INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
Image copyrightNSW Police Image caption
Cheryl disappeared shortly after her family migrated to Australia
Australian prosecutors have dropped their case against a man who had been accused of murdering a UK-born toddler almost 50 years ago.The
disappearance of three-year-old Cheryl Grimmer from a New South Wales beach in 1970 is one of Australia's longest-running mysteries.A man
was arrested in 2017, and he later pleaded not guilty to murder.On Friday, a judge ruled that a key part of the prosecution case could not
be used as evidence in a trial.It concerned statements made by the man during a police interview in 1971, when he was aged 17.The Supreme
Court of New South Wales ruled that the evidence could not be heard because the teenager had not had a parent or adult representative
present during the interview.Justice Robert Allan Hulme said: "The Crown accepts that its case cannot succeed without it."Family
devastatedCheryl went missing from a shower block on 12 January, 1970, in Wollongong, a city 70km (44 miles) south of Sydney, shortly after
her family moved to Australia from Bristol.It sparked a massive search at the time, but no trace of the girl was ever found.Image
copyrightNSW Police Image caption
Cheryl with her late father, Vince Grimmer
On Friday Cheryl's
brother, Ricki Nash, said the family was devastated by the latest development and felt let down by police."We're just a bit numb, a bit
the lack of progress in the case.Another of her brothers, Stephen Grimmer, said in 2016: "My mum and dad have passed on now not knowing, and
we want to know too before we pass on."'Unfair' evidenceThe man's trial had been due to begin in May
Now 65, he had not been identified publicly because of his age in 1970.In explaining his decision, Justice Hulme acknowledged that the man
had made a written statement and engaged in a "walk-through style interview" with police in 1971.Unlike now, minors were not legally
required to be accompanied by an adult when giving such statements.However, Justice Hulme ruled that the man's police interview "should be
excluded on the basis of unfairness".He also noted testimony from psychologists who had reviewed the case for the trial
They found that the man had "low intellect" and would have been "more vulnerable to influence" at the time, the judge said.
