The father of a schoolgirl who was savagely murdered in a crime so unspeakable ns will never know its full extent has said the justice system got the killer’s punishment ‘100 per cent wrong’.
Bridgette ‘Biddy’ Porter, 10, was killed in a gruesome attack at a farmhouse in rural NSW in July 2020.
The identity of her killer, a mentally ill 14-year-old girl who was known to her, cannot be revealed for legal reasons.
Biddy’s injuries were so horrific that they have been suppressed from the public for 20 years.
On the advice from the NSW Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), the family originally supported the pursuit of a ‘special’ verdict.
This meant that in 2021 a judge found the offence ‘proven but (the accused) is not criminally responsible’ because of her mental health impairments.
Biddy’s parents, Dominic and Rebekah, were told this would see their daughter’s killer spend longer incarcerated under the care of the Mental Health Review Tribunal who control her future release.
But they were both outraged to discover she had been allowed on day release earlier this year.
Dominic Porter, who has been left with severe PTSD from his daughter’s death, feels let down by the justice system and is campaigning for changes to victims’ rights.
‘They (the criminal justice system) got it 100 per cent wrong. It’s in the detectives’ view. I think it’s in the n public’s view,’ Mr Porter told Daily Mail .
The former bank manager fears that his daughter’s killer will taste freedom soon – and it rankles that she has been given more support than those left to pick up the pieces from her crimes.
‘It’s going to happen, she is going to walk free,’ Mr Porter told this publication.
‘She’s given more benefits inside the child prison, as I call it, from every aspect: mental health, physical care, bed and board: she’s effectively paid to be in jail. And any member of the n public would not sit well with that.’
Meanwhile, after Biddy was murdered, her parents were only entitled to $7,500 support payments.
Mr Porter reserves particular ire towards the DPP and the MHRT and has called for an inquiry into both.
It’s a move that is supported by Independent Member for Orange Phillip Donato who will present an e-petition signed by almost 40,000 to debate Biddy’s case on the floor of the NSW parliament next week.
‘There needs to be some accountability,’ Mr Porter said.
‘You can’t say that nobody is accountable for what has occurred. And that’s basically what the court n court system has done.’
Mr Porter said the DPP was a ‘force of its own’ that paid little regard to victim’s desires.
‘They make decisions, they make changes, they do as they will and none of that takes into account the victim’s perspective,’ he said.
‘It’s all about protecting the murderer or perpetrator and their best interests.’
It’s a view supported by Biddy’s mother and Mr Porter’s ex-wife, Rebekah, who told a recent episode of Spotlight that the family were not given access to important court documents.
‘We had a brief meeting with the DPP before we went to trial, with them convincing us that the best course of action would be to go for the act proven but criminally not responsible due to mental illness because it would mean that she would spend a lot longer put away,’ she told the program.
It’s understood that Mr Porter and his former wife Rebekah had about 90 meetings with the DPP.
But Mr Porter insists the system needs to be ‘overhauled’ to better support victims.
‘I want to change victims’ rights. I want no other family to go through what we’ve been through,’ he said.
‘I don’t want to blow smoke up my own chimney, so to speak, but I come from a pretty highly educated family. My dad is a clinical psychologist.
‘We have an extraordinary level of resources, not that it makes it any easier. We couldn’t navigate the system.
‘But what happens when something like this happens to a lower socio-economic family?
Mr Porter was was a very successful bank manager but now he is unable to work and relies on Centrelink benefits.
‘I was a highly successful bank manager for the majority of my career and now I’m unable to work,’ he said.
‘I’m stuck. It’s completely paralysing.’
Mr Porter claims that how the criminal justice system has treated him would ‘not pass the pub test’.
‘I could walk into any pub in right now, today, next year, next week in five years time and explain my story,’ he said
‘And would the Aussie bloke or woman who is sitting at the bar believe what I’ve gone through? No, they wouldn’t.’
He added: ‘I’ll fight till the day that I die. That’s what Bridget would have wanted.’
Biddy’s parents, who are separated, are being supported by Advocacy in their campaign for justice.
‘Sadly, Biddy’s family’s circumstances are not unique,’ Clare Collins, Chair of Advocacy said.
‘With a chasm of inequity between victims of heinous crimes and perpetrators, there’s something terribly wrong when NSW Government agencies with the responsibility to defend victims’ rights, fail to meet community expectations.’
Advocacy is also calling for a coronial inquest to investigate whether Biddy’s murder could have been prevented.
The DPP put out a statement in response to the Spotlight interview where they expressed sympathy with Biddy’s parents but defended their approach.
‘The Office had regular, ongoing contact with the family, answered their questions whenever possible and at every stage took their views into account,’ the spokesperson said.
They added: ‘The different possible approaches and outcomes were discussed with the family before the Crown determined how to proceed.
‘The family told the ODPP they preferred to proceed with a special verdict, where the key issue for the court was whether the accused had a defence of mental health impairment available.’
The spokesperson said that if a special verdict had not been pursued, Biddy’s killer would likely have been ‘sentenced for manslaughter on the basis of a substantial impairment due to mental illness’.
And since the perpetrator was a child, ‘the law also recognises that the younger a child is, the lower their moral culpability, which would further reduce the length of any sentence imposed’.
‘When an accused is charged with murder, but their mental impairment leads the court to enter a special verdict of act proven but not criminally responsible, they are placed in the custody of the Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT) as a forensic patient until they are assessed as appropriate to release,’ the spokesperson added.
‘This involves consideration of a number of factors, including whether their release would endanger themselves or others.
‘Similar considerations arise when the MHRT is considering day release. These are not decisions that involve the ODPP.’
Daily Mail approached the DPP for further comment.
A spokesperson for the MHRT said it does not ‘comment on the particulars of any patient outside of the hearing/review process’.