On the 13th of October 1999, a DoCS worker making routine checks noticed that Lane failed to tell caseworkers about her previous pregnancies while adopting out her fourth child, and on November 4th, reported this to the Katoomba police who opened a missing person’s investigation. By February 2001 no evidence had been found pointing to Tegan’s existence. This lead to Lanes first interview where she claimed the baby was given to the father, a man named Andrew Morris. Lane was again interviewed on May 9th 2003, again claiming the baby was given to the father, naming him as Andrew Morris or Norris. Manly police, unable to gather evidence, closed the case, referring the matter to the NSW coroners court in 2005. A coronial inquest beginning in June
…show more content…
Justice Anthony Whealy presided over the case; Mark Tedeschi, representing the crown prosecution; and Keith Chapple SC, as instructed by legal aid, defending Lane. The crowns case consisted of circumstantial evidence, as there was no physical evidence, nor testimonies. Lane was first found guilty of three charges of false swearing; these were related to the affidavits signed after the birth of her first and third child. As for the murder charge, the crown produced that, as motive, Lane was prepared to abandoned her children at birth to increase her chances of representing Australia in Water polo and feared the child would damage her ‘golden girl’ image (self-interest and social factors). The crown submitted that Lanes lies – those concerning the father of Tegan and her story given about a “Perth couple”- indicated her guilt. Whealy, as the judge instructed the jury to disregard this evidence. The matter was taken to the appeal court, who ruled in the crowns favor. The crown called evidence from a psychiatrist, Michael Diamond, who found that, based on his opinions, there was no evidence that Lane suffered any disturbance to her mental process which would support a mental illness or mental disorder defense. However, found clear evidence of "persistent long term repetitive features in her personality functioning ", or in layman’s terms, a personality disorder in that period of time. This somewhat coincided with the evidence provided my Dr Thompson, a GP who had counselled Keli back in 2004, they both agreed that Keli suffered some sort of personality disorder, however Thompson stood firm that Keli would never harm Tegan. Lanes defense rested on the lack of evidence, claiming that even if Lane had the actus reus, the crown could not prove she had the mens rea, and requested Whealy to direct the jury to find lane not guilty of murder. Remaining impartial, Whealy rejected the defense. Chapple then announced that
Justice Anthony Whealy presided over the case; Mark Tedeschi, representing the crown prosecution; and Keith Chapple SC, as instructed by legal aid, defending Lane. The crowns case consisted of circumstantial evidence, as there was no physical evidence, nor testimonies. Lane was first found guilty of three charges of false swearing; these were related to the affidavits signed after the birth of her first and third child. As for the murder charge, the crown produced that, as motive, Lane was prepared to abandoned her children at birth to increase her chances of representing Australia in Water polo and feared the child would damage her ‘golden girl’ image (self-interest and social factors). The crown submitted that Lanes lies – those concerning the father of Tegan and her story given about a “Perth couple”- indicated her guilt. Whealy, as the judge instructed the jury to disregard this evidence. The matter was taken to the appeal court, who ruled in the crowns favor. The crown called evidence from a psychiatrist, Michael Diamond, who found that, based on his opinions, there was no evidence that Lane suffered any disturbance to her mental process which would support a mental illness or mental disorder defense. However, found clear evidence of "persistent long term repetitive features in her personality functioning ", or in layman’s terms, a personality disorder in that period of time. This somewhat coincided with the evidence provided my Dr Thompson, a GP who had counselled Keli back in 2004, they both agreed that Keli suffered some sort of personality disorder, however Thompson stood firm that Keli would never harm Tegan. Lanes defense rested on the lack of evidence, claiming that even if Lane had the actus reus, the crown could not prove she had the mens rea, and requested Whealy to direct the jury to find lane not guilty of murder. Remaining impartial, Whealy rejected the defense. Chapple then announced that