Are you looking for an answer to the topic “Who Is Simon Gittany Details To Know About The Convicted Murderer“? We answer all your questions at the website Abettes-culinary.com in category: Top 4620 tips from Abettes-culinary update new. You will find the answer right below.
Keep Reading
Despite thorough research, Simon Gittany’s Wikipedia profile was not found on the Internet. Let’s dig deeper into his biography and family details.
Businessman Simon Gittany was found guilty in 2013 of murdering his then-fiancée Lisa Harnum.
It was also revealed that he has a criminal record dating back to the 1990s.
Fast Facts:
Surname
Simon Gittani
birthday
1974
Age
47 years old
nationality
Australian
profession
businessman
Married single
single
Simon Gittany Wikipedia
As mentioned above, the official Wikipedia biography of Simon Gittany is currently missing.
In 2013, Simon was guilty of murdering his partner by pushing her from the 15th floor of an inner Sydney apartment. Looking at his police records, people found that he had already served time in prison.
He was arrested for assault in 1991 at the age of 18. Similarly, in 1993, he was caught with stolen items in his car.
Simon Gittany’s Family & Brother
Simon Gittany sa in his hearing that he always puts his family and friends first.
In addition, it was revealed that Simon may have had his brother involved in hing his trial from the mysterious murder case.
It was discovered that Simon kept a hden camera in his fiancee’s room before he had any malicious intent to kill her. But later he appeared to have asked his brother to remove the storage unit from it while he was in prison.
Simon Gittany’s Real Age
Simon Gittany is currently 47 years old.
After serving his full 23 years in prison, he is set to be released at the age of 57.
Where Is Simon Gittany Now?
Simon Gittany is currently serving his 23-year sentence at Parklea Prison in Australia.
He certainly won’t have a normal life when he gets out of there in 2031; another ten years.
The secret life of Gittany part 2
[su_youtube url=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1Pz4BlZJ8g”]
Images related to the topicThe secret life of Gittany part 2
See some more details on the topic Who Is Simon Gittany Details To Know About The Convicted Murderer here:
Who Is Simon Gittany? Details To Know About The Convicted …
The businessman Simon Gittany was found guilty of murdering his then-fiancée Lisa Harnum in 2013. It has also been revealed that he has a criminal record …
Source: www.650.org
Date Published: 10/3/2022
View: 3555
Simon Gittany guilty of murdering fiancee Lisa Harnum
Sydney businessman Simon Gittany has been found guilty of murdering his fiancee, former ballerina Lisa Harnum, by throwing her off the …
Source: www.smh.com.au
Date Published: 1/13/2022
View: 3655
Balcony killer Simon Gittany loses appeal against murder …
Simon Gittany, from Sydney, was jailed in November 2013 after being found guilty of murdering his fiancee, Lisa Harnum, in July 2011.
Source: www.dailymail.co.uk
Date Published: 3/9/2021
View: 2340
Simon Gittany’s moment of truth: the cold-blooded killer of Lisa …
News_Image_File: Simon Gittany with girlfriend Rachelle Louise.The loudest reaction to the words “I find the accused guilty of the murder of …
Source: www.heraldsun.com.au
Date Published: 2/2/2021
View: 1369
Simon Gittany guilty of murdering fiancee Lisa Harnum
After the verdict: Simon Gittany’s girlfriend Rachelle Louise at the NSW Supreme Court. Credit:Danielle Smith She then walked over to a waiting media box and asked if anyone had a lighter. She lit a cigarette and smoked in silence for about three minutes while journalists continued to ask her how she was feeling. Lisa Harnum’s mother, Joan Harnum, carries a doll believed to have belonged to her daughter, outside the NSW Supreme Court as the judge announces her decision in the Simon Gittany murder trial. Photo credit: Peter Rae Back in the courtroom, Mrs. Harnum’s Aunt Elizabeth covered her face with her hands and cried.
Ms. Harnum’s brother Jason shook hands with the detectives who had been working on the case for the past two and a half years. Gittany’s friend Rachelle Louise at the NSW Supreme Court. Credit:Danielle Smith His account of what happened appears to be based on borrowed details. It lacked originality and the subtlety of actual experience. Mr Gittany’s sister Barbara blew her brother a kiss and said: “God bless you Simon”. Another Gittany family member yelled, “You didn’t get a fair trial bro.”
Died: Lisa Harnum. In the meantime, an ambulance was asked to come to the court. “Call an ambulance for mom, she’s in so much shock,” yelled one from the Gittany clan. When Mrs. Louise returned to court, Gittany was taken to the cells. “I love you Simon,” she said, crying. “It’s OK, baby,” Gittany replied before disappearing from view.
In court, Ms Harnum’s mother Joan told reporters: “There are no winners in this case. Two families dramatically changed their lives forever.” She added, “We will always mourn the passing of our beautiful Lisa Cecilia and work to make her legacy a powerful wake-up call for young women.” My daughter used to say that People can ask for help, but children and animals cannot. “And now young women involved in situations like my daughter need a voice too.” Joan Harnum said her daughter’s favorite saying is “families are forever”.
“Please go home and hug your children and hug your wife and husband and make it family for everyone,” she said. Crushing assessment of Gittany’s character The decision ends months of speculation about the death of Ms. Harnum, who came to Australia from Canada and was keen to make a life here. In her summary, Judge McCallum said she did not believe Gittany’s account of Ms Harnum falling to her death. Judge McCallum gave a scathing assessment of Gittany’s character.
“There is no doubt that the defendant controlled, dominated and at times abused Ms. Harnum,” she told the packed Sydney High Court on Wednesday. “The power of his jealous and controlling personality drew a mixed reaction from Ms. Harmum, who was at times defiant and at other times submissive to an inexplicable degree.” “At 6 a.m. on the morning of her death, Mrs. Harnum was “in a state of absolute fear and despair,” Justice McCallum said. Judge McCallum found that Gittany reacted with “nothing short of anger” when he discovered Mrs Harnum had secretly placed some of her possessions in storage.
“Despite all his vigilance, his errant fiancee had found a way to secretly remove her belongings,” the judge said. She said she accepted evidence from Ms Harnum’s mother that Ms Harnum had been “frantic” and anxious on their last phone call, and told her mother to contact her counselor “if anything happens to me”. Judge McCallum said she did not believe Mr Gittany’s account of how Mrs Harnum fell to her death. “It’s difficult to articulate my impression of this evidence other than that I found it unconvincing,” she said. After dragging Mrs Harnum screaming back into the flat, Mr Gittany said she sat on the lounge while he made a cup of tea before suddenly running to the balcony.
“The defendant appeared to me as a person playing a role,” said Judge McCallum. “His account of what had happened seemed to consist only of borrowed details.” “It lacked originality and the subtlety of the actual experience.” The defense had argued Ms Harnum climbed over the balcony after Mr Gittany put her in her unit had torn.
But a forensic scientist couldn’t find her fingerprints on the banister or glass balustrade. Judge McCallum told the court the lack of fingerprints was a “relevant piece of evidence”. In delivering her verdict on Wednesday, Justice McCallum said the Crown’s key witness, Josh Rathmell, gave a “careful and convincing account” of what he saw on the day of Ms Harnum’s death. She said she wasn’t perturbed by the fact that the ABC worker continued on his way to work after seeing Gittany “unloading” what he believed to be a piece of luggage, later realizing it was a dead body acted. She said the defense forced her to plead not guilty when she had doubts about his account of what he saw.
She said she had no doubt Gittany and Mrs Harnum loved each other but said it wasn’t the full picture. “I don’t think there can be any doubt that the defendant was controlling, dominating and at times abusive,” she said. “I am satisfied that by the end of July 2011 these tensions had reached a critical point.” Judge McCallum dismissed the notion that Gittany was tapping Ms Harnum’s phone to try to find out her “closely guarded secret”. “This was a pretext by the defendant to excuse an inexcusable breach of trust,” Justice McCallum said. Judge McCallum said she had no doubt that by the end of the relationship, Gittany was using CCTV cameras installed in the home to watch Ms Harnum.
She said Gittany lied about an argument in which he called Ms Harnum a “peacock”. Gittany claimed Ms Harnum wanted him to buy her an expensive dress, but Judge McCallum said she was pleased he “insulted Lisa Harnum because she came home beautiful with her hair down”. “It was one of a number of times I felt he was telling a distorted version of the truth,” Justice McCallum said. She noted that Gittany did this to give a different impression or “just to disparage Ms. Harnum”. She found that he also lied because he knew Ms. Harnum had a Westpac bank account.
“It was a lie told with significant ease to discredit Mrs. Harnum,” she said. Importantly, she also dismissed the defense’s claim that Ms. Harnum was suicidal or self-harm-prone. “There is no doubt that Lisa Harnum experienced increasing fear for her life and that she had a history of eating disorders. But I can’t find anything to support the claim that she contemplated suicide.” Judge McCallum told the court, “The circumstances surrounding Lisa Harnum’s death were shocking and tragic.” The deceased’s mother, Joan Harnum, entered the NSW Supreme Court with a doll believed to have belonged to her daughter and her sister Elizabeth’s arm.
Her son Jason Harnum followed him with a suitcase. Shortly after Judge McCallum began presenting the facts of the case, Joan Harnum shook her head and left the court. Mrs. Louise entered the court flanked by the Gittanys and her own family. She sat in the front row of the stands, facing the judge, and only briefly left the hearing to take a cigarette break. The detectives who have worked on the case for the past two and a half years all wore white ribbons, a sign of domestic violence.
Abusive and controlling behavior: Evidence The dramatic three-week trial produced evidence that while Gittany professed his love for Ms. Harnum, Gittany had subjected her to abusive and controlling behavior for months, including her near-constant surveillance. Judge McCallum, who heard the trial without a jury, was told that Gittany had persuaded the young woman to completely change her dress style, convert to Catholicism and quit her job at a hair salon because the staff there “polluted her mind”. He demanded to know her whereabouts at all times and forbade her to see her friends or do anything that might involve direct contact with other men. “Please don’t let any guy talk to you today… don’t look at any guy because your eyes should only be on me, the one,” Gittany told his fiancé in a text message.
Another text yelled, “Who the hell do you think you’re walking around the house like you own it or coming and going without my permission?” Gittany monitored Ms Harnum with security cameras hidden in her flat and a computer program that read her text messages pursued. The court heard Ms Harnum began planning her escape in the weeks leading up to her death, leaving a bag of clothes with her counselor, Michelle Richmond. “He had said that if she left him, she would be deported … that she would leave with nothing the way she came, even with her underwear,” Ms Richmond told the court. But Gittany became aware of the secret plan, telling Ms Richmond in an abusive phone call, “I’m going to fuck you hurt.”
It was the Crown case where, in the hours leading up to her death, Mrs Harnum realized she was being watched and made a desperate attempt to escape. One of Gittany’s own surveillance cameras recorded him grabbing Ms Harnum and, one hand around her mouth, pulling her back into the apartment as she tried to flee. Sixty-nine seconds later she was dead, falling 15 stories into the footpath below. A note in her pocket was scrawled: “There are security cameras inside and outside the house.” Mr Rathmell, a producer for ABC News, caught a glimpse of the murder as he was leaving for work.
He saw a man “unload” what he believed to be “luggage” from the 15th-floor balcony before storming back inside. This contradicted Gittany’s claim that instead of killing Ms Harnum, she climbed over the balcony when he confronted her about a “secret” she didn’t want to reveal, then told her to leave. “I immediately pushed myself up onto the balcony railing,” Gittany told the court. “I put my belly button on the balcony railing and stretched out my hand as far as I could.” He said his attempts to hold Ms. Harnum failed and she slipped onto the awning of the balcony below, which she used a springboard from the edge tore.
Balcony killer Simon Gittany loses appeal over murder of fiancee Lisa Harnum
Convicted murderer Simon Gittany, who was sentenced to at least 18 years in prison for throwing his fiancée off a 15th-floor balcony in Sydney, has lost his appeal.
He was jailed in November 2013 after being found guilty of the July 2011 murder of 30-year-old Lisa Harnum.
The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the challenge to the 42-year-old’s conviction on Friday.
Convicted murderer Simon Gittany, who was sentenced to at least 18 years in prison for throwing his fiancée off a 15th-floor balcony in Sydney, has lost his appeal
He was jailed in November 2013 after being found guilty of the July 2011 murder of 30-year-old Lisa Harnum
The appeal had focused on the reliability of a witness who said he saw a shirtless man “unload” on a balcony what he initially believed to be a piece of luggage or a black duffel bag.
Gittany’s lawyer said the recollection of witness Joshua Rathmell, who saw Ms Harnum’s body fall from the balcony, was unreliable.
His memory may have been influenced by what he learned about the incident as a witness, the attorney said.
“I saw a shirtless man, who at the time, as I have described, was carrying black luggage or a holdall or some black object, and that was the action to which my eyes were immediately drawn upon registering the screaming,” Mr Rathmell told the court during Gittany’s trial.
CCTV footage shows Gittany holding a hand over Ms. Harnum’s mouth just before he pushes her off the balcony
According to the trial, Gittany had been monitoring Ms Harnum (pictured) via CCTV cameras he had installed at her home and using a computer program to read her texts and emails
He later said the object he saw falling from the balcony was Mrs. Harnum’s corpse.
Judge Lucy McCallum, who heard the no-jury trial, found that the jealous and possessive Gittany went into an uncontrollable rage and threw Ms Harnum off the balcony of their flat after she found out she was planning to leave him.
According to the trial, Gittany had been monitoring Ms. Harnum via CCTV cameras he had installed in her home and using a computer program to read her texts and emails.
All three judges dismissed Gittany’s appeal for murder, agreeing that Judge McCallum “spent considerable time identifying and considering the various factors that may have rendered Mr Rathmell’s evidence unreliable”.
“The allegation that the trial judge was distracted by counsel’s rhetoric from making a proper assessment of whether she had reasonable doubts as to the reliability of Mr. Rathmell’s evidence, an allegation made in at least some of the submissions on appeal, was not tenable. “, says the notice of appeal.
NSW Court Confirms Gittany Murder Conviction
At 10 a.m. on July 30, 2011, ABC journalist Joshua Rathmell was on his usual commute. He was walking through the south end of Hyde Park in Sydney’s CBD when he heard “distraught screaming” from a male voice.
The journalist looked up to see a shirtless man “unloading” a large object – which he took to be “garbage” or “luggage” – “in one quick motion” over the side of a 15th-floor balcony of an apartment. block on Liverpool Street.
Seeing people rushing toward the object below, Mr. Rathmell concluded that it was not what he originally thought but must have been a person. In fact, it was the body of 30-year-old Lisa Cecilia Harnum.
Moments later, the journalist saw Ms. Harnum’s fiancé, Simon Gittany, come out of the building in a white shirt and striped pajama pants and go to Ms. Harnum’s body. Mr Rathmell thought this was the man who saw the woman fall from the balcony above him.
Mr Rathmell then spoke to two council officials who worked on the front of the Museum Station, who confirmed it was a person who had fallen. The journalist then continued to work.
A judge-only trial
Mr Gittany appeared before the NSW Supreme Court in October 2013 charged with murder under Section 18 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – an offense carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and a standard non-parole period (SNPP) of 20 years.
An SNPP is a point of reference for the sentencing judge in determining the minimum time a person must spend behind bars before they can apply for parole.
The four-week trial was conducted by a judge alone. Lucy McCallum, NSW Supreme Court Justice and tasked with deciding whether Mr Gittany was innocent or guilty.
Prosecutors alleged that Gittany deliberately lifted and dropped Ms Harnum over the balcony balustrade. Gittany’s lawyers alleged that their client’s fiancée climbed over and either slipped or fell.
The court heard evidence that the defendant was “controlling, abusive and dominating” over the course of the couple’s 18-month relationship and had become increasingly so towards the end.
However, Gittany’s legal team argued that the relationship was more complex. While it was true that the couple’s interactions were dysfunctional, the relationship was also “infused with affection and love.” Evidence was presented that the deceased had developed a pattern of altercation and threats to leave the defendant and later changed her mind.
guilty of murder
Judge McCallum eventually found Gittany guilty of felony murder.
Her Honor noted that Mrs Harnum was “apparently in a state of great anxiety” on the morning of her death and that the woman had attempted to flee the home just moments before her death. Noting that Gittany had slipped into “a state of uncontrolled anger,” she restrained her.
Her Honor noted that the victim’s fingerprints were not found on the balustrade and “could not accept that any person with a will to survive could have viewed this as an escape route”.
In delivering the verdict on November 27, 2013, Judge McCallum said that life imprisonment was excessive and sentenced Gittany to 26 years in prison, 18 of which were without parole.
The evidence of the forensic psychologist
Mr Gittany appealed the verdict to the NSW Criminal Court of Appeal (NSWCCA) in June last year.
Gittany’s attorneys relied on three grounds of appeal:
that the judge acted erroneously in examining Dr. Richard Kemp failed to take into account that the judge did not properly assess the reliability of Mr Rathmell’s evidence and that the judgment was unreasonable.
UNSW Associate Professor of Forensic Psychology, Dr. Richard Kemp, had testified about “the phenomenon of changing memories”. He proved that memories can be altered as subsequent information is acquired, and a process of unconscious reconstruction can take place.
Gittany’s lawyers had concluded that Mr Rathmell may not have seen what he thought he was seeing and that he may have unconsciously reconstructed his understanding of his actual observations “to fill in the blanks”.
Mr Rathmell had made three statements. The first was addressed to Senior Constable Jacob Rex around noon on the day of the incident, July 30, 2011. The witness gave another “passage through” statement on August 2, 2011 at Surry Hills Police Station and a third “passage through” statement was videotaped on August 6.
dr Kemp posited that the delays in recounting the events, as well as the frequency with which the witness was asked to do so, could result in “memory contamination”.
Journalist’s evidence convincing
There were questions about certain inconsistencies in the first narration which Mr Rathmell made to Constable Cox on the telephone. However, Rathmell claimed that he did not attempt to provide an “exhaustive account” of what he saw during the initial call.
The journalist testified that the second report on August 2, 2011 was indeed “exhaustive”. He added that he took this opportunity to correct some of what he originally described to the police.
NSWCCA Judge John Basten noted that the trial judge examined Mr Rathmell’s evidence and found that the “court witness demonstration of the unloading operation” that he saw Mr Gittany perform on the balcony “consistent with that of his given demonstration coincided a week after the incident.
“It was a careful and compelling account describing a willful act of unloading an object over the railing of a balcony,” Justice McCallum had observed during the first trial.
Problems with the memory contamination argument
According to Justice Basten, there were “numerous problems” with Dr. evidence presented to Kemp. One was the failure to identify “post-event information” that may have contaminated Mr Rathmell’s account of what he had seen.
Second, the information obtained after the event – namely the knowledge that it was Ms Harnem that the journalist had seen ‘dumped’ over the balcony and not rubbish – did not change his account of how he saw Gittany throwing the object .
Justice Basten saw no reason to believe that the trial judge would consider the value of Dr. Kemp’s evidence had “unduly disparaged”.
His Honor also noted that the trial judge “spent considerable time identifying and considering the various factors that may have rendered Mr Rathmell’s evidence unreliable”.
The decision
Since the first two grounds of appeal were rejected, the third ground of appeal had to be rejected as well.
“Having dismissed the objections identified under Reasons One and Two,” there was “no basis for concluding that the judgment was unreasonable,” Judge Basten noted. “Accordingly, reason three is to be rejected.”
On August 19 last year, the court ruled that Mr Gittany’s appeal against his conviction was dismissed.
Related searches to Who Is Simon Gittany Details To Know About The Convicted Murderer
Information related to the topic Who Is Simon Gittany Details To Know About The Convicted Murderer
Here are the search results of the thread Who Is Simon Gittany Details To Know About The Convicted Murderer from Bing. You can read more if you want.
You have just come across an article on the topic Who Is Simon Gittany Details To Know About The Convicted Murderer. If you found this article useful, please share it. Thank you very much.