Student ID: 18937322 Page |1

Figure 1: Lindy and Azaria Chamberlain at Uluru.1

The Trial of Lindy Chamberlain

‘Trial by media’ or merely disbelief for her story?

This essay will explore one of Australia’s most famous criminal law cases, the trial of Lindy
Chamberlain for the murder of her daughter, Azaria Chamberlain, in 1980. It is proposed
that although there was a heavy media presence during this trial, a “trial by media” did not
occur and the jury’s finding of guilt was not influenced by the media to a great degree. This
essay will examine the prevalence of the case in Australian discourse, the reactions that
Australians had to Lindy Chamberlain’s story and to her sexuality and femininity, and the
grassroots support that gathered and which ultimately set Lindy free.
Student ID: 18937322
The Initial Events and Coronial Inquests
On the night of the 17th of August 1980, a
cry rang out through the night, “My God,
My God, a dingo has got my baby”.2
Michael and Lindy Chamberlain, their sons
Aidan and Reagan, and nine-week old
baby Azaria had left Mount Isa in
Queensland, to travel to central Australia
for a holiday.3
Figure 2: Lindy Chamberlain, 16 August 1980.4
Instead of relaxation and enjoyment, they
lost their daughter and would be exposed
to widespread ridicule, slander and
harassment, in addition to criminal
convictions, for the crime of allegedly
murdering their daughter and being an
accessory to the crime afterwards. This
journey would last for 32 years, four
coronial inquests, a trial, numerous
Page |2
appeals including to the High Court, and a
Royal Commission until the pair were
exonerated, and Azaria’s death was
recognised as having been due to a dingo
attack.5
Lindy Chamberlain’s account that a dingo
entered the Chamberlain’s tent, snatched
up Azaria Chamberlain and ran away with
her in its jaws was met with widespread
disbelief across Australia as many people
were unable to countenance this act with
the Australia dingo, and found the idea –
horrible as it was – that Lindy
Chamberlain had cut her infant daughter’s
throat with a pair of scissors, more
believable. This disbelief was prevalent
despite the evidence to the contrary, such
as many dingoes being known to visit the
Ayers Rock camping area, numerous
attacks by dingos having been previously
reported, including just the day before
Azaria was taken, and a report by the
senior ranger at Ayers Rock that had
warned that “children and babies can be
considered possible prey”.6
Student ID: 18937322 Page |3

On Trial own child as “the dingo story is

After an initial inquiry from December preposterous… its not capable of belief”
1980 to February 1981, in which Coroner according to the Crown prosecutor.10
Denis Barritt found that the Chamberlains Indeed in his closing address to the jury,
had not caused Azaria’s death, a second the Crown prosecutor commented that
inquiry was held in late 1981 which “not only [was it] a dexterous dingo” as it
recommended that the pair be had managed to pull Azaria out of her
prosecuted for the murder of Azaria clothing without undoing all of the
Chamberlain, and being an accessory after buttons, “it was a very tidy dingo… it had
the fact.7 Thus on the 13th of September managed to cut [her clothing] with a pair
1982, Lindy Chamberlain found herself on of scissors”.11
trial for the murder of her child.
Ultimately, even the judge trivialised
The prosecution argued that Lindy dingos in his address to the jury as he
Chamberlain had taken her nine week old advised them that “unlike the Bengal
baby from her bassinette in the family tiger, the Australian dingo has not been
tent, sat in the passenger seat of the generally recognised as dangerous…
Chamberlain’s Torana and slit her baby’s dingoes may play, nip people… and even
throat with a pair of nail scissors before take up soccer… but they would not… take
hiding the corpse in her husband’s camera up dressmaking”.12
bag and then returning to the barbecue
area to chat with fellow tourists.8 At no
point during the trial however did the
Crown ever suggest a motive for why
Lindy had done this, despite the fact that
the defence had produced ten
independent witnesses who had given
evidence that Lindy Chamberlain did not
suffer from post-natal depression, or any
other condition that may make her kill her
own child.9 Instead the Crown preferred
the story of a woman who butchered her
Figure 3: The Chamberlains at court.13
Student ID: 18937322
Disbelief for Lindy’s story
What did one dingo say to another
outside the maternity hospital?
Shall we eat here or take away?
What could have changed the course
14
of history? A dingo at Bethlehem.
These quotes display that the Australian
public did not belief Lindy’s story about a
dingo attacking and eating her baby, and
it struck many as a bold-faced lie that was
a desperate attempt to evade
responsibility for her purported crime. It
has been said that the “professors in
London, journalists inhabiting a Sydney
Figure 4: Next dingo you see, sing out and I’ll stop.18
As the cartoon above displays, it can be
argued that the Australian public reduced
the tragedy to a joke about unruly
children, and how sometimes every
parent wishes a ‘dingo’ would carry the
children away. This in turn leads the
viewer to disbelieve Lindy’s claims as they
Page |4
high-rise and [investigating detectives]”
were inner-city urban Australians who had
little experience with rural central
Australia, and it was these people who
were the driving force behind Lindy’s
incarceration.15 In contrast, “rangers and
locals, including Aboriginal people, had no
doubt that a dingo could, would, and did
take and eat the baby”.16 Indeed, a 1984
poll found that 76.8% of participants
believed that Lindy Chamberlain was
guilty, and Lindy’s trial had only reinforced
their opinions.17
are encouraged to think that the dingo
was an outlandish claim made up to cover
for her murdering her child in a fit of rage,
bout of depression, or merely being fed
up with a demanding child.
Student ID: 18937322
Femininity and Motherhood on Trial
A further ground of attack against Lindy
was the belief that her attitude and
behaviour “flew in the face of strongly-
held notions about what is normal”.19
Lindy was widely accused of being
heartless, cynical and self-aggrandising
due to her reaction after Azaria was
taken, her behaviour in courts, her
willingness to engage in interviews and for
her simple insistence that a dingo had
taken her child.20 This is because Lindy
Chamberlain was “condemned… not for
murder but because of a public belief
that… she had violated the sanctity of
motherhood”.21 People believed that a
woman who could talk about a dingo
“[peeling] back the skin as they go… like
an orange” felt no emotions regarding the
death of her daughter.22 Furthermore,
Lindy was attacked for being “too
composed, too in control of herself” as
she did not “act stereotypically as a grief-
stricken mother. She did not have
hysterics, go to pieces, require drugs or
tranquilisers”.23 Those who believed in her
guilt took her behaviour to be proof of the
fact that she had murdered Azaria, rather
than that of a woman who had been
thrust into the spotlight and was coping in
the best way that she could.
Page |5
Even Lindy’s clothes and body became
objects of criticism levelled against her as
her “tanned shoulders and off-the-
shoulder apricot dress” were believed to
be signs of a woman who wanted to look
attractive, and this in turn made her a bad
woman and “everybody knows that a bad
woman cannot be a good mother”.24
“Sexy woman, or good mother?”25
Journalists who reported on the case even
believed that “she obviously dressed to
highlight her attributes” and described her
as “look[ing] stunning… her lithe body
faultlessly sun-tanned as far as could be
seen”, whilst a “guessing game developed
over whether Lindy would arrive in a new
dress or not”.26 Lindy’s pregnancy with
her fourth child was also perceived as
being a “cynical act to play upon the
emotions of the jury, to cheat justice and
[to] avoid retribution for her actions”.27
Lindy was ultimately found guilty of
having murdered Azaria Chamberlain and
was sentenced to life imprisonment with
hard labour, whilst Michael Chamberlain
received a suspended sentence for being
an accessory after the fact.
Student ID: 18937322
Trial by Media?
The criticism that was levelled at Lindy
Chamberlain raises two questions. Firstly,
was it primarily spread/received through
the news media, or through ordinary
discourse between Australians? Secondly,
if it was through the news media, did the
coverage of the case actually affect the
jury’s decision-making?
In an attempt to combat the “months of
innuendo, suspicion and probably the
most malicious gossip ever witnessed in
this country”, the first coroner allowed
his findings to be broadcast live on
television to an audience of about 2
million people, an audience second only
to the moon landings.28 This was the first
time that this had occurred in an
Australian courtroom. This clearly displays
the Australian public’s interest in the case,
but it does not suggest that the media
adversely affected public opinion.
However, evidence of media dominance is
shown by attendance of a host of
“journalists, photographers, artists and
television crew” at the case, with 30
cameramen jostling each other for the
best photograph of the Chamberlain
arriving in Alice Springs in 1981, 50 to 60
members of the media being present
during the second inquiry, and a further
Page |6
60 to 80 being expected to attend the
trial.29
It was even considered worthy of a
headline that Michael Chamberlain had
“evade[d] reporters at Sydney Airport” by
using a fake name when he left Darwin
after the trial.30
Figure 5: The media coverage.31
Although this may appear to point to the
media having dominated the discourse on
the Chamberlain case, it should be noted
that the case was also a source of
conversation between people regardless
of the media’s coverage, as seen by the
coroner’s comment regarding innuendo
and gossip, and the dingo jokes previously
mentioned. This is also supported by
comments made by one of the jurors from
the trial, and letters to the editor that
were published in The Canberra Times.
A juror spoke out and said that he
believed the judicial system was “in
danger of being overcome by an
Student ID: 18937322
emotional coup d’etat”, and that
members of the public had no right to
second guess the jury and suppose that
the jury did not have the capability of
judging the evidence without being
“influenced by pre-trial publicity”.32 This
attitude was shared by others, such as a
Mrs Jane Chapman who asked “are we
about to… [make] a mockery of our
Figure 6: Dingo Radio presents… dog rock.35
In conclusion, the Chamberlain case
captivated Australia’s attention and
inspired many, who perceived her
imprisonment to be a grave injustice, to
rally to Lindy’s side and to campaign for
her release.
Days after Lindy was found guilty,
thousands of signatures had been
collected and a rally was held in Brisbane,
Page |7
judicial system… regardless of the facts…
which [have] been subject to full judicial
procedure?“33 This view was supported by
others who said they “feel far more
inclined to agree with the conclusion of 12
people who sat through 33 days of
testimony… than with a concerned
[citizen] who is acting upon a sentimental
spasm”.34
whilst in Melbourne a sculptor organised a
100,000 signature petition to “call on the
Federal Government to show mercy”.36
On the 4th of May 1984, a petition was
presented to the Governor-General which
had been signed by 131,000 people
demanding a full judicial inquiry into the
case and the immediate release of Lindy
Chamberlain.37 In addition, “two former
Student ID: 18937322 Page |8

federal Attorney-Generals called for
Lindy’s release”, alongside a former NSW
Supreme Court judge who “wrote an open
letter to every member of Federal
Parliament”.
Not only did these people strive for
Lindy’s release, but 40,000 people also
sent Lindy personal letters during and
after her imprisonment.38
It was the Australian people who initially
disbelieved her, and it was the Australian
people who were instrumental in setting
Lindy Chamberlain free.

Figure 7: Dear Lindy, With Christian love.39

Student ID: 18937322 Page |9

1
Michael Chamberlain, Lindy and Azaria Chamberlain at Uluru [image], August 1980
<https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-31/lindy-and-azaria-chamberlain-at-uluru/8154120>,
accessed 8 October 2019.
2
Inquest into the death of Azaria Chantel Loren Chamberlain [2012] NTMC 020, 7.
3
Royal Commission of Inquiry into Chamberlain Convictions, ‘Report’, [online document], (1987,
Northern Territory Department of the Attorney-General and Justice)
<https://justice.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/209057/azaria-hamberlain-appendix-av-
web.pdf>, 13, accessed 1 October 2019.
4
Michael Chamberlain, Lindy Chamberlain holding Azaria Chamberlain, with Aidan and Reagan
Chamberlain, standing on the Stuart Highway with sign to Ayers Rock, alongside their Torana on
August 16, 1980 [image], (16 August 1980) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-31/lindy-
chamberlain-holding-azaria-chamberlain2c-with-aidan-and-/8152786>, accessed 8 October 2019.
5
‘Azaria case timeline’, The Age, 7 Oct. 2004, < https://www.theage.com.au/national/azaria-case-
timeline-20041007-gdyr4s.html>, accessed 22 Sep. 2019; Inquest into the death of Azaria Chantel
Loren Chamberlain, 7.
6
Royal Commission of Inquiry into Chamberlain Convictions, 29-30, 336.
7
‘Azaria case timeline’, The Age.
8
Chamberlain v R (No 2) [1984] HCA 7, 23 (Gibbs CJ and Mason J).
9
‘Conviction impossible: QC’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 26 Oct. 1982, 6, in Trove [online database],
accessed 10 October 2019; ‘Evidence suggests murder: QC’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 27 Oct. 1982,
10, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.
10
Ibid; Ibid.
11
‘Conviction impossible: QC’, The Canberra Times.
12
‘The Australian dingo not like a tiger, judge says’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 30 Oct. 1982, 10, in
Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.
13
Unknown, 1982, Lindy and Michael Chamberlain outside court, September 1982, in National
Library of Australia [online database], accessed 25 September 2019. Acknowledgement to The
Canberra Times.
14
Noel Saunders, in Deborah Staines, Michelle Arrow and Katherine Biber, (eds.), The Chamberlain
case – nation, law, memory (North Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2009), 32.
15
Ibid, Blair Wood, 48.
16
Ibid.
Student ID: 18937322 P a g e | 10

17
Julia Baird, ‘She’s Innocent. We’re Guilty.’, The New York Times, 15 Jun. 2012,
<https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/16/opinion/shes-innocent-were-guilty.html>, accessed 3
October 2019.
18
Geoff Pryor, 1982, Next dingo you see, sing out and I’ll stop, National Library of Australia [online
database], accessed 20 September 2019.
19
Dianne Johnson, The Chamberlain case, 15.
20
Ibid, Blair Wood, 44; Fay Anderson, ‘Photographing Lindy: Australian press photography and the
Chamberlain case, 1980-2012’, Media International Australia, 162/1 (2016) 13.
21
Ibid, Kerryn Goldsworthy, 35.
22
The media and Lindy Chamberlain, and reporting criminal matters in the Northern Territory today,
8 Jun. 2012, <https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/archived/mediareport/the-media-
and-lindy-chamberlain2c-and-reporting-criminal-matte/4064942#transcript>, accessed 8 Oct. 2019.
23
Paul Reynolds, The Chamberlain case, 64.
24
Ibid, Kerryn Goldsworthy, 37.
25
Ibid.
26
Dianne Johnson, The Chamberlain case, 15; James Simmonds, Azaria, Wednesday’s child (West
Melbourne: TPNL Books, 1982), 138 cited in Dianne Johnson, The Chamberlain case, 14.
27
Paul Reynolds, The Chamberlain case, 66.
28
‘Dingo killed baby, unknown person took body: coroner’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 21 Feb. 1981,
3, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019; The media and Lindy Chamberlain, and
reporting criminal matters in the Northern Territory today.
29
‘Chamberlains in Alice Springs’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 14 Dec. 1981, 7, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019; ‘Inquest on Azaria to hear of tests’, The Canberra Times (ACT),
1 Feb. 1982, 3, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019; ‘Trial of the Chamberlains set
to begin in Darwin tomorrow’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 12 Sep. 1982, 3, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019.
30
‘Michael Chamberlain evades reporters at Sydney Airport’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 1 Nov. 1982,
3, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.
31
Unknown, Michael Chamberlain: Media coverage of the couple was unprecedented at the time
[image], (unknown) <https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/michael-chamberlain/image-
gallery/67997bdc95d7b2c441516b1098f81602>, accessed 25 September 2019.
32
‘Azaria juror speaks out against campaign to free Mrs Chamberlain’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 12
Apr. 1984, 1, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.
Student ID: 18937322 P a g e | 11

33
‘Campaign to free Mrs Chamberlain’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 19 Nov. 1985, 2, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019.
34
‘Sentimental spasm about Lindy’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 7 Nov. 1982, 2, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019.
35
‘Dingo Radio presents… dog rock’, Tharunka, 15 March 1982, 1, in Trove [online database],
accessed 27 September 2019.
36
‘Rally organised over Chamberlain verdict’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 3 Nov. 1982, 7, in Trove
[online database], accessed 10 October 2019; ‘MHA supports petition to free Mrs Chamberlain’, The
Canberra Times (ACT), 4 Nov. 1982, 7, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.
37
‘Chamberlain petition to Governor-General’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 4 May 1984, 3, in Trove
[online database], accessed 10 October 2019.
38
Katherine Biber, ‘The Archival Turn in Law: The Papers of Lindy Chamberlain in the National Library
of Australia’, Sydney Law Review, 39(3) (2017) 277-301.
39
Alana Valentine, Dear Lindy: A Nation Responds to the Loss of Azaria, (Canberra: National Library
of Australia, 2017), 58.
Student ID: 18937322 P a g e | 12

Bibliography
Anderson, Fay, ‘Photographing Lindy: Australian press photography and the Chamberlain case, 1980-
2012’, Media International Australia, 162/1 (2016) 13.

Baird, Julia, ‘She’s Innocent. We’re Guilty.’, The New York Times, 15 Jun. 2012,
<https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/16/opinion/shes-innocent-were-guilty.html>, accessed
3 October 2019.

Biber, Katherine, ‘The Archival Turn in Law: The Papers of Lindy Chamberlain in the National Library
of Australia’, Sydney Law Review, 39(3) (2017) 277-301.

Chamberlain v R (No 2) [1984] HCA 7, 23 (Gibbs CJ and Mason J).

Inquest into the death of Azaria Chantel Loren Chamberlain [2012] NTMC 020, 7.

Royal Commission of Inquiry into Chamberlain Convictions, ‘Report’, [online document], (1987,
Northern Territory Department of the Attorney-General and Justice)
<https://justice.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/209057/azaria-hamberlain-
appendix-av-web.pdf>, 13, accessed 1 October 2019.

Staines, Deborah, Michelle Arrow and Katherine Biber, (eds.), The Chamberlain case – nation, law,
memory (North Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2009), 32.

‘Azaria case timeline’, The Age, 7 Oct. 2004, <https://www.theage.com.au/national/azaria-case-

timeline-20041007-gdyr4s.html>, accessed 22 Sep. 2019

‘Azaria juror speaks out against campaign to free Mrs Chamberlain’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 12
Apr. 1984, 1, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Campaign to free Mrs Chamberlain’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 19 Nov. 1985, 2, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Chamberlain petition to Governor-General’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 4 May 1984, 3, in Trove
[online database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Chamberlains in Alice Springs’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 14 Dec. 1981, 7, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019

‘Conviction impossible: QC’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 26 Oct. 1982, 6, in Trove [online database],
accessed 10 October 2019

‘Dingo killed baby, unknown person took body: coroner’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 21 Feb. 1981, 3,
in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019

‘Evidence suggests murder: QC’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 27 Oct. 1982, 10, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Inquest on Azaria to hear of tests’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 1 Feb. 1982, 3, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019
Student ID: 18937322 P a g e | 13

‘MHA supports petition to free Mrs Chamberlain’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 4 Nov. 1982, 7, in Trove
[online database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Michael Chamberlain evades reporters at Sydney Airport’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 1 Nov. 1982,
3, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Rally organised over Chamberlain verdict’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 3 Nov. 1982, 7, in Trove
[online database], accessed 10 October 2019

‘Sentimental spasm about Lindy’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 7 Nov. 1982, 2, in Trove [online
database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘The Australian dingo not like a tiger, judge says’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 30 Oct. 1982, 10, in
Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.

‘Trial of the Chamberlains set to begin in Darwin tomorrow’, The Canberra Times (ACT), 12 Sep.
1982, 3, in Trove [online database], accessed 10 October 2019.

The media and Lindy Chamberlain, and reporting criminal matters in the Northern Territory today, 8
Jun. 2012, <https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/archived/mediareport/the-
media-and-lindy-chamberlain2c-and-reporting-criminal-matte/4064942#transcript>,
accessed 8 Oct. 2019.

Figure 1:
Chamberlain, Michael, Lindy and Azaria Chamberlain at Uluru [image], August 1980
<https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-31/lindy-and-azaria-chamberlain-at-
uluru/8154120>, accessed 8 October 2019.

Figure 2:
Chamberlain, Michael, Lindy Chamberlain holding Azaria Chamberlain, with Aidan and Reagan
Chamberlain, standing on the Stuart Highway with sign to Ayers Rock, alongside their Torana
on August 16, 1980 [image], (16 August 1980) <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-
31/lindy-chamberlain-holding-azaria-chamberlain2c-with-aidan-and-/8152786>, accessed 8
October 2019.

Figure 3:
Unknown, 1982, Lindy and Michael Chamberlain outside court, September 1982 [image], in National
Library of Australia [online database], accessed 25 September 2019. Acknowledgement to
The Canberra Times.

Figure 4:
Pryor, Geoff, 1982, Next dingo you see, sing out and I’ll stop, National Library of Australia [online
database], accessed 20 September 2019.

Figure 5:
Unknown, Michael Chamberlain: Media coverage of the couple was unprecedented at the time
[image], (unknown) <https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/michael-chamberlain/image-
gallery/67997bdc95d7b2c441516b1098f81602>, accessed 25 September 2019.
Student ID: 18937322 P a g e | 14

Figure 6:
‘Dingo Radio presents… dog rock’, Tharunka, 15 March 1982, 1, in Trove [online database], accessed
27 September 2019.

Figure 7:
Valentine, Alana, Dear Lindy: A Nation Responds to the Loss of Azaria, (Canberra: National Library of
Australia, 2017), 58.