Bill D'Arcy could never have committed the main crime of rape of which he was convicted on November 1, 2000.
Please recall that there was only one woman who ever accused Bill D'Arcy of rape. This rape conviction represented 10 years of the original 14 year sentence. Education Department records clearly state Bill D'Arcy left the Yalleroi School in June 1965. It is public domain knowledge that Bill D'Arcy was transferred from the Yalleroi School to the Currumbin Valley School on June 30, 1965.
1. The accusing woman gave evidence that her parents sent her to a new school in May 1966 to get away from Mr D'Arcy.
2. The accusing woman gave evidence in October 2000 that she had "tried to bury her dreadful experience for 34 years" - meaning 1966.
3. The accusing woman gave evidence that "she was only eleven years old when she was raped in front of the class." She was born in October 1955. She was only 9 years old when Bill D'Arcy was transferred.
4. The accusing woman gave evidence that she visited Bill D'Arcy at his residence in Tilbury. Bill D'Arcy never lived at Tilbury. The teacher who came after Bill D'Arcy in 1966 lived there.
As an aside, the teacher who came after Bill D'Arcy left the country at the time of Bill D'Arcy's trial, and hasn't been seen since!
5. The accusing woman gave evidence that Bill D'Arcy gave her bad marks. But the accusing woman's father told the first investigator that the teacher after Bill D'Arcy gave her bad marks. Her father and this teacher had a meeting about it.
6. The accusing woman gave evidence that in her time at the school there were between nine and thirteen children enrolled at the school. This makes the year 1966. From 1963 to June 1965 there were never less than twenty children at the school.
7. The accusing woman gave evidence that the teacher who raped her left the school while she was away in August 1966. This can only refer to the teacher who came after Bill D'Arcy.
8. The accusing woman gave evidence - by an actual drawing - of the arrangement of desks and the classroom design in 1966. It was a distinctly different arrangement to the desks and classroom design which existed in June 1965.
9. The accusing woman gave evidence under cross-examination that she was "positive" that Bill D'Arcy was her teacher in May 1966.
Note 1: There are other reasons given elsewhere on this website why Bill D'Arcy could not have committed this crime. The best one of many is the letter of Dr O'Connor to Dr Travis Gee. This page is about the accusing woman's own evidence.
Note 2: The accusing woman, when asked where her recollections came from, replied that they came from "pictures in her mind" — how could this be construed as a valid recollection of factual events?
Note 3: The question must be asked why the teacher who came after Bill D'Arcy, who is so clearly identified by the accusing woman and her father, was never questioned. He was never followed up, subpoenaed, or investigated in any way. At the time he quickly migrated overseas. We do know who he is, of course, and recently members of the support group found out where he is now. But the police could have found out at the time of Bill D'Arcy's trial.
Note 4: The accusing woman saw a number of doctors over the years regarding her self-confessed myriad psychological problems but never ever mentioned Bill D'Arcy to any of them - but - she only and readily placed all the blame on D'Arcy when the police came and asked her to "help".
Education Dept. Records which prove that Bill D' Arcy left on the 30/6/1965.
First Investigator's 88 page report.
Second investigator's brilliant letter to the accusing woman in which he gently attempts to persuade her that she has made a mistake.
Bill D'Arcy's analysis of the transcripts of committal proceedings, and statements and documents recovered under FOI (Freedom of Information).