LOIS D'ARCY
December 06 - Lois D'Arcy slams government, judicial system and media at Conference at Surfair
 Lois and Bill D'Arcy taken at Moreton Correctional Centre ca 2000
2004-BBC-convictions reversed
Men at risk 17-11-02
 The three D'Arcy children. Diana (graduating from Queensland University, Lara, and David.
The Trials
The trials -Comment
Bill 's letter to friends 18/03/02
 David D'Arcy, Bill and Lois's son, is a succesful industrial Advocate.
October. 2001: False Memory - and how innocent people are being convicted (including Bill).
8-2-6-Queensland Teachers- the repercussions
Bill 's letter to friends 23/11/01
Aug 31, 2001. Letter to the Editor (all Major Newspapers)
Second letter sent by Dally Messenger
Bill's D'Arcy's letter - 29 Aug 2001
Nov. 2000. Letter to the Editor (all Major Newspapers)
First letter sent by Dally Messenger
October 2000: Where are the teachers? - where is the Teachers Union?
by David Wales
High Court rejects victims claim for cash in D'Arcy case-pdf
Pre Trial Publicity
The Hole in the Wall
Scott and Kaiser
contact us
 Lois, daughters Lara and Diana, with friends at a family function
|
The Basic Charge
That when a young man in his twenties, at a one teacher school Bill D'Arcy raped an eight year old girl in front of a whole class of approx.20 pupils sitting 3 to 12 feet away from the teacher's desk.
(Bill D'Arcy was found guilty by a jury, and the appeal by the Queensland Court of Appeal was not upheld. Bill D'Arcy and his wife and family are still fighting)
The Basic Defence
- In spite of many attempts by police to obtain statements no one in the class of twenty or so saw or heard anything. That is, there was no corroboration of any part of the accuser's story, which she said came from "pictures in her mind".
- The evidence relies basically on the testimony of one person who made the accusation after 35 years and only after the police contacted her following media hype.
- There was no record that the 8 year old screamed in pain, told her parents, or that anyone was alerted in any way.
- The erroneous claim that Bill D'Arcy was at the school 12 months after he had actually been transferred. Evidence (school records) which have come to light since his conviction have established that Bill D'Arcy was not at the school at the time of the alleged offence, but had left a year earlier
- There is overwhelming evidence that recollected memories after 35 years are prone to mistakes, exaggerations, and unreliability. This type of evidence is not accepted anywhere in the world except in Queensland.
- That Bill D'Arcy was found guilty, not on the evidence, but as the result of concerted rumour and media campaign in the two years leading up to the trial.
- This person sued Bill D'Arcy for $250,000. The "Civil Trial" (Judge Botting) more or less found Bill D'Arcy "innocent" denied the complainants claim and awarded costs against her in favour of Bill D'Arcy (this was hardly reported in the media at all).
October 2000. First Trial
Bill D'Arcy was tried in October 2000 and found guilty of sexual offences against children while he was a 23 year old teacher in a one teacher school in the sixties. Despite weeks of media beat up and hype there was effectively no corroborative evidence at all. To everyone's astonishment, including Bill's family who were there, his solicitor and his barrister, he was found guilty of the full ambit claim of 18 charges and sentenced to fourteen years jail. He was 62 years of age at the time.
August 22 2001. Appeal to the three Judges of the Supreme Court of Queensland - Court of Appeal, failed.
(Judges were P.McMurdo, J.AMcpherson and J. Chesterman). The solicitor, Alan Bennett, and the barrister, Anton Maher, were confident that the appeal would be upheld. The were suprised and disappointed when the only concession was that Bill's sentence was to be reduced from fourteen (effectively a life sentence as he is 63) to ten years.
Even so, the media via A Current Affair ensured that the judges were viciously attacked by people, who knew nothing about the case, but can always be counted on to make these remarks. ("Judges are out of touch", "our judges need a course of education", "the legal system is hopelessly lacking in understanding of these issues" etc, etc). The question is, can our judges be intimidated by the media too? The well argued and documented case by Bill's lawyers received no concession from the judges except the one mentioned above. Bill was obviously shattered.
Click here for Bill's D'Arcy's letter - 29 Aug 2001
The full 34 page report can be accessed at
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/qld/QCA/2001/325.html
The appeal to the High Court was denied.
Another Trial before Judge O'Brien:
Bill was accused of three charges of sexually interfering with children from another school. Of the two serious charges he was found not guilty and the third charge he was found guilty - once again on the recovered memory evidence. There are several unsavoury aspects to this trial at which the writer was present. The one I can state publicly is that Bill's barristers were not allowed to cross examine the police about methods of "trawling". The judge allowed no questioning of the police and their methods whatsoever, and,
SINCE THIS TRIAL school records (hitherto reported "lost") have clearly established that the person whose evidence, and whose evidence only, supported the third charge, was not at the school at the time of her evidence. Police had these records but witheld them from the court. They "came to light" after the trial! Bill D'Arcy's lawyers have apllied for a "pardon" on the gournds of this false evidence but so far have got nowhere. The current Queensland Attorney-General refuses to see them.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This Support Group
Many are deeply disturbed by the Bill D'Arcy case - for different reasons.
This support group would like to bring those together who: -
-
1. Believe that Bill D'Arcy is the victim of a political assassination. That the charges against him would never have emerged or been concocted, if he did not have one of the safest ALP seats in Queensland, which was coveted by others. This group of supporters are aware that the accusations brought forward, in most questionable circumstances, after 37 years, were done so at a time when D'Arcy had severe heart problems necessitating valve replacement surgery. He was thus physically weakened and not in fit state in countering the political forces out to destroy him.
-
2. Believe Bill D'Arcy is the victim of a media assassination. (See letter below and on link.) They believe that the trial by media influenced the jury which found him guilty.
--
3. Believe that charges brought against a person after 37 years, based on memory only, have to be so questionable as not to constitute evidence.
-
4. Suspend judgment on whether Bill is guilty or innocent of any or all of the charges but who want answers to the following questions:
- Who initiated an investigation into Bill D'Arcy after thirty five years? Why was it initiated? Who stood to gain?
--
- Why did a section of the media conduct a trial by media, with a number of false accusations and stories over the two years, especially the last month leading up to the trial?
--
- Why did not the media, when all parties to the false stories denied the misquotations and false reporting - why did not the media report their refutations and denials?
--
- Who drip-fed the media this misinformation and why?
--
- Why was it, when there was clear evidence of false media stories presented to the media, there were never any retractions?
--
- Why were the police so "super-diligent" in pursuing this case visiting some "witnesses" five and six times to get statements? Why were they so patently unsuccessful in getting people to testify? (There were "witnesses" from three families who had no corroborating evidence, but who testified that Bill D'Arcy put children on his knee. (D'Arcy vehemently denies ever doing this in an inapporopriate way.)
Why were these many unsuccessful attempts not publicised? It is clear that the police were not interested in people who did not assist their case. Why? Should not truth be the criterion?
--
- How could Bill D'Arcy be a paedophile when we know that paedophiles notoriously re-offend? There is not the slightest indication that this is the case with Bill D'Arcy. Since marrying Lois in his twenties, he has raised an admirable family of three now-grown-up children and has an impeccable record in community and public life. A leading psychiatrist in this field declared that Bill was not a paedophile. Unfortunately, it was not thought necessary to call him to give evidence!
-
|
Innocence Day was held in Brisbane on Sunday March 28, 07. |
Information  Lois D'Arcy, protracted battle to prove her husband's innocence.  William D'Arcy
 Kerrie (Brown) Bill, wife Lois, son David
 Daughter Diana, Lois, Bill, daughter Lara
 An article by Christopher Pearson in the Weekend Australian
 Family shot: Bill and Lois are bottom right. Son David -left. Top right is Nan Wright (dec'd) - a teacher at Logan Village State School with Bill ca 1970-1
 Bill D'Arcy in better times - on his boat.
 Bill's name is often mispelt
Bill Darcy
William Darcy
William Theodore Darcy
Innocence Day-from Michael Cox
Awakening Day in Great Britain
 Bill in his boat with a beer.
 Recent photo of Lois (centre right) with Deborah Kuzman (centre left) flanked by daughters. Deb was a former student of Lois and babysitter for the D'Arcy children
 Don Livingston, retired Member for Ipswich West, visiting Bill in Wolston correctional Centre.
 Historical Photo. Lois with baby David, nursed by the late Don Dunstan, then premier of South Australia.
 Harry Gillett, recently deceased, friend and Mentor of Bill for over 60 years. With Lois
 Lara, Diana, (top) with close friends, Lara Decker and Shannon Decker Ross
 Lois with daughter Lara at Perisher Blue Resort.
|
