Coroner Hears Evidence for Perjury Referral Against Melbourne Birthkeeper

A Victorian coroner has heard that birthkeeper Emily Lal may be referred to prosecutors for perjury after phone records contradicted her testimony. The evidence emerged during resumed hearings on Monday regarding the death of Stacey Warnecke. Counsel assisting the coroner, Rachel Ellyard, presented the new material to the court.

Warnecke, a 30-year-old nutritionist and wellness influencer, died in September 2025 at Frankston hospital. She had delivered at home and suffered a postpartum haemorrhage. Lal was present during the birth and had been paid $6,000 to support Warnecke throughout her pregnancy. Birthkeepers operate outside the medical system and do not have clinical training.

The inquest began in June, but closing submissions were delayed while Warnecke's phone underwent forensic analysis. Ellyard told the court that the analysis uncovered numerous messages. These included communications in a WhatsApp group chat coordinated by Lal for women choosing freebirth. A recorded call between Lal and Warnecke was also played to the court.

The audio directly challenged Lal's earlier account. In June, Lal testified that Warnecke hired her mainly as a supportive friend. Lal stated the payment covered her time rather than medical advice. Ellyard argued that Lal’s role was to groom clients to resist the temptation to seek medical help, pain relief, or hospital care during labor.

In the recorded call, Warnecke expressed fear of the hospital. Lal replied, "You should be scared of the hospital." She described the facility as "a terrifying place" and stated that staying home required a mindset and condition that were "so solid." Lal also suggested that midwives attending home births can inadvertently sabotage them by urging a woman to go to hospital when labor runs long, sometimes simply due to exhaustion.

Lal had previously testified that she was not clinically trained and that making the birth safer was not her responsibility. She said she would not call an ambulance unless asked and gave no medical advice. Ellyard rejected this characterization, stating that Lal was providing advice, referrals, and selling supplements. Ellyard described the arrangement as "much more structured, much more deliberate" than the dynamic of a friend who "pulls your hair back and wipes your forehead."

Ellyard also noted that Warnecke’s husband, Nathan, had been "reassured or indoctrinated" into believing his role was simply to sit back and support his wife. Lal was invited to return to the stand to provide further evidence after the phone analysis but declined. She had originally testified only after the coroner granted a certificate of protection, which prevents her evidence from being used against her in future proceedings.

The court heard that Lal asked Warnecke three times if she wanted an ambulance after Warnecke lost up to 1.5 litres of blood and began struggling to breathe. Warnecke agreed on the third attempt but was seriously unwell when paramedics arrived. She died in hospital several hours later after the facility exhausted its blood supply. Lal stated it was not her role to call an ambulance against a client's wishes, even if the woman was unconscious and dying.

Ellyard told the coroner it would be open to her to find that Lal was not truthful and to refer her to the Office of Public Prosecutions for the offence of perjury. The office prepares and conducts criminal matters on behalf of the director. The coroner, Therese McCarthy, will deliver her findings at a later date.

Ellyard argued that Warnecke would have survived had she been in hospital. She noted that postpartum haemorrhage is the most common complication of childbirth and that women in well-resourced countries rarely die from it in hospital settings. Medical evidence presented earlier indicated Warnecke would also have survived a home birth with a registered midwife. Ellyard stated that Warnecke suffered a known complication that was "eminently treatable if identified and responded to immediately."