Andrew L. Urban.
“A Hobart lawyer charged with two counts of perverting justice in relation to Susan Neill-Fraser’s appeal bid may not face trial,” Emily Jarvie of Launceston based The Examiner reported on August 22, 2019, but Hobart’s Mercury did not cover this story, in what is perhaps Hobart’s most contentious topic, the Sue Neill-Fraser case.
Jarvie’s report outlined the most recent development: “Mr Thompson allegedly influenced witness Stephen John Gleeson to change his version of events as to what he saw the night Mr Chappell disappeared in favour of Neill-Fraser’s case.
“The Hobart Supreme Court heard on Thursday a preliminary legal argument may result in the matter not proceeding to trial.
“Mr Thompson claims boxes of documents seized by police in relation to the charge were part of the Neill-Fraser matter and therefore subject to legal privilege.
“Crown prosecutor Jackie Hartnett said the state’s position was that no privilege exists.
“Justice Michael Brett said the legal argument seemed to be the crux of the entire matter.
“If I am correctly predicting this argument … [it] may resolve the trial,” Justice Brett said.
“The matter was adjourned for the legal argument to proceed on October 31.”
The judge said he couldn’t find the crime of which Thompson was charged in the documents.
I lived in Tasmania for 3 years .Its a beautiful Island however they tend to ignore the processes of what they call the rest of Australia as the Mainlanders.
Some of them have never ventured out of Tasmania and a percentage have what I would refer to as behind the times attitude and understanding. I am not trying to undermine or criticise however they don’t appear to have general knowledge of what happens outside their territory nor is the care factor heavily present.
How Sue Neil Fraser has been treated is so similar to the Convict era. Just change the clothing and we have the same mentality .
I used to become so frustrated and gob smacked at times by the general attitude although in general they are of good nature and kind people. But please let there be fair justice carried out and a proper legal fair investigation ..outside of Tasmanian courts to let this poor woman have what is left of her life on this planet in peace and freedom. Who cares who has to exit with a red face ..at the end of the day Sue is far more important than egos and the exposure of blunders and comedy.
I find it so upsetting to observe this poor woman at the mercy of incompetence and lack of intelligence. JUST FREE the poor woman because you cant look any more stupid with your blunderings than you already do.
You know what Andrew, your book “Murder by the Prosecution”, which I encourage everyone who writes to you to read, says the most important words on page 24;- “ But at least the correspondence is on file for history”.
It’s why everyone should keep writing, especially to those who have the ability to release Sue from prison, if only on a ‘home detention’ plan before her appeal.
Only when this miscarriage of justice has been properly ‘given a fair trial’ will those who continue to support this conviction sleep better. But until then they should all be reminded that their tunnel vision without proof will be recorded in the annals of infamous criminal injustices.
It is my guess also that the local newspaper will regret their ‘selective and misguided reporting’ when Sue is released. The people of Hobart will then have a choice to make in this age of digital news to avoid ‘fake news’.
So Mr Thompson’s had his personal and professional life shattered in the service of the police and prosecution’s relentless, unwavering efforts to make sure Sue’s conviction stands. To those responsible for this outrage he is just an outsider who got in the way, collateral damage and of no consequence. The good old Mercury’s reporting at the time did what was desired by the State of Tas, to further taint Sue and her supporters with the public impression that they were prepared to break the law to free Sue, that they didn’t have a case and so had to fabricate one. I frequently ask myself, what is behind all this, why go to such extremes? What would be revealed if Bob’s disappearance were to be responsibly and competently investigated?
Yes, will they be furnishing him with the funds to rebuild his/their whole lives again? Plus pain and suffering and embuggerance and stress and reputation?
Apart from Hobart Mercury’s seemingly selective reporting of events that would presumably be of intense public interest, isn’t the real issue here that a judge no less, cannot find any said wrongdoing by Mr Thompson in the seized documents?
As far as saying “no privilege exists” – can Jackie Hartlett explain why ?
At this rate Justice Brett will need more headache pills……
Tasmania seems like a merry go round – stationary, but going around in circles making lots of people dizzy in the process.
Can Jacque Lambie and Andrew Wilkie look into this latest mess?
I am waiting for a response to a letter I sent to Jacque Lambi in the hope that she might be able to raise this case. So far – no response from her, the PM and Opposition Leader along with Tasmania’s AG.
Hello Di, Kerry and Gruntle, seems that each of you along with myself know the swings and the roundabouts of Tasmania’s Justice System.
Possibly the most contentious of all of Australia’s States. Though another court that is capable of bias is the High Court of Australia. The Liberal party have stacked the benches with Liberal party protectors in both the Federal court and the Federal Court Appeals Tribunal.
According to Australia’s Constitution no one is exempt from facing a trial, except Martin Bryant, and this was by way of a special instruction from the least credible PM ever to hold that high office in Australia, John W Howard, relating to the Port Arthur false flag event circa 1996.
Not one Australian Parliament minister or even Senator will touch on that horrific staged event.
“The judge said he couldn’t find the crime of which Thompson was charged in the documents.”
You have to laugh! So whatever the prosecution are putting forward as an offence is not being seen that way by Justice Brett.
As I recall, prison video and audio of the Thompson/Gleeson meeting was used to bring these charges. Looks like the Tasmanian numpty brigade still cant put a brief of evidence together properly or establish what the elements of an offence are.
They should have Donald “Trump” as their mascot.
Typical Mercury ….about time Tasmania introduced another newspaper.
Too much power and they don’t have a good track record.
About time they stopped being so biast.
People want the news …not an editor’s opinion or lack of coverage .
Tasmanians …you may be an Island but your petticoat is showing.
You need to get your act together .A person’s life is at stake and quite frankly we don’t care about an editor’s opinion …please keep it to yourself and report the news TRUTHFULLY and in full as it happens .You are not Judge and Jury
Amazing but that is the Mercury!!!! Very selective on what makes the paper. No letter to the Editor from me has!!! Justice Brett couldn’t find the crime in the documents – no surprises there and I am convinced that no other Justice would have worried about that. This was always a trumped up charge aimed at intimidation that has been ongoing since the start.
Jeff’s life has been severely disrupted by this action by DPP/police and I can only hope that he is able to seek damages if this does not go to trial.
Where is accountability in Tasmania?????
And then the rats run for cover?