Morrison’s men threw me under the Brittany bus – Brown

Posted on February 4, 2026 by andrew

In an extraordinary legal pleading, former Liberal staffer Fiona Brown has accused then-prime minister Scott Morrison and his most senior advisers of muzzling her and preventing her from responding to false allegations by Brittany Higgins that destroyed her life, according to an exclusive report by Janet Albrechtsen and Stephen Rise in The Australian (Feb. 4, 2026). The following are extracts from their report, republished here in the public interest. Continue reading →

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | Leave a comment

Big win for some victims of crime

Posted on February 2, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban

 First and only-time child sex abuse offenders who are wrongfully convicted will lose the minor mitigating factor at sentencing if good character references are no longer accepted in the wake of the NSW government’s move to introduce new laws on Wednesday, Feb 4, 2026 to scrap the “good character” provision for all offences.  Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 1 Comment

The Mean Girls – a reincarnation of Macbeth’s witches?

Posted on February 1, 2026 by andrew

Prompted by Janet Albrechtsen’s column in The Australian chastising Kristina Keneally and the other two Mean Girls, we might fantasise that perhaps the Mean Girls once lived in William Shakespeare’s mind…. in the personas of the three witches. The similarity is striking…  Continue reading →

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 3 Comments

‘Rotten to its core’: No saying sorry in Tasmanian justice

Posted on January 30, 2026 by andrew

“A woman was convicted of murder on false evidence. She spent 13 years in prison. Her family has suffered. Both trial and appellate courts have been duped.” HUGH SELBY looks for contrition in the Tasmanian judicial system and finds none. (from CBR City News, Jan. 29, 2026) Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 7 Comments

Men make false sex assault claims, too

Posted on January 29, 2026 by andrew

Reader Dieter Fischer posted a comment (on January 28, 2026) that prompted the research that underpins this post. He made the point that it is not only females that make false claims of sexual assault; men do too.  Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 2 Comments

A supreme mis-judgement?

Posted on January 28, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban 

Phillip Boulten, a criminal barrister elevated to the NSW Supreme Court despite a history of criticism of Zionists and police, will primarily handle common law and murder cases, NSW Attorney-General Michael Daley says, in an effort to avoid any “apprehension of bias” in matters related to pro-Palestine protests or demonstration laws. That’s the flimsy defence for Boulten’s elevation. Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 5 Comments

Safety in perjury for fake sex assault claims – why?

Posted on January 25, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban

 Even some judges have called for reforms to laws shielding sex abuse claimants (see below) – why has the legal system done nothing about it?  Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Sue Neill-Fraser petition on its way to Tasmanian Governor and Premier

Posted on January 23, 2026 by andrew

With nearly 40,000 verifiable signatures, the petition calling for a judicial inquiry into the contested conviction of Sue Neill-Fraser for the murder of her partner Bob Chappell will be handed Tasmania’s MLC The Hon Meg Webb at the January 24, 2026 rally in Hobart’s Parliament Gardens, with the request to present it to Tasmanian Governor The Hon Barbara Baker AC and Premier Jeremy Rockcliff MP.  Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 3 Comments

Tasmanian Parole Board’s condition on Sue Neill-Fraser unlawful

Posted on January 22, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban

 The Tasmanian Parole Board last year acted contrary to the High Court’s rulings when it tightened the parole condition on Sue Neill-Fraser, prohibiting her from claiming her innocence of the 2009 murder of Bob Chappel, her former partner. Concerned that the Tasmanian Supreme Court is taking too long to hear a challenge to the new condition from the Human Rights Law Centre in Melbourne on Neill-Fraser’s behalf (lodged in April 2025), we tasked Legal Intel AI (LIA) to research the matter. LIA found the parole condition legally faulty.  Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 4 Comments

Justice Estcourt stands with Sue Neill-Fraser

Posted on January 21, 2026 by andrew

It was no doubt a shock to Tasmania’s legal establishment when one of its most senior judges delivered a dissenting opinion – not because of his dissent per se, but because he argued to uphold the appeal against the most controversial murder conviction in Tasmanian history – that of Sue Neill-Fraser, a conviction – then as now – protected by the police, prosecution and politicians. He defied the Tasmanian establishment … of which he is a member.  Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 19 Marco Rusterholz | 5 Comments