Who Killed Bob? The Podcast

Andrew L. Urban.

 A homeless girl’s DNA, a strange grey dinghy, witness misidentification, tunnel vision, no murder weapon, no body, an impossible murder scenario … nothing adds up to a valid murder conviction in the case of Sue Neill-Fraser. Hear all about it …

If the Tasmanian Court of Criminal Appeal judges deliver a verdict (they heard the appeal at the start of March 2021) to uphold the appeal against Sue Neill-Fraser’s 2009 murder conviction, there will be no shortage of material to provide recriminations against all those in Tasmania’s legal system responsible for her wrongful conviction. But at the top of that long list will be the 10-part podcast produced by Eve Ash, who made Shadow of Doubt, the 2013 documentary feature film and the 2019 6-part TV documentary series, Undercurrent, all exploring this astonishingly unconvincing case against the accused. And now, in 2021, Ash has orchestrated the story together with the voices of key participants in the drama. Sue Neill-Fraser herself, Police Inspector Peter Powell and the many key players who reveal their parts in what is a profound blemish on the Tasmanian justice system. (If the appeal is dismissed, the recriminations will multiply…)

The drama of it all is well captured in the 10 x 50 minute (approx.) podcast episodes, available by subscription on Spotify from 22/11/21 in advance of its general release on 13/12/21, under the title Who Killed Bob? It may as well be called Who Framed Sue? (TRAILER)

The many practical benefits of a podcast (from virtually unlimited access to rewind and replay functions) to its dramatic potential with the spoken word as distinct from the written word… have already established ‘true crime’ podcasts as hugely popular. Who Killed Bob? is destined to propel that popularity.

With Eve Ash as the documentary investigator and primary story teller and Mark Mitchell representing the listener, asking relevant questions to expand details, (as well as reading the words of the judge and the DPP, for example), this podcast brings the whole scandalous case immediately to life. More even than the three books, the stage play, the screen documentaries and the various current affairs shows that pored over this case, this podcast asks and answers the multitude of questions that have continued to haunt the conviction.

The podcast appeals to the intellect as well as the emotion. In one revealing trial extract, we hear the judge tell the jury that he is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Sue Neill-Fraser’s motive for murder was “Possibly a desire to acquire all the assets that she stood to receive upon his death and at least a desire to place herself in a position where she could acquire Mr Chappell’s interest in the Four Winds without having to borrow.”

A little later, the judge tells the jury that he is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that after killing him, she had tried to sink their jointly owned yacht, the Four Winds.

The podcast is released in partnership with Podshape, The Australian independent podcast production company who recently released the popular Podcast – The Sydney Siege which documented two horrific days in the Lindt café where two people lost their lives and a terrorist was killed by police, told through the eyes of hostage survivor – Louisa Hope.

Jay Walkerden, founder of Podshape said “Eve’s tenacity in following this story over 13 years and seeking justice for Sue and her unique story telling ability is was what attracted us to this project. With each episode you will be shocked how this story unfolds.”

This entry was posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Who Killed Bob? The Podcast

  1. Diane Kemp says:

    Everyone involved in this case – apart from Sue and Bob – have been rewarded in some way and continue to benefit today. They could have been great people who fought for justice in Tasmania but instead they have ended up corrupted by the power they wield and justice is rotten to the core by their actions.
    The judges we are waiting to hand down the decision still – really 8 months later!!! – have an opportunity to shine a light on the rotten core and restore some confidence for Tasmanians. Do they have the courage to hand a ruling down that clearly highlights the shortcoming of their boss??? I hope so but I fear not.
    Justice delayed is justice denied.

  2. Tom Cairns says:

    One might suspect that the delay is due to the difficulty the system and those in it are having in finding, not reaching, a decision that exempts them from any loss of face so that their status and prestige are unaffected, ostensibly anyway.
    The dilemma can be measured in terms of just how far they are prepared to go in persecuting a decent innocent woman.
    I suggest they leave the back door open and head down the pub. That should fit in with their ethical standards.

  3. owen allen says:

    I could start raving, about corruption, mafia, island syndrome.
    But I won’t.
    I will just say; it had to happen eventually.
    Tasmania is imploding; and the smart will confess and spill the beans.
    It ain’t over ’till it’s over.
    Contact a mainland law firm and say you have information about Tasmania, crime and corruption and help clean up your own back yard.
    It is your only hope. And still, Tasmania has drained me so much for so long, my living conditions are hovel, because I have only so much energy to survive and fight, and my conditions are better than a trench, but I don’t care.
    Great work Andrew, and keep the comments coming people.

  4. Moni says:

    The Prosecutor

    You sit on the seat of Justice,
    but justice you do not deliver.

    You care not for the truth and violate it,
    warping words and sowing lies so they bloom like a pseudanthium.

    You deliberately hide facts that may cause your case to fall into doubt,
    disregarding the life that will pay dearly for your deceit.

    Yours is an adversarial style,
    full of conceit and treating the court like a theatre.

    You lead on a truth then disfigure by the end, thus making it an untruth.

    You pepper you phrases with outlandish prompts, “trust me it’s there.”

    You were born of a system from University to a closed secretive structure, where you are formed into another clone of the many before you.

    Then the day comes when you arrive at the bench, rewarded for playing the game and not upsetting the status quo.

    You make the absurd comment that you don’t know what Justice is,
    but do know what Injustice is!

    You onced mused that “there is no such thing as justice,
    yet no reforms do you action.

    They congratulate you, those in and surrounding your chamber,
    locking you in with a smug contempt for others.

    A job for life and guarded by the system forever. Never questioned, rarely any oversight, only admired and fawned over because of the power you now hold.

    • owen allen says:

      Wow Moni, that is fantastic writing.
      This will go down in history forever, like a Winston Churchill speech.
      God Bless You.

  5. Stephen Berry says:

    Hi guys.
    We are missing a link somewhere.
    The actions of the authorities in this case do not make any sense! So there has to be a reason why they took the course they did. As I get older the thought of fairy’s at the bottom of the garden get more and more remote so, lets explore some thoughts with what we know.
    Two guys, now known to the police broke into the Four Winds where Bob was. A fight broke out, Bobs blood is scattered about in the boat and Bob has gone missing?
    A grey dingy ties up to the side of the Four Winds late in the day?
    That night Sue gets a phone call from a stranger who has muscled his way into Bobs daughters life telling Sue the Four Winds is sinking? No such things as fairy’s.
    Within two days of the Four Winds found sinking the police peruse Sue for Bobs disappearance and who comes forward with a story about Sue, somebody well known to the police?
    Bod is still missing!
    So what is the link between those who broke into the Four Winds, the owner of the grey dingy, the phone call to Sue and how did he know that the Four Winds was in peril, and the made up stories about Sue by somebody known to police who not only needed a deal with the police but had a grudge against Sue to satisfy?
    Where is Bob? I think the some or all of the above know exactly where he is!

  6. Pauline Chalmers says:

    The WILFUL silence persists because the REAL ISSUE is, how will the men in law enforcement in Tasmania cope, at having their rank stupidity EXPOSED if Sue Neill-Fraser’s conviction is quashed. We have already witnessed Colin Riley’s wrath, Tim Ellis’s Wac a Mole derision, The Vigilante News TVN disparaging demand for “fresh and compelling” evidence, Michael Dyson’s misogynistic commentary and Darren Hine’s dismissive comments made without reading the Etter/Selby documents filed in Parliament in August. I am a latecomer supporting Sue whose case I learnt about while researching family history in Tasmania, off the back of New Zealand’s worst Miscarriage of Justice case, and it’s equal in weight to the worst social scandal’s the island has to offer, beginning with the massacre of aboriginals at Risdon Cove on the 3rd of May 1803. In a 100 years time all Tasmanians will be hanging there heads in shame, because honestly Teina Pora’s case held double the complexities of Sue Neill-Fraser’s case and the people in overturning his conviction didn’t have to deal with the level of pure spite Sue’s supporters have had to endure. Everything said and done (including omissions) is for historians to record and later dissect and it’s not going to make for pretty reading!! Law enforcement should try and limit, not extend the embarrassment with this wilful silence.

    • Brian Johnston says:

      I am not sure how you can suggest some miscarriages of justice are worse than others, it comes down to opinion. There are cases worse than Teina Pora. Scott Watson and Mark Lundy for starters. We can go back to Arthur Allan Thomas.
      There are worse cases in Australia. Gun Alley Murder where an innocent person was hanged. Sometimes it is opinion others it is what it is.
      There are some shocking aspects to Sue’s case. The police determined Sue’s guilt before the evidence was in, at that point it was all over for Sue. To invent a story where Sue may have been hit over the head with a wrench or stabbed with a screwdriver and without evidence or a body is just crazy talk. What was the judge thinking for allowing such trash.

      • Graham Day says:

        You wrote; To invent a story where Sue may have been hit over the head with a wrench or stabbed with a screwdriver and without evidence or a body is just crazy talk. What was the judge thinking for allowing such trash.
        I understand that the “invent a story” referred to crazy talk by the DPP Ellis.

        How did the judge allow “such trash”.
        It is a good question without a good answer.

  7. tony brownlee says:

    Appeal heard in early March 2021, no decision as at mid November 2021! Is the obvious, obvious? Can it be the Court and “the sewer system” that is Justice in Australia cannot come to terms with a decision either way?

    • andrew says:

      If the Attorney-General had invited mainland judges to sit on the appeal, the judges would not have had to grapple with any of the conflict of interest issues that may be troubling them. Confidence in their decision is leaking away the longer they wait to announce their decision/s….

      • John Biggs says:

        The AG to my mind didn’t invite mainland judges precisely because she identifies with the Tasmanian legal establishment and doesn’t want it besmirched. They are too far committed to the injustice to Sue to allow any backing down. But somewhere at the back of my once Christian mind, I believe that the truth will eventually out. However, the chief players of this wicked prosecution will by then be beyond retribution. On second thoughts, the truth is already out, we know the scenario full well. This completely shakes one’s faith in our justice system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.