 |
| Kathleen Folbigg |
Background & Exoneration
Kathleen Folbigg, who had spent two decades in prison following her 2003 conviction for the deaths of her four infant children, was granted an unconditional pardon and had her convictions legally quashed by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal after mounting scientific evidence cast reasonable doubt on her guilt
The turning point came from groundbreaking genetic research. Scientists identified rare mutations-such as the CALM2 variant in Folbigg and two of her daughters (Laura and Sarah) and BSN gene mutations in her sons (Caleb and Patrick)-that likely caused fatal natural events, rather than foul play
Compensation Details & Backlash
Her legal representative, Rhanee Rego, strongly condemned the figure, calling it “a moral affront – woefully inadequate and ethically indefensible,” arguing it fails to reflect the trauma and losses-20 years of her life, her children, her home, career prospects, and enduring psychological impacts.
Greens MP Sue Higginson echoed this outrage, calling the sum “insulting.” She noted that $2 million barely covers potential lost wages over two decades and overlooks related financial and emotional costs.
Precedents & Calls for Reform
Folbigg’s compensation falls short compared to other high-profile wrongful conviction cases:
- David Eastman received $7.02 million in compensation from the ACT government in 2019 after nearly 19 years wrongful imprisonment.
- Henry Keogh was awarded $2.5 million by the South Australian government in 2018 following 21 years behind bars.
- Lindy Chamberlain received $1.3 million in 1992 after her wrongful conviction, though adjusted for time, that amount would be significantly higher today.
- Given this context, legal experts argue Folbigg deserves the largest compensation payout in Australian history, noting the unparalleled severity of harm done to her.
There are growing calls for systemic reform, including the establishment of an independent Criminal Case Review Commission similar to models in the UK and New Zealand. Critics argue NSW’s current ad hoc system is prone to delays and lacks transparency, disproportionately disadvantaging the wrongfully convicted