Bill D'Arcy_victim of false conviction
The Support Group

Bill D'Arcy supporters consist of :-

1. Those who believe that because of the extensive pre-trial publicity, Bill D'Arcy had no chance of a fair trial.


2. Those who believe that because of a plethora of uncorroborated evidence, contradictory allegations, and conflicting accounts, he should never have been found guilty.


3. Those who believe that because of evidence given at the trials, evidence suppressed by the police, and evidence which has been clarified or uncovered since, he was not guilty of any charges.


4, Those who believe that because of the consistent refusal of all government and legal authorities to accept Bill D'Arcy's request for an independent enquiry into his case, especially in the light of evidence which has emerged since the trials, he is suffering a further injustice.

Any chance of "beyond reasonable doubt"?

And was there any observing of the principle that a person is "innocent until proven guilty"? No there wasn't. He was pronounced guilty long before he entered the courtroom. It is a painstaking task examining the transcripts of trials to list the contradictions and anomalies but that is what several of this support group have done. During the four trials many of the lesser charges had to be dropped because of contradictions in the evidence. But they all should have been. In fact one whole trial was "aborted" because accusers could not remember what they had said in their police-assisted statements.

In another trial, Marie Doyle who had been a fellow teacher of Bill's at the Logan Village School has given evidence on video of how she was approached by the Argos Police task force six times to give evidence against Bill D'Arcy. Not to give her evidence - but pressurised to give evidence against him. She further states in her videotaped interview that she heard so much contradictory evidence that she was dumbfounded when the jury came down with the guilty verdict.

Only one woman has ever alleged rape.

One woman and one woman only has ever alleged rape against Bill D'Arcy. It is very important to know this because of the 14 year sentence D'Arcy recieved at the first trial - ten years of that sentence was for the conviction of rape. The other four years were for the lesser offences. Away from the hysteria and the mania of this trial a dispassionate examination of the evidence reveals that Bill D'Arcy could have never raped this child. I only need to give one piece of evidence. Bill D'Arcy could not have committed this crime because he was not there. He left the school in question in July 1965 and the alleged rape took place in May 1966. Bill D'Arcy and his lawyers and his private investigators have a detailed body of evidence to this effect. It is available to any official body such as the CCC (Crime and Corruption Commission) but so far they do not want to know about it!

The Absurdity of this rape

Bill D'Arcy, a young man in his twenties, a teacher at a one teacher school, supposedly raped an eight year old girl in front of a whole class of approximately 20 pupils sitting 3 to 12 feet away from the teacher's desk. The absurdity of this charge is clearly exposed in the letter of Dr Daniel O'Connor MB.BS (Qld), FRCOG, FRANZCOG. The charge, in his opinion, "beggars belief". In spite of many attempts by police to obtain statements not one person in the class of twenty saw or heard anything. There was no corroboration of any part of the accuser's story, which she said came from "pictures in her mind". This one person made the accusation after 35 years and only after the police contacted her following media hype. 
There was no record that this 8 year old screamed in pain, told her parents, or that anyone was alerted in any way.

Recovered Memory

There is overwhelming evidence that recollected memories after 35 years are prone to mistakes, exaggerations, and unreliability. This type of evidence is now not accepted anywhere in the world. 

But he must have done something !

Wasn't there a great number of former students who made accusations of sexual impropriety? Someone must have been telling the truth. Surely.

Nothing in this collection of contradictions stands up to scrutiny. It is hard to know where to start. Police trawling ignored all pro D'Arcy evidence and encouraged people to "remember" offences. As Marie Doyle relates, they contacted her six times and had her almost believing that she must have seen something. Most of the so called recovered memories in these statments and evidence are riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies. Recovered memories "to help the police" to "nail this known paedophile" have this kind of result.

The hole in the wall

Even though it is treated more fully eslewhere, this summary page should mention the "hole in the wall" - the account of which contributed to D'Arcy's conviction on a number of the lesser charges. The hole in the wall was purportedly a hole near the main blackboard of the classroom dug by a student with a compass. Through this hole the students took it in turn to watch Mr D'Arcy in sexual dalliance with various students in a back room. "What", said a contemporary teacher, "leave the main classroom for more than a minute — the kids would riot".

Half the students of the time confirmed that there was a hole in the wall - the other half said there wasn't. The guy whom they said dug the hole said he didn't dig it - and he didn't know what they were talking about. The building, which has not been changed since D'Arcy taught there was inspected by two building experts, "What", said one, "dig a hole through this wall with a compass? - you have to be joking". No evidence of any hole - but Bill D'Arcy was convicted by the jury.

Beyond reasonable doubt - I don't think so.


Transcripts of committal statements and first trial.
Main investigators report (88 pages) to the CJC, CMC, and the CCC
Second investigators report.
Videotaped interview with D'Arcy's colleague teacher, Marie Doyle.
Building inspectors reports (2) regarding the hole in the wall.