibi turned out to be a lie. Incredibly, police where to busy to follow any of this up. If the genders had been reversed there would be a public outcry!

Not a single politician made any noise about how disastrously the coppers handled this case. The best some of our “real men” in parliament can come up with is that we should discuss law changes removing the “right to be silent”.

Your a hard case, If it wasn’t for people like you I would go mad. I have a 650 suzuki. Its a lovely little bike. Man a side car would be cool I can imagine you and your son out there. He would love it, It would be the talk of the town. Boys (generally) just love that suff, and camping. I have done many of the treks in the South Island, and would love to do them again with my son. These are the things to focus on. The things we would love to do. Firing up the old BBQ and cooking some freshly caught fish, sitting around a camp fire with your (my) son and having a good old chin wag. To me that is life.That is why I live in this country. Only one problem… getting access to our kids. That is the only fucker of New Zealand, Too bloody PC. I mean really if a father is going to fight for his kids, then why the fuck would he want to hurt them !!! There is no logic in that arguement !! anyway mate all the best with your bike, it is always a pleasure to chat to you. Paul

Our justice system is that dysfunctional it’s dangerous.

Apology and money for Dougherty
Jul 11, 2001 6:36 PM

David Dougherty has received an apology and more than $800,000 after being convicted and jailed for the abduction and rape of an 11-year-old girl.

The Justice Minister made a public apology and unveiled the compensation payout for Dougherty, who spent three and a half years in jail.

After a four year battle, Dougherty was awarded $868,728, made up of $168,728 in lost income, legal and other costs and $700,000 to compensate for time in prison, loss of reputation, emotional harm and effect on family and personal relationships.

Justice Minister Phil Goff said the payment has been made in recognition that society has an obligation to right the wrong that was done in Dougherty’s case.

“I think it is very appropriate. David has had three and half years stolen from his life,” his lawyer Murray Gibson said.

It has been four years since he walked from the Auckland High Court after being acquitted in a retrial after already serving three and half years in prison.

DNA evidence finally proved Dougherty was not the man who abducted and raped the 11-year-old girl.

Gibson says his client is now a sick man worn out by the whole process.

“David is relieved as well as pleased, because he has been down a long road and is not well. He now has the ability financially to move forward,” Gibson said.

But the research scientist who questioned the DNA evidence, forcing the court of appeal to give Dougherty a retrial, says it has taken too long.

“No justice system is perfect…but every fair minded New Zealander expects that when a mistake does occur that it is put right quickly and people are looked after and compensated,” Arie Geursen said.

Former justice minister Sir Douglas Graham initially refused compensation, but Goff called for it while in opposition and has now made amends.

“I acknowledge and apologise to Mr Dougherty on behalf of the government and the justice system for the wrong that was done to him,” Goff said.

Dougherty’s lawyer wants another apology.

“I think the ESR (Institute of Environmental Science and Research) should have assumed some responsibility for what happened. After all it was their scientists who misinterpreted the results,” Gibson said.

The report commissioned by Goff says no blame could be attached to the ESR for not picking up the DNA mismatch.

Goff is promising a revamp of the rules governing eligibility for compensation in such cases. The rules were toughened up after Dougherty filed his original claim and under the new rules he would not qualify for any compensation.

Two other New Zealanders have won substantial payouts for wrongful imprisonment.

In 1980 Arthur Allan Thomas received $1 million for 10 years wrongful imprisonment for the double murders of Jeanette and Harvey Crewe. And last year an Auckland man received $570,000 after spending 14 months in jail for sexually abusing his son.