when a man told Queensland police "I think I know that man who was having an argument with his wife on the Brampton Island ferry when that woman was murdered. He's my brother Wayne and he lives in Sydney". Wayne Butler was originally arrested in 1988 for Douty's murder, but was released because of insufficient evidence. Butler's wife divorced him and in October 1997, went to a police station in Sydney and told officers, "My ex-husband has committed a murder. He killed a girl on a beach in Queensland. I couldn't say anything while we were married. Now we're divorced and I want you to know the truth". Although Butler had long been a suspect, it was not until DNA testing techniques were advanced enough to establish the probability that the semen stain on the towel was his, that he was charged. Trial Conviction Butler was tried for the murder in 2001. His former wife, Vija Samite Duffey, told the court that on the day of Douty's murder, Butler had been away for four hours. She said that this was not unusual and his behaviour was not different on his return. The court was also told that DNA evidence had confirmed that semen stains on the red towel covering Douty's body came from Butler and that the chances of another person having the same profile were 1 in 23 × 1015. Dr Kary Mullis, who won a Nobel Prize for his work on DNA replication, advised the defence throughout the trial, but was not called to testify. The defence suggested that the DNA evidence had been contaminated in the laboratory, but the claim was rebutted by the prosecution after they demonstrated that this was not possible. Butler was not called to give evidence. He was found guilty by the jury after only 90 minutes of discussion, after which Supreme Court Judge Justice John Helman jailed Butler for life without the possibility of release on parole, saying: "For this savage crime you will spend the rest of your days in captivity. Parole will always be out of the question". Appeals On 31 July 2001, Wayne Butler unsuccessfully appealed his conviction. His appeal was based on the grounds that the original verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory, and that the judge failed to uphold the submission that there was no case to answer. Butler was given a second chance to appeal in 2005,