ROBERT FARQUHARSON
By Ashleigh Kwong, Kevin Kingsley, Kirra
Havemann & Nikita Ash
FACTS OF THE CASE
Robert Farquharson, divorcee, was driving with
his three sons on Father’s Day when the car
veered off the road and drove into a lake
 The three sons were trapped and drowned but
Farquharson escaped
 Farquharson charged with three counts of
murder and found guilty by jury
 Defence claimed that Farquharson had suffered
from a coughing fit causing him to lose control of
the vehicle
 Appeal pending on 31 grounds (defence)

FACT BEFORE THEORY INTERNET
CAMPAIGN
Facebook group established by Farquharson
sympathizers to campaign for his freedom
 Uses photographs (police as well as family) to
humanize Farquharson and make him the victim
 Biased representation of police evidence and
court proceedings
 Supposedly ineffective police work highlighted by
campaign

LEGAL ISSUES RELATING TO SOCIAL
MEDIA
Difficult for courts to “quarantine” jurors and
prevent bias
 Easily accessible materials that are presented as
evidence externally
 Changes in public perception of justice through
social media which do not match legal definitions
 Jurors instructed to ignore media
representations of the case but it is becoming
increasingly difficult to do so

EXAMPLE OF CONTRADICTING
PERSPECTIVES
Police Evidence
Social Media
• Photographs taken of tire
tracks and yellow paint used
to mark direction
• Used to establish guilt i.e.
prove that Farquharson must
have intentionally veered off
the road to create such marks
• Focus on defence’s questioning
of photographs
• Yellow paint shown to be
incorrectly applied
• According to defence,
Farquharson lost control and
the vehicle moved in an arc
(contrary to yellow marks)
• Facebook campaign used this
error to highlight police
injustice
• Used to show proof of
reasonable doubt