Retrial ordered for corrections officer Nadia Khalil for alleged abuse of juveniles
An appeals court has quashed the conviction of a former New South Wales juvenile corrections officer and ordered she face a retrial for allegedly abusing five boys in her care.
In 2021, Nadia Khalil was sentenced to 12 years in jail with a non-parole period of more than seven years for sexually assaulting five boys at Reiby Juvenile Justice Centre near Campbelltown on the outskirts of Sydney.
She appealed against the decision, alleging a forensic psychologist gave evidence outside his area of expertise.
In the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal hearing on March 3, Ms Khalil's barrister Phillip Boulten SC argued that allowing a report by clinical and forensic psychologist Christopher Lennings to be admitted as evidence was a miscarriage of justice.
Dr Lennings's website said his areas of research interest include violent and sexually violent young offenders, youth suicide and child protection.
The court heard the doctor was asked to review literature regarding young males being sexually victimised by staff in detention centres.
"We say his evidence was not based on specialised knowledge of youth detention guards," Mr Boulten told the hearing.
Appellant justices Peter Garling, Dina Yehia and Belinda Rigg handed down their restricted decision today.
Information is limited in the restricted judgement, but it does say that the justices considered whether "the opinion about youth workers was irrelevant and highly prejudicial".
The three appellant judges today ordered the convictions and sentence be quashed, ruling that the appeal be allowed.
The trio also made an order that there be a retrial of the appellant.
They also ordered the case be sent back to the District Court for mention on June 6.
Reiby houses children up to 15 years of age and the state's youngest detainees have been incarcerated there.
The appeals court was told she held a position of trust and authority.
Ms Khalil's alleged offending occurred between 1997 and 2005.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
35 minutes ago
- ABC News
Sydney man Gurvindar Singh alleged mastermind of illegal tobacco, drug ring
A man with no criminal record or prior underworld connections is the alleged mastermind behind a plot to import 20 million illegal cigarettes and almost half a tonne of drugs into Sydney. Gurvindar Singh, 42, faces a maximum penalty of life in jail if convicted. In total, police allege they have tied back 50 kilograms of cocaine from Panama, 20 million cigarettes from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and 280kg of liquid meth from Canada to Mr Singh. Police alleged they tracked Mr Singh and his associates using a messaging app, with undercover officers and telephone intercepts, before sweeping raids over the weekend. One of the intercepts, police will allege in court, captured Mr Singh saying "it's fake" when he realised police had swapped the 50kg of cocaine for an inert substance. The drugs were allegedly hidden inside cement bags imported from Panama into Port Botany last week. Police will allege Mr Singh enlisted the help of Canadians Aman Kang, 24, and Mani Singh Dhaliwal, 31, who are related by marriage, to sell the drugs to crime networks. Both have been charged with possessing a commercial quantity of drugs and have also been refused bail. It is also alleged in court documents that when the drugs arrived in the cement bags, Mr Singh wanted to sell the cement they arrived in too. Police will allege Mr Singh netted $443,000 in proceeds of crime after selling some of the illegal cigarettes on the lucrative Sydney black market. The tobacco had allegedly been illegally imported from the UAE in January. Police accuse Mr Singh of using a freight forwarding company in Punchbowl to import more than 20 million cigarettes in three consignments. The police statement of facts in this case reveals that police have been watching Mr Singh and six associates for two years under a team called the Multi Agency Strike Team (MAST). The MAST began the investigation looking for workers at ports of entry into the country helping to smuggle in drugs, before evidence led them to the men who were later charged. Police say they first identified Mr Singh as the alleged ringleader when they uncovered a plot to import 280kg of liquid meth in August 2024 from Vancouver. Police will allege they charged two men with a raft of drug offences after observing them attempting to cool and extract the liquid meth in Riverstone. Mr Singh has been charged with five counts of importing a commercial quantity of drugs and border-controlled tobacco, two counts of dealing with proceeds of crime and two relating to his role in leading a criminal group. The most serious charges carry a maximum sentence of life in jail, but Mr Singh has not entered any pleas to the offences. He appeared in Parramatta Bail Court on Sunday, where his lawyer, Ahmed Dib, argued for his release on bail. Part of his argument to remain in the community was that Mr Singh had a series of health conditions, was the breadwinner for his family, and was willing to put up his house as a surety. He was denied bail and will remain in custody until his next court appearance at the Downing Centre Local Court next month. Mr Dib was contacted by the ABC but he declined to comment on the case.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Requirement for professional carpet cleaning at end of lease ruled invalid in Tasmania
Tasmanian tenants are not necessarily required to have their carpets professionally cleaned when they vacate their rental property, despite "almost all" leases saying they are, a ruling has found. In a recent bond dispute regarding a Burnie property, the Residential Tenancy Commissioner found the tenant is only required to have the carpet professionally cleaned if they leave it in a worse state than when they began their lease. "A tenant is not responsible for carpet cleaning performed as a matter of general practice as opposed to any real need or genuine failure of the tenant, in accordance with their obligations," it states. The Tenants Union of Tasmania, which represented the tenant, said this was the first definitive ruling on the matter and was a legally enforceable decision. "It really shines a light that a blanket clause in standard tenancy agreements that says you have to have premises professionally cleaned is invalid," Tenants Union senior solicitor Andrew Smith said. "A tenant has the right not to do it, if they've left it in the same condition as when they moved in and there's proof of that. Mr Smith said despite the ruling, the condition to have carpets professionally cleaned was appearing in leases "all the time", as it was in the standard lease provided to landlords by the Real Estate Institute of Tasmania. "It is in the standard Real Estate Institute lease almost all real estate agents will use and a lot of private landlords will choose to use, even some social housing providers are using these leases," he said. The Real Estate Institute of Tasmania has declined to comment. In the case that led to this ruling, the Residential Tenancy Commissioner said the owner had provided a photo of a "small yellow stain on the carpet of one of the bedrooms, which was not recorded in the ingoing condition report". But no other photos had been supplied showing the condition of the carpet at the end of the tenant's lease. Hence, the commissioner said the tenant was only responsible for the cost of cleaning that one stain. "I will award an amount I consider reasonable given the stain in question is very small, even when photographed close up," the ruling states. "The owner is awarded $25 for carpet cleaning." The case also dealt with the cost of fumigating the property, given the tenant had a pet. The tenant had argued the same principle should apply to fumigation as carpet cleaning, but the commissioner took a different view. "While I understand they seem similar in nature, carpet cleaning is predominantly cosmetic and the requirement can be determined based on outgoing photographs," the ruling says. "Fumigation is considered a necessary measure to return the property to a hygienic state and remove pests, dander and other allergens associated with pets in the premises. "Therefore, I am satisfied that a requirement for fumigation at the end of a tenancy is reasonable and is not inconsistent with the [Residential Tenancy] Act." The Tenants Union said it did not agree entirely with the commissioner's interpretation of the law. "We think it's a similar issue and that clauses requiring professional fumigation unconditionally are also invalid if they're not required by the condition of the premises," Mr Smith said. "Say if the tenant had a dog that always stayed outside or simply a fish in a fish tank, why is a tick and flea spray required inside the premises?"
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Here are the biggest takeaways so far from Erin Patterson's testimony in her murder trial
Accused triple-murderer Erin Patterson has continued to give evidence in her own trial as it edges closer to an end. Ms Patterson's defence lawyer, Colin Mandy SC, called her to the stand late on Monday to begin questioning her. The 50-year-old has been charged with murder and attempted murder after three relatives died from death cap mushroom poisoning following a meal prepared and served by Ms Patterson. Another relative, Ian Wilkinson, fell seriously ill but survived. While Ms Patterson is expected to take the stand again on Wednesday — answering questions from her defence lawyers before the prosecution has the opportunity to cross-examine her — here are some of the key things we have learned so far during her testimony. On Tuesday, Ms Patterson conceded that the beef Wellington dish she prepared for her relatives contained death cap mushrooms. "Do you accept that there must have been death cap mushrooms in [the meal]?" her defence lawyer, Colin Mandy SC, asked. "Yes, I do," Ms Patterson replied. Ms Patterson has always maintained her innocence and her lawyers argue the deaths were a tragic accident. She told the court the majority of the mushrooms used in the deadly meal had come from the local Woolworths in Leongatha and some from a grocer in Melbourne. She said mushrooms she purchased from an Asian grocer in April 2023 smelt "very pungent", so she put them in a container and took them back to her Leongatha home to store them. Earlier in the trial, the jury was shown messages sent between Ms Patterson and some of her online friends criticising her in-laws. In one of those messages, Ms Patterson wrote: "This family I swear to f***ing go". "I'm sick of this shit, I want nothing to do with them … So f*** 'em," another message read. On Tuesday, she told the court she wished she had never said those things. The court heard that Ms Patterson regretted the language she had used and "played up the emotion" to get support from her online friends. In previously heard evidence, a Facebook friend of Ms Patterson said she was openly an atheist and had described clashes with her estranged husband, Simon, stemming from his rigid religious beliefs. But on Tuesday, Ms Patterson confirmed to the jury that she was Christian. "They would gently make fun of the fact that I was religious, and I would try to, I don't know, evangelise back to them in a sense," she said when asked about the online comments she made to friends that she was an atheist. "But it was all in good humour." Ms Patterson outlined to the jury that she developed an interest in wild mushrooms while going on walks during the first COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020. She told the court she noticed lots of them popping up at the Korumburra Botanical Gardens during those walks. Eventually, she said, she became confident in her ability to identify different species of mushrooms, even eating some she picked herself. "They tasted good and I didn't get sick," she said. The court also heard that Ms Patterson would dehydrate mushrooms she foraged as well as some she purchased from the store to dry and preserve them. Previously, the court heard she lied to police about owning a food dehydrator and foraging for mushrooms. During her testimony on Tuesday, Ms Patterson recounted experiences that had damaged her trust in the medical system, including health episodes involving her children where she felt her concerns were not being listened to. She told the jury she often turned to "Doctor Google", including one time when she convinced herself that she had a brain tumour. She admitted to the jury that she never had ovarian cancer but that she had been experiencing chronic headaches, fatigue, abdominal pain, sudden weight gain and fluid retention. Throughout the trial, the court has heard a cancer diagnosis was the reason Ms Patterson invited her guests to the lunch in question. She also told the court she never had a needle biopsy on a lump on her elbow, which she spoke to her mother-in-law, Gail Patterson, about in messages shown to the jury. Ms Patterson outlined that she had had body image issues since she was a teenager and said that her mother had weighed her weekly as a child. "I've tried every diet under the sun … it's been a rollercoaster over the years," she said. Ms Patterson was visibly emotional when she spoke about being bulimic and binge eating. Ms Patterson spoke about multiple separations between her and her estranged husband, Simon. During her evidence, she said the separation was "difficult" but the pair "went back to just being really good friends". "I didn't want to separate, but I felt there was no choice," she said on Tuesday. "Our primary problem was, if we had a disagreement or any kind of conflict, we didn't seem to be able to talk about it in a way where either of us felt heard or understood. "We just felt hurt, and we didn't really know how to do that well." Ms Patterson told the court she had put three properties under her and Simon's names because she "wanted some way to demonstrate to Simon [that] I see a future for us". Simon previously gave evidence of the pair's tumultuous relationship. "I'll put it this way, she would leave each time … it was always her leaving me," he previously told the court.
