Andrew L. Urban
The ACT Integrity Commission had found that Walter Sofronoff providing his report on the inquiry into the criminal prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann to two journalists (under embargo) was corrupt. He appealed and in dismissing his appeal, the Commission probably boosted his appeal, if you’ll excuse the word-play. Continue reading
Andrew L. Urban
Common sense would tell you that a migrant with imperfect English accused of murdering a whole family but claiming to be innocent would not make a confession to negate his alibi to a stranger in jail, even if he didn’t know the stranger was a police snitch? Yet even appeal judges bought the prosecution’s assertion. When gullibility – or bias – negates common sense …. Continue reading
Andrew L. Urban
The conviction of Stephen Struber and Dianne Wilson-Struber for the 2012 murder of gold prospector Bruce Schuler in remote Queensland carries a high risk of wrongful conviction when assessed against established international miscarriage-of-justice indicators. Former detective and author Graeme Crowley identifies 140 inconsistencies in the evidence. LIA questions the verdict. Continue reading
The late jurist Lionel Murphy (1922 – 1986) wrote a prescient dissenting view when the High Court rejected Lindy Chamberlain’s 1984 appeal, where Murphy was outvoted 3-2. It is essential reading even now. Murphy’s summary turned out to be 100% right. Continue reading
Andrew L. Urban
Another title could be “You can’t make this stuff up!” And we didn’t. Or you could file it under ‘Truth is stranger than fiction’. We have been inspired by real events to draft these story lines. Sadly, there are no happy endings … yet. Continue reading
Not for the first time, a Federal Attorney-General has shrugged off a proposal to consider the establishment of a Criminal Cases Review Commission. The public should know this. The legal profession should know this – especially the few who have shown support for such a body. The A-G’s department has again turned away from the proposal in the same language as its predecessors. But none have given a reason. Continue reading
Andrew L. Urban
In a Sydney murder trial, Juror John was so disturbed by what he saw as the Crown’s unethical behaviour, unrestrained by the judge, he barely could restrain himself from jumping out of his seat and shouting his objections to the prosecutor and the judge. He was recalling this a few years after the trial. He is still outraged. Juror John (not his real name) spent many weeks in the jury room for that trial. He was pretty disgusted by the ignorance and or carelessness of some of his fellow jurors, too. And in the end, the jury could not agree on a verdict. Continue reading
Andrew L. Urban
Now that Bruce Lehrmann’s appeal against the negative result in his defamation case against TEN and Lisa Wilkinson has been dismissed in the Federal Court, the legal quagmire has deepened. He is living in the hell of legal purgatory. This is not a victory for the rule of law. Continue reading
Andrew L. Urban
You won’t be surprised that the Tasmanian Government is continuing to stonewall on the calls for an inquiry into the Sue Neill-Fraser case, firmly keeping a blind eye on the mountain of reasons in favour of one. The latest exhibition of this happened in the Legislative Council in the evening of Tuesday, December 2, 2025, when the latest Etter Selby report was tabled by Michael Gaffney (Ind, Mersey). And then that mysterious phone call … Continue reading
LIA, the new Legal Intel AI, has identified at least four issues as potential grounds that might be framed as a ‘fraud on the court’ in the case of Sue Neill-Fraser. One would be enough. Given the shameful history of the case at the hands of Tasmania’s legal system, nobody should be surprised. But why now? Continue reading