8

Justice Jeffrey Shaw and HIS Missing Blood Samples

There’s a common perception that the Justices of the courts, those who decide who is right and wrong in this country, are above reproach – in both their legal and moral character. They would never, we are led to believe, succumb to the temptations and evils that get us, the regular people of Australia, into the sort of trouble that can land us on the wrong side of them, waiting to hear their verdict.

But while we really only know them by name or the occasional picture in a newspaper, Supreme Court Justices really are normal human beings with the same health and social frailties as the rest of us. And believe it or not, some of them have even been known to have an alcoholic drink from time to time. And yes, even a little too much at times – which is certainly no crime. Unless, of course, you do something you shouldn’t while inebriated.

A car, too much alcohol and a few hundred metres was all it took for NSW Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey William Shaw’s life to turn upside down on the night of 13 October 2004. Shaw had attended a NSW Law Society function, then kicked on with a meal in the city with a colleague before catching a cab home. But not all the way home – and that’s where the trouble started.

No one is really sure why Justice Shaw – well over the legal limit to drive after his night out – decided to get the taxi to drop him off at his grey Alfa Romeo parked near his local oval at around 11.30pm, instead of going the short distance further to his house on Louisa Road, the only street on an arm of land that stretches into Sydney Harbour in exclusive Birchgrove, near Balmain in Sydney’s inner west.

But the Justice must have believed he was fine to operate a vehicle, especially if he drove slowly. He wasn’t, though. His Eminence managed to slam into a parked Toyota Corolla while navigating down the quiet road, the impact of the crash so loud it echoed out along the quiet street. Tired residents came out in their dressing gowns to see what the commotion was. They dragged the semiconscious Shaw from his car, blood flowing from a gash in his head, the smells of a smoking clutch and booze thick in the air. Shaw denied that he had been drinking, but the neighbours took his keys away from him anyway. It was clear that something was up. He begged them not to call his wife or the police, and protested strongly when one of his neighbours insisted on taking him to hospital to have his head wound treated.

Shaw arrived at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Camperdown at around 12.30am. Police attended the crash site and had both of the vehicles involved towed away.

Complying with hospital procedure dictated by the authorities, nurses took two blood samples from Shaw at 2.15am. They were stored in identical vials and sealed to prevent tampering. One of the samples was for the police in case a drink-driving charge had to be laid. The other was for Shaw to keep. It is believed that the blood alcohol reading of the samples was .225 – a massive four times the legal limit for anyone in charge of a vehicle.

Once the Justice was left alone, he dressed himself and walked out of the hospital. He got a cab out the front at 2.30am. Security cameras next snapped Shaw using his security pass to gain access to his office at the Supreme Court building back in the city at 3am. In his hands were what appeared to be the two vials holding his blood samples.

The Justice was back at the hospital a little over an hour later. Doctors gave him a final examination before discharging him. It was around 9am when his wife drove him back to their Birchgrove home.

It took 19 days for police to issue a press release, stating that both of Justice Shaw’s blood samples had gone missing after the accident. The next day – 20 November – Shaw’s wife was shocked to find officers of the law at her door looking for the samples. She turned them away.

Next, the authorities declared that an inquiry would be held to determine exactly what had happened to the missing blood samples. Shaw knew his bluff had been called. He decided it was best to turn them in to the police investigating his case. Of course, no one could say exactly how they had ended up in his possession. No one was about to say that a Justice of the Australian courts had stolen police evidence. Had it just been a big mistake, either by Shaw or the hospital, perhaps?

There was even debate about what had happened with the blood samples during the weeks they had been missing. Some questioned whether or not the blood in them was even Shaw’s.

One of the doctors on duty that night said that he had believed he’d secured the sample taken for the police in the special police safe box, but now he wasn’t positive that he had after all. A nurse insisted that the vial containing Shaw’s personal sample had been left on a shelf above his bed.

The police suggested that Shaw himself had taken the samples from a trolley, but he was quick to deny the accusation, despite the fact that he had also said he didn’t actually remember much from the night. The best the Justice could come up with was that someone at the hospital must have simply given them to him.

Because of all the confusion about what had really happened on the night – and what had happened with the blood samples afterwards – the high-range drink-driving charge against Shaw was dropped in March 2005. Instead, he was found guilty of negligent driving and driving under the influence. These lesser charges earned him a $3000 fine and a one-year suspension of his driver’s licence.

Justice Shaw resigned from public service in November 2006. The next month, a Police Integrity Report regarding the matter was presented in Parliament. It damningly found that Shaw had indeed swiped the blood samples from a hospital trolley. It also stated that he had – against medical advice – left the hospital of his own accord and taken the vials in question to his office at the Supreme Court building. A week later, the report stated, he gave the vials to a fellow barrister for what was called ‘storage’.

The claim that Shaw had come to possess the vials by means that ‘did not involve misconduct’ was disavowed by the report, which also recommended that Shaw be charged with perverting the course of justice. If found guilty, he could expect to spend as much as 14 years in jail.

It wasn’t until August 2007 that the Director of Public Prosecutions Nicholas Cowdery told the Police Integrity Commission that former Justice Jeff Shaw would escape a charge of giving false evidence – aka lying. Neither would he be charged with attempting to pervert the cause of justice. Cowdery said that the charges would not be pursued because he didn’t believe Shaw could be proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, because of his defence – that someone at the hospital must have given him the samples but he couldn’t properly recall what had happened on the night in question.

Strangely, men all around the country try to pull that one every Sunday morning. The wives of Australia don’t often let them get away with it.

After a distinguished career in politics and as a jurist, Justice Jeff Shaw passed away in May 2010. He was just 60. It seems a terrible shame that one human mistake that is common to all of us could blemish such a career.

But judges aren’t supposed to make mistakes.