Stephen Jamieson

Death of Janine Balding

Stephen Jamieson was convicted along with four co-accused in one of the most high-profile and confronting crimes in Australian history. 

On 8 September 1988, Janine Balding, a 20-year-old bank teller from Sydney, was abducted at knifepoint from Sutherland railway station by a group of homeless youths. She was subsequently raped and murdered. The horrific nature of this crime was further amplified by the ages of the offenders, who were later convicted. These included Bronson Blessington, aged 14, Matthew Elliott, aged 16, Wayne Wilmot, aged 15, Carol Arrow, aged 15, and Stephen Jamieson, aged 22, the eldest of the group.   

Jamieson has consistently maintained his innocence, with his conviction primarily based on a purported confession to police, a confession that remains highly contentious due to a range of evidentiary and procedural issues.  Jamieson has been imprisoned since 1988.  

Post-conviction investigations

In 2019, the Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative began reviewing Jamieson’s conviction following long-standing concerns about his guilt and the integrity of the police investigation into Janine Balding’s murder. For over three decades, Jamieson’s legal teams have highlighted multiple investigative errors that raise serious doubts about his culpability.  These include:   

  1. Evidence of misidentification: Compelling evidence suggests that another individual, Mark Wells, may have been involved in the crime rather than Jamieson. Both men were known by the nickname ‘Shorty,’ which likely contributed to the initial misidentification. Significantly, Jamieson’s four co-accused have consistently stated that Wells, not Jamieson, was present during Janine Balding’s abduction, rape and murder.     

  2. Absence of forensic evidence:  No forensic evidence links Jamieson to the crime. NSW Police have also refused to conduct DNA testing on a key piece of evidence —a bandana used during the crime—that could potentially implicate Wells. Notably, Queensland Police collected a DNA sample Mark Wells in 2011, raising serious concerns about why such a critical piece of evidence remains untested.   

  3. Issues with the police investigation: The investigation into Jamieson’s involvement in the crime reveals significant flaws, suggesting he was prematurely and unfairly targeted as a suspect. His police interview, which was not video recorded, raises serious credibility concerns, showing characteristics that are consistent with fabrication. This aligns with the practice of ‘verballing’, a troubling and widespread issue within NSW police during the 1980s and 1990s.  

  4. Cognitive impairment: Another critical issue is Jamieson’s intellectual disability, he has an IQ of 65. The level of complexity and coherence in the confession far exceeds what would have been expected of his cognitive capabilities at the time, creating further doubt about the authenticity of the interview.    

  5. Failure to obtain alternative suspect DNA: Further, despite being aware as early as November 1988 that Mark Wells was a viable alternative suspect and despite collecting DNA samples from Jamieson and his co-accused, NSW Police did not obtain a sample from Wells.  

Expert concerns

In recent years, a growing coalition of legal and forensic experts has raised serious concerns about Jamieson’s conviction.

Dr Kirsty Wright, one of Australia’s most highly regarded forensic experts, has emphasised the urgent need to compare the DNA profiles from the bandana against those of Mark Wells. According to Dr Wright, this analysis could definitively confirm or exclude Wells’ involvement.  

Similarly, forensic linguist Dr Helen Fraser has questioned the reliability of the transcript of Jamieson’s police interview. Speaking to 60 Minutes Australia, Dr Fraser indicated that there was “no way” the transcript is an accurate representation of what was said, raising further doubt about the integrity of the case against Jamieson. 

These concerns culminated in Jamieson’s application for a judicial inquiry into his case. BOHII will continue to support the efforts of Jamieson and his legal team as they attempt to obtain a full review of the circumstances surrounding his conviction.

Media