2 weeks Ago By Anthony Dowsley, Amelia Ballinger, Nick McKenzie
Testing on a black bandana used to gag a murder victim 36 years ago has unearthed unidentified male DNA, which could potentially expose a wrongful conviction. The five mystery DNA profiles, which began appearing in tests conducted from 2014 onwards, were detected on the bandana used to gag Janine Balding, who was abducted, raped and murdered by a gang of five youths in 1988. Stephen “Shorty” Jamieson, who was sentenced to life in prison for the abduction, rape and murder of Janine Balding.
Credit: Nine News Further testing of the bandana is at the heart of a legal fight before NSW’s Supreme Court brought by lawyer and former politician Peter Breen to prise open the case of Stephen “Shorty” Jamieson, a never-to-be released prisoner convicted of the killing. Jamieson, who was 22 when he was jailed, has always maintained his innocence despite signing a confession. In litigation launched last year, Breen asked the court to compare the mystery profiles on the bandana to a DNA sample taken from Mark “Shorty” Wells, who Jamieson’s co-offenders claim was the real “Shorty” with them on the night of the murder and who has said he was present at the crime scenes.
He has denied any involvement in the rape or murder and has never been charged over the crime. In June, Australian Academy of Science chief executive Anna-Maria Arabia told this masthead that a review mechanism sitting alongside the courts was needed to look at possible miscarriages of justice. Murder victim Janine Balding.
Credit: 60 Minutes Jamieson’s co-offenders claim Wells was the real “Shorty” with them on the night of the murder, and he has twice said he was present at the crime scenes. Breen launched the case after discovering the NSW Forensic & Analytical Science Service never had Wells’ sample to test against the bandana. While NSW police have a sample of Wells’ DNA, taken by Queensland police in 2011, it has refused to compare the sample against the unidentified profiles.
In a submission to the NSW Supreme Court, the Crown says it is “presently unable as a matter of law to compare Wells’ DNA profile”. The bandana, a key piece of crime scene evidence, has been DNA-tested seven times in the past 20 years. Jamieson’s profile has never been detected and there is no other forensic evidence linking him to the crime.
Semi-retired lawyer Peter Breen is representing Stephen “Shorty” Jamieson. Credit: 60 Minutes “I’d like them to just do the testing – that’s all we’ve ever asked, that they do a comparison,” Breen told this masthead and 60 Minutes . “And if Wells is not excluded as a contributor, that’s sufficient for us to get a judicial inquiry into Jamieson’s conviction.
” Forensic scientist Dr Kirsty Wright described the failure to test against Wells as a “very critical failure”. This masthead is not alleging that Wells committed any crime, only that comparing his DNA to that on the bandana is now a matter of important public and legal debate. Forensic scientist Dr Kirsty Wright.
Credit: 60 Minutes Wells became a person of interest in the case during Jamieson’s first trial in 1989, when one of his co-accused, Bronson Blessington, told the court it was Wells, not Jamieson, who was with the group. In an interview with NSW Police shortly after, Wells, who was a schizophrenic known to wear a bandana and had previously falsely confessed to a crime, also made admissions to being present the night Janine Balding was killed. He recalled a blonde woman being pushed over a “barbed wire fence”.
“They took her into the bush, and I stayed in the car,” he told police. Wells told police that when they returned, “one of them was wet”. Wells, who stands at a similar height to Jamieson at 150 centimetres, accurately recalled the make of the car, driving along a highway, that a knife and rope were used, the victim was thrown over a barbed wire fence, and the car breaking down.
But he also got key facts wrong, such as who was driving, the colour of the car and the colour of the knife used to threaten the 20-year-old bank clerk. Mark “Shorty” Wells was a suspect in the abduction, rape and murder of Janine Balding. Credit: 60 Minutes Wells also nominated Jamieson, whom he knew, as one of the killers.
Investigators dismissed Wells as a suspect because he “lacked detail”. Still, the issue surrounding the “wrong Shorty” caused the first trial to be aborted. At a second trial in 1990, all four of Jamieson’s then co-accused testified that it was “Shorty” Wells, not “Shorty” Jamieson, who was with them when Balding was randomly targeted at Sutherland railway station.
Wells, who was called to give evidence, confirmed his nickname was “Shorty”. When asked if he knew a person named Janine Balding, he told the court: “I don’t want to answer any of these questions because they might incriminate me.” Jamieson was convicted on the strength of his confession and the evidence of two new eyewitnesses, who had contacted police following the first trial being aborted.
Jamieson has long argued his confession was fabricated by police. In 2002, that claim sparked a Police Integrity Commission investigation, which looked into the allegation that “Jamieson was not involved in the offences against Janine Balding”. During that six-year probe, codenamed Cerduna, investigators examined the details of the case, repeatedly interviewing all five co-offenders, as well as members of the NSW homicide squad who led the murder probe.
It did not identify any serious misconduct. This masthead has seen transcripts of the secret hearings, and it can be revealed that in 2005, Wells again made certain admissions under police questioning. After initially denying he was at the Balding crime scenes, Wells stated that he had been there.
Wells was asked: “Were you there, Mark, in body?” Wells replied, “Yeah,” before confirming his answer, nodding and saying: “Yes.” Mark “Shorty” Wells arrives at the Janine Balding murder trial. Credit: Greg White/Fairfax Media “Right, I was there.
They took her over the fence. I stayed where the car was.” The officers asked for more details to verify his admission.
“Well, that highway, I, where it is. Yeah, a bit of a paddock at the side, thick scrub and a long barbed wire fence,” he said. “So they pushed her over, and they jumped over, grabbed her, walked into the bush and (that was) the last time I heard anything.
I didn’t even hear her scream.” The officers told Wells he had given conflicting stories and it was “obvious” he was confused. They noted Wells had worn a bandana to his interview.
Jamieson’s co-offenders, Blessington, Matthew Elliott and Wayne Wilmot, all restated that he was not with them when they committed crimes against Balding. Blessington, who was also jailed for life over Balding’s murder, gave evidence to Operation Cerduna that he was “adamant” Jamieson was not with them. “I’m willing to take a lie detector test or anything like I’m 100 per cent adamant that Stephen Jamieson is innocent,” he told investigators.
“He was not there at the time of the murder. He was at the station the morning of the murder, but he had no involvement at all.” The former homicide detectives stood by the integrity of their investigation.
The NSW attorney general’s office and NSW Police, this week declined to comment on the case. NSW Supreme Court Justice Ian Harrison is expected to rule next month (December 13) on whether to order a judicial inquiry into Jamieson’s case. Get the day’s breaking news, entertainment ideas and a long read to enjoy.
Sign up to receive our Evening Edition newsletter..
