Graham Stafford was convicted in 1992 for the brutal murder of his girlfriend’s 12-year-old sister, whose mutilated body was discovered in bushland near Redbank Plains, Queensland. Despite the absence of a clear motive and significant flaws in the forensic evidence, Stafford was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison. In 2009, after serving almost 15 years, and following five failed appeals, his conviction was quashed, with forensic experts exposing critical failures in the prosecution’s case. To this day, the perpetrator remains unidentified, while Stafford continues to seek the truth about what happened to the young girl.

Leanne Holland was last seen on September 23, 1991, when she went to buy hair dye at the local shops near her home in Goodna. At home that day was Stafford, her sister’s 28-year-old live-in boyfriend, who was working on his car in the front yard. Though Leanne did not return home, the alarm was not immediately raised, as she was known to be somewhat independent. Reported missing the following day, police launched an investigation. Three days later, her battered body was discovered eight kilometres from home in isolated scrubland. The crime was disturbingly sadistic: she had been tortured, tattooed with a sharp object, burned with cigarettes, raped, and bludgeoned to death. Her underpants were torn or cut, and she had a stab wound to her perineum. Retired Supreme Court Judge Anthony Whealy described the injuries as ‘horrific,’ noting evidence of ‘some form of sadism’ and highlighting the ‘sheer violence’ of the blows that ultimately caused her death.

Stafford was swiftly questioned, and the family home was forensically examined. He soon emerged as the primary suspect and was arrested and charged with murder. However, the case against him was riddled with inconsistencies, misleading forensic claims, and prosecutorial omissions. The prosecution speculated that Stafford had killed Leanne in a fit of rage while dyeing her hair in the bathroom, although no clear motive was established. Investigators found presumptive traces of blood in the house and in Stafford’s car boot, which forensic experts at the time claimed matched Leanne’s blood type. A strand of hair, belonging to Leanne, was also found in the vehicle. Additionally, a maggot recovered from the boot was said to match one found on her body.

The trial relied heavily on circumstantial forensic evidence, including blood and DNA traces, maggot analysis, tyre tracks, and the alleged use of a hammer. However, significant discrepancies undermined the reliability of this evidence. Dramatic footage shown to jurors, where swabs appeared to turn green, suggested a bloody crime scene, but these tests were merely presumptive and reacted similarly to various household substances. Further lab analysis had already ruled out most of the swabs as human blood, with only a few specks that likely came from a cut sustained weeks prior. The jury was never informed of the limitations of this ‘blood evidence,’ a critical omission that, according to Stafford’s lawyer Joseph Crowley, played a decisive role in Stafford’s conviction. One juror later admitted, ‘I thought there was blood everywhere.’ Another key issue was the lack of conclusive DNA evidence, as forensic technology at the time was limited. The strand of hair found in Stafford’s car was weak evidence, considering Leanne frequently travelled in the vehicle. Subsequent reviews found no definitive DNA link between Stafford and the crime. Furthermore, forensic entomologists dismissed the maggot, calling it an ‘impossible’ scenario and suggesting it may have been planted. An in-depth investigation revealed that the tyre tracks at the crime scene were inconsistent with Stafford’s vehicle, casting doubt on the validity of the prosecution’s claims. Finally, forensic testing found no traces of blood or tissue on the hammer, further weakening the case against him.

Despite the lack of direct forensic evidence, Stafford was convicted on March 25, 1992, and sentenced to life imprisonment. His appeals were rejected and attempts to secure a pardon were dismissed. While serving nearly 15 years behind bars – where he endured violent assaults and hospitalisation – Stafford continued to fight for his exoneration. Supported by investigator, Graeme Crowley, he was granted parole in 2006, and in 2008, new evidence prompted another appeal. On December 24, 2009, the Queensland Court of Appeal quashed his conviction and ordered a retrial. However, in 2010, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) declined to pursue further action. Despite this, Queensland Police launched a review of their investigation, refusing to acknowledge their mistakes and doubling down on Stafford’s guilt. Independent forensic analysis later exposed critical flaws in the police review. When asked if any evidence indicated Stafford was guilty, forensic scientist Professor James Speers responded unequivocally: ‘In a simple answer, no.’ A damning forensic review by Queensland’s Chief Forensic Scientist, Leo Freney, ultimately dismantled the prosecution’s case, confirming that ‘the murder … didn’t happen in the bathroom. It didn’t happen anywhere in the house.’ Freney also highlighted the impossibility of Stafford cleaning up a massive amount of blood in under 90 minutes without leaving a single trace on himself, his clothes, or his shoes. ‘He would’ve been covered in blood,’ Freney stated. ‘A huge amount of blood.’ The court identified significant issues with the prosecution’s case and concluded that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction. Despite his release, Stafford was never formally declared innocent, and no other suspect has been charged with Leanne’s murder.

In 2010, a witness, referred to as ‘Kim,’ claimed that her father, a convicted sex offender and police informant, misled police and may have been involved in the crime. She alleged that he had shown her crime scene photographs of Leanne’s body as a warning, telling her, ‘This is what happens to little girls who don’t do what they’re told.’ Kim also stated that the abuse she suffered at his hands, including torture, cigarette burns, and violence, bore striking similarities to the injuries inflicted on Leanne. Additionally, she recalled being taken to bushland near Redbank Plains during her own abuse.

In 2016, the Queensland government rejected Stafford’s request for a new inquest, leaving the case officially unresolved. Stafford remains committed to seeking an inquiry that will expose the failures of the original investigation and uncover the real killer. As he insists, ‘I have no fear of being retried’ and adds, ‘I would prefer an inquiry – bring everyone to the table and ask the relevant questions.’