Andrew L. Urban.
Book him now. He’s moving south. Queensland last year, ACT this year…Tasmania next year? Walter Sofronoff KC will be available to chair a Commission of Inquiry into the case of Sue Neill-Fraser. Excuses by the Attorney-General to avoid one are indefensible.
Sue Neill-Fraser – with family dog Archie (pic Rosie Crompton-Crook)
Tasmanian Attorney-General the Hon. Elise Archer has repeatedly denied the need for a Commission of Inquiry into the evidence-free 2010 murder conviction of Sue Neill-Fraser, a law-abiding middle aged mother (now grandmother) who was planning her retirement with her partner Bob Chappell – the victim of her alleged 2009 crime.
Among those putting the case for a wrongful conviction is Tony Jacobs, former Principal Crown Counsel and a Crown Law Officer in Tasmania for over 30 years, who lists errors that he claims show her (now deceased) defence counsel’s “flagrant incompetence”. So is Flinders University legal academic Dr Bob Moles, who has followed the case for over a decade, argues that the trial failed many legal rules; and the majority decision refusing the 2021 appeal was contradicted by the dissenting judge.
Sue Neill-Fraser’s former lawyer Barbara Etter APM together with Canberra barrister Hugh Selby, prepared a detailed dossier cataloguing the many failures of the police investigation – and evidence withheld – which was tabled in the Legislative Council of Parliament in August 2021. Among those calling for an inquiry (several times) is the barrister Robert Richter KC. There are others.
“ … a Commission of Inquiry has not been shown to be needed or justified in Ms Neill-Fraser’s case.”
Tasmania’s Attorney-General Elise Archer MP has put that observably incorrect view in writing, in the first half of 2023. It is one of the indefensible excuses she has cited in reply to letters urging her to establish an inquiry.
It seems desirable that my publishers (Wilkinson) urgently make available to the Attorney a copy of my new book, The Exoneration Papers – Sue Neill-Fraser, in which all her excuses are shown to be unfounded – as shown here. Further, I helpfully provide a list of appealable matters that have not been considered by any court in the case. See further below.
Three previous books, several TV current affairs shows, a film, a documentary, a documentary series, press articles, a play, and a podcast series have all cast doubt on the conviction.
The Attorney-General (or was it perhaps an uninformed staffer on her behalf?) made further indefensible excuses – like this one:
One of my duties as Attorney-General is to uphold the rule of law. This means ensuring that a case is adjudicated independent from the executive arm of government. Tasmania and Australia’s highest courts have each now considered Ms Neill-Fraser’s case in great detail. It is important that the courts’ decisions be respected. For me not to do so would undermine the rule of law and the judiciary.
Elise Archer MP, Tasmanian Attorney-General
This argument is pompous and erroneous. It conflates the appeal heard in the Supreme Court with the application seeking leave to appeal to the High Court. In the latter, the High Court refused leave to hear the appeal; it did not hear any arguments on the ground/s of the proposed appeal. There is a long history of court decisions (convictions) overturned after several appeals were initially lost, most famously the case of Lindy Chamberlain.
Public confidence in the rule of law is maintained only when such confidence is justified, while the above issues, plus a petition with over 36,000 signatures (as at early 2023) suggest that such confidence is not being maintained.
Her response contradicted her own actions, when she claimed as follows:
The separation of powers between the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament is an important cornerstone of our system of government. This means that Tasmanian courts hear and decide cases, independent of and without influence from, the government of the day. Similarly, the Director of Public Prosecutions, who prosecutes crimes in the Supreme Court and conducts appeals, exercises his or her functions independent of and without influence from the government of the day. This ensures there is no political, sectional or other interference.
Yet on May 4, 2023, she intervened to direct the coroner to hold an inquest into the death of Jari Wise, a man who died after being struck by a car driven by his former partner, overturning a Supreme Court decision made just hours earlier.
Asked if this was the first instance of an Attorney-General intervening in this way, the Justice Department said it “is not aware of a similar direction having been made”. As readers would be aware, reviews have recently been held in the NSW cases of Kathleen Folbigg’s murder convictions and Bruce Lehrmann’s abandoned rape allegation in the ACT, both established by the Attorney-General of the relevant jurisdiction. The establishment of an independent review by the Attorney-General would not constitute political interference. Rather, it would demonstrate respect for justice to be done and seen to be done.
It was former judge Walter Sofronoff KC who chaired the ACT inquiry into its justice system viz the abandoned Bruce Lehrmann trial. It was also he who chaired the Queensland Commission of Inquiry into the forensic DNA testing scandal, established last year. As he moves south, perhaps he could be invited to continue on towards Hobart, as his report will have been delivered to the ACT Attorney-General by July 31, 2023. (We will cover the report.)
None of the matters summarised below (from chapters in my book) have been considered by any appeal court in the Sue Neill-Fraser case:
Dr Bob Moles
Identified by Flinders University legal academic Dr Bob Moles:
- Luminol test results are not admissible
- Luminol test results in photograph in the dinghy are seriously prejudicial
- Pathology evidence inadmissible
- Submissions by prosecutor and judge inadmissible
- Jury misinformed concerning drug smuggling operations
- Judge – circumstantial case wrongful summing up to jury
Tony Jacobs
Identified by former prosecutor Tony Jacobs, Principal Crown Counsel & a Crown Law Officer for over 30 years:
- flagrant incompetence by defence counsel, the late David Gunson;
- the failure of the solicitors lodging her 2011 appeal to raise these issues;
- the failure of the solicitor lodging her 2012 High Court appeal;
- the failure of the Tasmanian Appeal Court in 2012 to, of its own motion, raise these issues;
- Evidence not disclosed re electropherogram (of Vass DNA), destroying prosecutor’s claim of transferred deposit;
- Evidence not disclosed about the false Mt Nelson address (given by Vass);
- Failure to object to inadmissible hearsay evidence from Detective Sinnitt re Vass possibly hanging around Goodwood;
- Evidence not disclosed that Mr Gosser in conversation with Detective Sinnitt re DNA unlikely to have been walked on
The Etter Selby papers & the police investigation
The August 2021 Etter Selby investigation report states that: “This paper explores significant police shortcomings in the investigation, along with their failure to disclose key evidence to the Crown in the Sue Neill-Fraser case. It brings to light information that has not been presented to the court at any stage of the initial trial or subsequent appeals.
*
It would be pure speculation to suggest potential reasons for the refusal to establish any kind of independent review of the case. But if you think a Commission of Inquiry, say, might find that it was a botched investigation, an error-riddled trial and a wrongful conviction, you might think it would mean major professional embarrassment all round, a loss of confidence in the legal system and a claim against the State for costs and compensation.
Lady Justice fallen
The Exoneration Papers – Sue Neill-Fraser by Andrew L. Urban will be launched in Hobart by former Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings at Fullers Bookshop on August 23, 2023.
What is the worth in millions and who are the players – The Tasmaniac illicit drug industry ? Tasmaniac Policeymens know exactly who the two “men” were with Vass on the “Four Winds” – The Federal Drug Squad was so bent – couldn’t be straightened ! Was given a complete revamping jiggy ! What a can of worms that turned into – A ludicrous wrongful conviction – the guilty went free – all part of the system – The current Tasmaniac AG might well come unstuck – denying justice – damn fool !
Thank you Andrew. This will not go away no matter how much the Tasmanian government wants it to!!! So many people complicit in this travesty and continuing to ‘hold the line’.
It is clear that this government must go to an early election and will hopefully be defeated because as long as the current AG remains in position, nothing will change.
An independent inquiry is essential and Walter Sofronoff KC conducting it is a wonderful idea.
Sue, you remain in our thoughts and we will continue until this wrong is corrected and you are exonerated and those responsible are brought to justice.
Diane, I am sorry to say, an early election, change of Government will not achieve anything. Tasmania is corrupt through and through. Local Government, Public Service, Police, Politicians and Judiciary.
It is called the Island Syndrome. Cronyism, nepotism, corruption, and the close knit society closes ranks when corrupt police are in the scope, because the police are the power; eg; Tasmania Leader of Opposition tells my wife and I, Tasmania Police are too corrupt to do anything about.
I have lived through and experienced 2 Case Studies of Tasmania Police Corruption. But I am a pleb, Government denies the ability to rectify the problem, and Tasmania Media wanted no part of whistleblowing.
Some body in Australia must be able to sort it out.
Owen.
What is “undermining the rule of law and the judiciary” is actually the people in positions of power (where they should be serving the community) who are refusing to act, review and correct this heinous miscarriage of justice! If it wasn’t so serious it would be laughable. Please take note Attorney General, YOU have the power to intervene and initiate a review, to initiate a Royal Commission, to fix this disgrace. That does not undermine anything, in fact it strengthens the process. To do nothing is a dereliction of duty in my view. Premier Hodgman also had the opportunity to act when he was handed all the papers by Robert Richter KC, but what transpired? Zip all! Seems a common theme in Tasmania. The Etter Selby papers have been similarly ignored, so the Attorney General needs to explain…. We are all ears. Tasmania is a disgrace.
Thanks LB. For what you say, as it is; these people are guilty of criminal negligence. Not fit for practice. They should be removed from office, pronto; any Constitututional Academics out there to confirm or deny the situation please.
Owen.
Thank you for your continued hard work for justice.
.What Tasmanian needs is a CCRC appointed by the Political AG – This CCCRC has to be very carefully designed – So Taspol can ignore requests for Blue Cloths DNA -and if becoming a bloody nuisance – can easily be nobbled by the Political “Systems ” — (as has the Britush CCRC). eezy peezy. Emasculated castrated (had its balls cut off).
Bob Moles has proposed a plan for a national CCRC network. Using the experience the UK CCRC, the body can avoid pitfalls found, strengthen any weaknesses and make a substantial contribution to better results in the criminal justice system Maybe even justify the word ‘justice’ ….
Well Andrew time will tell as my Brisbane friend ex Tasmanian is finishing off his documentation before he makes the trip down under to the Penal Colony (without the convicts) and with the media standing by when he goes to the Integrity Commission in Tasmania to fight for justice. He lost a business as well as two homes. I am in touch with him every second day
This has to be without peer the most disgusting exhibition of injustice along with incompetence on all fronts. Tasmania hang your head in shame
Well done Andrew, excellent work and to everyone on the case.
Owen.
Andrew, with you on that, “Book him now”. This man, Walter Sofronoff KC has already demonstrated a very ‘no-nonsense’ approach while at the same time showing great ‘insight’ to all parties he has had to deal with in the previous Canberra based inquiry which I as well a so many others await his report into the abandoned Bruce Lehrmann trial. I’m interested in knowing how this could be achieved and I look forward in anticipation of some wonderful supportive proposals.
In the case of Sue Neill-Fraser, Sue was done over by her own legal team in concert with a hell bent police brief and a prosecutor who bent, broke, and forgot rules of evidence.
The Tasmanian DPP behaved like a small child caught with their hand in the biscuit tin all the while saying “what tin.”
It’s time that a system to review such matters was instigated as has been suggested by most reasonable lawyers, those lawyers, Judges not interested, are not interested because lazy suits their style of defence and as for the DPP name one time they took the lead in any known system problems in their department?
Thank you for this, Andrew. And for your readers may I give an example of Attorney-General Elise Archer’s reply to my request for her to initiate an Inquiry?
This ‘separation of powers’ stuff has been around long enough now. It did its duty in the long years of hearings when there was something actually before the court and now its been recalled to active duty.
It is sad that our Tasmanian Attorney-General does not admit that there are problems with the conviction of Sue. You know – I know – many of us know that there is not just
a single ‘anomaly’, but a whole raft of them. I won’t attempt to cite them all here, but one of them (and it certainly was not the first) came when then Justice Blow refused to allow Meaghan Vass to be recalled to the (trial) stand for reexamination after Detective Sinnitt subsequently informed the court that on the night of Bob’s murder, Vass was that night for a ‘sleepover’ and the address she’d given for the sleepover did not exist or could not be found.
And yet, her DNA was found on the Four Winds.
Does it not seem reasonable that Gunson for the defence should get her back to ask her about her movements that night?
For that single reason of Justice Blow refusing to allow Vass to be recalled, I have regarded the trial and conviction of Sue as a miscarriage of justice.
I believe that
1 We need an Inquiry into all aspects of Bob Chappell’s murder and that
2 We need a Criminal Cases Review Commission.