Kathleen Folbigg to receive $2.2m payout after wrongful murder convictions
Folbigg was 35 years old when she was locked up in 2003, wrongly convicted of killing her four young children.
The children – Caleb, Patrick, Sarah and Laura – died between 1989 and 1999 at ages ranging from 19 days to 18 months.
Folbigg was released from prison in June last year after receiving a pardon following an independent inquiry, which heard new scientific evidence that indicated her children may have died from natural causes or a genetic mutation.
Her solicitor Rhanee Rego issued a statement describing the payment as 'profoundly unfair and unjust'.
Experts had predicted a payment to Folbigg upwards of A$10m.
'The sum offered is a moral affront – woefully inadequate and ethically indefensible,' Rego said.
'The system has failed Kathleen Folbigg once again. Kathleen lost her four children; she lost 20 of the best years of her life; and she continues to feel the lasting effects of this ongoing trauma.
'The payment does not reflect the extent of the pain and suffering Kathleen has endured. This should be about the system recognising the significance of what it did to her.'
Rego said an inquiry was urgently needed to understand how the Government decided on this figure.
The payment to Kathleen Folbigg, who was released from prison in June last year after receiving a pardon, has been described by her solicitor as "profoundly unfair and unjust". Photo / NewsWire
'When Lindy Chamberlain was exonerated in 1994, she received A$1.7m for three years in prison. Kathleen Folbigg spent two decades in prison, yet for her wrongful imprisonment she has been offered A$2m,' she said.
'Kathleen Folbigg's fight should be over. After being failed at her conviction and abused in prison, she is now being treated with contempt by the very system that should be making amends.'
Greens MP and justice spokeswoman Sue Higginson said the offer was 'shocking and insulting'.
'Two million dollars barely covers what Kathleen could have earned on a fulltime salary over 20 years,' she said.
'Kathleen has not only lost 20 years of wages, she has lost her four children, her home and her employability. She has racked up legal costs fighting her wrongful conviction, she has lost her superannuation, and she has been the victim of one of the worst injustices in this state's history – wrongful imprisonment.'
Higginson said ex gratia payments were payments of grace and goodwill, 'but what the Minns Labor Government have done today is offered a disgraceful payment in bad faith, it is 'go away' money'.
'It's unfair and speaks of misogyny and failure to take responsibility for the state's infliction of a grave injustice,' she said.
In recent times, Folbigg has said she might not be locked in a cell any more but still carried the shackles of 20 years of incarceration.
'I'm always watching who's coming through the door, who's behind me. I won't say fear, it's not a fear, just a bit of trepidation,' she said during an interview in Newcastle, the place she calls home.
'And I wait for someone else to open doors. When you're inside, you don't open doors or you cop it from the guards.
'I hadn't opened a door for 20 years, so yeah, I even find myself hesitating at my own doors at home.
'Then there is the anxiety that comes with meeting new people.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
22 minutes ago
- RNZ News
New political poll predicts hung Parliament
In preferred prime minister ratings, Christopher Luxon and Chris Hipkins both sit at 20.2 percent. Photo: RNZ The race for Election 2026 appears to be on a knife edge, with a new political poll predicting a hung Parliament. The latest Taxpayers' Union-Curia Poll - taken between 3 and 5 August - comes after a string of negative headlines about the economy. Labour has overtaken National as the largest party, gaining 2 points to 33.6 percent, while National drops 2.1 points to 31.8 percent. The Greens are up 0.4 points to 9.8 percent, ACT is down 0.5 points to 8.6 percent, New Zealand First is down 2 points to 7.8 percent and Te Pāti Māori down 0.3 points to 3.2 percent. If an election were held today, the centre-right bloc would lose four MPs for a total 61 seats, while the centre-left bloc would gain four MP and also reach a total 61 seats. With neither bloc having the upper hand, it would be a hung Parliament. The last Taxpayers' Union-Curia Poll showed the coalition parties reasserting their lead with enough support for 65 seats, driven by a surge in support for New Zealand First. For the minor parties, TOP is up 1.4 points to 2.6 percent, Outdoors and Freedom is up 1 point to 1.1 percent and Vision NZ is up 0.4 points on 0.4 percent. Cost of living remains voters' most important issue at 24.4 percent (+2.8 points), closely followed by the economy more generally at 20.7 percent (+1.6 points). Health is the next largest issue on 10.0 percent, followed by employment on 6.0 percent. In preferred Prime Minister ratings, Christopher Luxon is up 0.5 points to 20.2 percent while Chris Hipkins is up 0.6 points to also sit at 20.2 percent. Winston Peters is down 1.1 points to 8.2 percent, Chlöe Swarbrick is up 1.0 point to 8 percent, and David Seymour is up 0.5 points to 6.2 percent. The poll was conducted by Curia Market Research Ltd for the Taxpayers' Union. It is a random poll of 1000 adult New Zealanders and is weighted to the overall adult population. It was conducted by phone (landlines and mobile) and online, has a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent and 6.2 percent were undecided on the party vote question. Curia is a long-running and established pollster in New Zealand, which has resigned its membership from the Research Association New Zealand (RANZ) industry body. Polls compare to the most recent poll by the same polling company, as different polls can use different methodologies. They are intended to track trends in voting preferences, showing a snapshot in time, rather than be a completely accurate predictor of the final election result. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Newsroom
26 minutes ago
- Newsroom
Terror law consultation extended amid overreach concerns
A proposed overhaul of the country's terrorism laws has had its consultation process extended indefinitely, as more groups raise concerns about potential overreach and a lack of meaningful engagement. Last month, Newsroom revealed the Government was considering a suite of changes to the Terrorism Suppression Act, such as making membership of a terrorist entity a criminal offence, creating new offences to capture public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities.
Newsroom
26 minutes ago
- Newsroom
The Greens want to lead the next Govt. What does that mean?
Analysis: When Chlöe Swarbrick announced her run for co-leader last year, it was with a lofty goal: achieving 'our nation's first Green-led government'. More than a year on, the Greens are polling about where they sat at the last election – 11 percent. It's more than respectable, given the party's 2023 election result was its best, and given Labour has jumped 7 points in the polls over the same period without eating into the Green Party's constituency. But it's nowhere near where a party which is aiming to lead the next government needs to be. Labour, at 34 percent in recent polls, has more than triple the Greens' support. And yet, Swarbrick and co-leader Marama Davidson both reiterated the goal of a Green-led government at the party's AGM over the weekend and began sketching out a high-level path to get there. To start with, the co-leaders claimed the Greens are already leading the Opposition – not in number of MPs, but in setting the agenda and laying out a vision for an alternative government. 'We're not one of the two biggest parties, but if you take the Green MPs who were directly leading the interruption to this Government's Budget night legislative agenda, we stopped them from being able to get it through,' Davidson told Newsroom in an interview ahead of the AGM. 'We were the party who exposed the fiscal, massive, giant hole in the Government's Budget this year. Our Green MPs at the select committees have been the MPs responsible for the scrutiny, the surgical precision blowing apart what the ministers were reporting on.' And, as Swarbrick told reporters on Sunday: 'This very Government, on its own Budget day, spent the majority of its time talking about the Green budget.' Labour's slow policy processes and reluctance to commit to anything beyond a handful of planned moves for its next moment in power has left a vacuum the Greens have been more than willing to fill. While Chris Hipkins won't even say, for example, whether Labour would reinstate the oil and gas ban, the Greens have a fully fledged alternative emissions reduction plan and industrial policy to help workers transition to cleaner jobs. But a strong role in Opposition – even a leading one – does not necessarily transmit to a leading role in Government. If Swarbrick genuinely wants to lead the largest party in the next government, there's a long way to go for her and the Greens. It's something she readily acknowledges, telling reporters that 'this change is not going to happen overnight'. And yet, with little over a year until the next election, it can't wait much longer if the Greens think there's a genuine chance of changing the government in 2026. Building a base which can out-muscle Labour's is a daunting task, particularly for a party which has at times been accused of navel-gazing and insularity. Acknowledging this, too, is a sign of a changing focus for the party. In her speech on Sunday, Swarbrick urged members at the AGM to be open to uncomfortable conversations with people who are not the party's 'natural constituencies'. 'Where do you want to invest your valuable energy and focus? On winning debates or changing our world? On being right, or building relationships? On being comfortable, or growing?' she asked, rhetorically. 'How do we get a mass of exhausted regular people, fed up with politics, to engage and organise with a bunch of earnest nerds – that's us, guys – to win power against some of the most well-funded and unscrupulous industries and political actors?' While the party has at times in past elections focused more on boosting turnout from its core constituency, Swarbrick said she believes there is potential for the Greens to vastly expand their base by reaching beyond those traditional Green voters to people whose interests and values are aligned. As examples, she points to coal miners on the West Coast, who she met last year, the Kinleith Mill workers who the Greens worked with on their industrial policy and perhaps the party's least likely source of new voters: farmers. 'Sure, the conversation to begin with may be a little bit frosty…. But as soon as you get through all of those presumptions that we may make about each other and we come to the core, common good that we share, the common values, you find that those coal miners just want a decent income,' Swarbrick told reporters. 'They want to be able to stay in their community and to feel a sense of pride. Those are things that we can work together on…. That is the broadest possible coalition that we could possibly find across New Zealanders.' Of course, there's another way a future government could be labelled 'Green-led'. Davidson alluded to this on Sunday, without saying directly that it's what the Greens actually means when they talk about a Green government. 'Setting the agenda isn't just about numbers. We've got a Government right now whose tail is being wagged by two smaller parties,' she said. The Greens won't come out and say it, for fear of handing over effective ammunition to the Government, but a more realistic vision of a Green-led government is more closely modelled on the current coalition, with Chris Hipkins swapped in for Christopher Luxon and Swarbrick and Davidson (and potentially Te Pāti Māori's co-leaders) playing the roles of David Seymour and Winston Peters: A Green tail wagging the Labour dog.
