Case closed.

Thirty years later (clearly there was no rush), the Australian coroner has come to a conclusion of the infamous Lindy Chamberlain, “The dingo ate my baby”, case.

Several decades ago, the case had the nation divided over the opinions of how Lindy Chamberlain’s 9-week-old infant went missing during stay in a tent near Ayers Rock, Australia.

It turns out, it was the dingo all along. Image courtesy of

It turns out, it was the dingo all along. Image courtesy of

Tensions in the nation were uneasy of the Chamberlain’s claims that the animal had dragged their infant from their tent, and increasing suspicions of the couple being guilty of murdering Azaria Chamberlain became the popular assumption.

The couple spent much of their time being ridiculed, insulted and abused at their family home, where they told of people “howling like dingoes” in their front yard.

A yet-again pregnant Lindy Chamberlain was sentenced to a life behind bars, after new evidence found her guilty for allegedly slitting her daughter’s throat to make it look like a legitimate dingo attack. Three years later, the verdict was overturned and the case, re-opened.

She gave birth to Kahlia Chamberlain-Creaton (now 29 years of age) in prison.

Now, only one day after Azaria Chamberlain (the infant) would have been 32 years of age, the verdict has been finally been re-announced. The dingo ate the baby.

Well, apparently.

Wildlife experts have told the media that the news has definitely not come as a shock.

“An expert on dingo behavior, Brad Purcell said he was not surprised that a dingo would enter a tent and take a baby while older siblings slept.” – (USA Today)

Purcell also claimed that the dingo would have been easily attracted the the baby’s crying.

A 9-week-old baby left alone in a tent, in the middle of the Australian outback, vulnerable to threat. Definitely no guilt there.


The Chamberlains have expressed their anger toward the frustrating and drawn-out duration of the case.

“This battle to get to the legal truth about what caused Azaria’s death has taken too long,” Chamberlain said.” – (USA Today)

Kahlia Chamberlain-Creaton collected her dead sister’s new death certificate yesterday, stating that the emotion of the final verdict has weighed the family down for far too long.

The Azaria Chamberlain dingo case has given much of the world a face to the nation of Australia. It has given Hollywood a Meryl Streep film (A Cry in the Dark – 1988) and the legal system a run for its money.

But at long last, the verdict has been reached.

The dingo ate her baby.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Crime, Events, People, Politics, Law

Author:Cassie McBlane

Cassie McBlane is an established blogger, published author, passionate writer, editor and content marketing specialist.

Subscribe to Intentious

Be notified by email whenever new pieces are posted by the blogging team tackling controversial current events or issues.

29 Comments on “Case closed.”

  1. June 12, 2012 at 9:30 pm #

    Reblogged this on The Foreverthings and commented:

    Case closed – The dingo ate her baby.

  2. TP
    June 13, 2012 at 6:00 pm #

    terrible article, misquotes Lindy as Kahlia ?

    • Sarah
      June 29, 2012 at 4:26 pm #

      With more journalism graduates than jobs available, misquoting facts, grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors is the quickest way to ensure you won’t be a paid journalist.

  3. Anonymous
    June 14, 2012 at 12:33 am #

    It does not misquote.

  4. Anonymous
    June 14, 2012 at 12:56 am #

    TP pls. Your face is a terrible article.

  5. Victoria Cooper
    June 24, 2012 at 4:55 pm #

    have you ever been camping? ever been to Uluru? the tent was within earshot – i.e. metres away from the communal campsite. There were also two older children in the tent – so if the baby woke up them up crying or upset they could call for the parents. It is fairly standard practice for people to put children to sleep in a tent when they are camping and then go and sit around a camp fire. You have not mentioned the testimony in the trials and coronial inquiries that people heard the baby cry, and in response Lindy immediately went to check on the baby. You are also ignorant of the fact that 30 years ago people did not fear dingoes taking babies from tents, and parenting was also much less focused on hovering over a child for the first 18 years.

    Haven’t these people suffered enough from ill informed judgement by moralising, unrealistic people who have never even bothered to review all of the available evidence, and especially weed out the rumour, gossip and lies, without you perpetuating it. Shame on you for being so malicious and cruel. They lost a beloved child – can you even begin to understand the permanent pain of that, without adding to it 32 years of nasty, stupid commentary? I hope you never experience even a fraction of the pain this family have endured.

  6. cathy
    June 25, 2012 at 7:29 am #

    yes appalling article…”ate” is not correct. The surname is incorrect. Kahlia was not quoted at all. Azaria was not left alone in the tent. No point writing an incorrect article….waste of space.

  7. Victoria Cooper
    June 25, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    “I don’t believe I payed out on the family at all.” ( which should be “paid out”! )
    Unbelievable – now you are trying to disown your ill-considered work!

    Look at your own words, and take responsibility for writing them.

    “The dingo ate the baby.

    Well, apparently.”

    What is this but a verbal nod and wink, a toss of your vacuous head in the direction of the idea that “Well, we all know that’s still not true.” If not, why use the word “apparently” – the coroner’s statement was UNEQUIVOCAL.

    Then you go on to state

    “A 9-week-old baby left alone in a tent, in the middle of the Australian outback, vulnerable to threat. Definitely no guilt there.

    Er. ”

    What are you inferring here? Surely your intention is to lead the reader toward a judgement about the family ?? Otherewise why did you write it?

    YOU CERTAINLY DID “PAY OUT” the family – saying you didn’t doesn’t change your smug, ill-informed commentary. Or are you actually claiming that you have no idea of your own intention when you select the words you use?

    • June 25, 2012 at 10:46 am #

      Each to their own opinion, but please leave me alone. You’ve had your say. I respect that.

  8. Victoria Cooper
    June 25, 2012 at 3:04 pm #

    WHAT ?Please leave me alone? My posts are polite, to the point and relevant.
    You are asking to be left alone, when one column you write is criticised for its flaws and the clear intention it showed to make light of THIRTY
    YEARS of misrepresentation is highlighte? Perhaps you will have more understanding of the enormity of what the Chamberlain’s have endured.
    If you don’t want to enter robust public debate, then stop writing for publicly accessible websites.

    • June 25, 2012 at 3:05 pm #

      You’ve had your say. I get your point.

    • James Hill
      June 25, 2012 at 4:14 pm #

      Hey, Victoria, have you had a loved one eaten by a dingo, or do you just have poor control over your emotions? You seem awfully bent out of shape about a couple of typos and an alleged factual error or two. The Chamberlains have been acquitted both legally and in the court of public opinion throughout most of Australia, it might be time for you to take a few deep breaths and remind yourself of that fact.

      • June 25, 2012 at 4:15 pm #


      • Sarah
        June 29, 2012 at 4:11 pm #

        James aren’t you taking it person with your remarks?

    • June 25, 2012 at 4:41 pm #

      If only people got this defensive about women’s righ— oh wait.

  9. Darren
    June 25, 2012 at 3:29 pm #

    It doesn’t help that you keep harping on about it Victoria. Your point has been made and noted, just leave it. What do you get out of re-hashing the same old stuff? We got the point the first time, no need to come back and say it again. If you don’t like the article, stop coming to the page to comment. It might be helping your own ego to belittle someone on the internet, but it doesn’t actually help anyone else. Enjoy life on your pedestal.

    You go on to say ‘if you don’t want enter public robust debate, then stop writing for publicly accessible websites’ – this is not a robust debate, it’s just abuse. You clearly have your opinion on this particular story and that is fine, but write your own blog if you want people to see it from your point of view, there’s no need for what you’re doing.

    Just leave it.

  10. Victoria Cooper
    June 25, 2012 at 7:36 pm #

    I wasn’t aware there was a limit on comment, isn’t that censorship? What is the limit perhaps the editors could post that information for future reference. Intentious claims to promote contentious journalism, but seems unable to deal with any dissent.
    The author did not explain why she made allusions about the veracity of the judgement and in fact claimed not to have “paid out” The Chamberlains when she clearly did. I should just let that go? Why? This site is permanent, it is a permanent historical record of an important legal and social event so it should be correct.

    Yes I am bent out of shape by poor journalism on a site that promotes journalism. I am frustrated by commentary from people who do not understand the enormity of wrongful accusation and imprisonment for a crime that wasn’t committed. James Hill’s comment is in bad taste and again ill-informed. Be careful on the Internet before you make assumptions about the lives and experiences of other people. As for letting it go, it was the author who inferred some degree of guilt by The Chamberlains – and that is unfair, unreasonable and worth responding to. If it was any of you I would do the same.

    • June 25, 2012 at 7:44 pm #

      It was more the way you went about it, Victoria. It could have been a clean and polite comment stating how you thought I did wrong. But instead, what you thought was “polite”, came off cruel.

    • June 25, 2012 at 7:45 pm #

      And I deeply apologise for offending you, or “being misinformed”. I’ll aim to improve my writing in the future.

      • June 27, 2012 at 3:08 pm #

        No one ought to apologise for “offense”. Defamation, sure. But offense? Nooooope. <–my opinion

        • June 27, 2012 at 3:10 pm #

          I’ve grown to not care less about the previous comments against me. Such is life.

  11. Victoria Cooper
    June 25, 2012 at 9:35 pm #

    It’s not me that deserves an apology, it’s the Chamberlain family. You’ve done nothing to me. I grew up listening to the most tasteless and vicious “jokes” about this case, and then I read the court transcripts. How anyone could ever have thought that anyone deserved that degree of public approbation is beyond belief.

    Journalism is very powerful, it is a power that should not be wielded lightly or without thought for the human beings involved in every story.

    “You can crush a man with journalism.” ~William Randolph Hearst

    You may have seen this, but it’s worth reading again:

    Harmer said: “Lindy, Michael. I am truly sorry for the hurt I caused you, your family and friends. I hope you can find it in your hearts to forgive me.

    “I acknowledge that the horror for your family has been unending. You have always conducted yourselves with the utmost dignity and composure. The very qualities that saw you damned, accused and convicted.

    “I sincerely hope that today’s verdict helps you find some peace, but I also understand that your journey with grief is something of which I have no comprehension.”

    She said it was important for younger Australians to know how poorly people behaved during the “witch hunt” against Mrs Chamberlain-Creighton.

    CASE CLOSED for me, and I won’t be visiting or commenting on this site in the future.

  12. Anonymous
    June 25, 2012 at 10:19 pm #

    Toughen up Cassiemcblane.Dont be so thin skinned or youll be eaten alive by the Intentious followers.

  13. Mat
    June 25, 2012 at 11:30 pm #

    Cassiemcblane how do you expect to make in the journalism industry if you can’t accept constructive criticism?

    • June 27, 2012 at 12:33 am #

      I think Cassie has accepted them just fine.

  14. RangaGrandma
    June 26, 2012 at 3:00 pm #

    At first I could see how the comments were constructive criticism to this young journo, but they developed into harsh and hurtful abuse. This is a site for up and coming writers, looking to make a break into the industry. So please, treat them with a little courtesy and do not judge them as if they have made a mistake that could cause society to collapse as we know it.

    We’ve all had our say and made our points clear. Lets move on like the mature and respectable adults we should be.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: