Author Archives: andrew

From the archives: Derek Bromley’s appeal mangled by court

Posted on May 6, 2026 by andrew

The appeal court in Bromley has fundamentally failed to pay due regard to the rule of law and to the well-established principles governing criminal appeals, according to legal academics Dr Bob Moles and Bibi Sangha, as we first reported on … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 05 Derek Bromley | 1 Comment

Welcome to context

Posted on May 5, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Contrary to his apparent intention, Dr Simon Longstaff’s heartfelt and personal reflection laid out in his column (The Australian, May 5, 2026) reinforces the inappropriateness of the practice known as “welcome to country” in 21st century Australia. … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Will Albo be called?

Posted on May 4, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban It starts today. Witnesses will be heard at the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion, starting with Alex Ryvchin,  co-chief executive of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry. Ever since the release of the Terms of … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 3 Comments

The Lawyer X Scandal: Rule of Law or Necessary Evil?

Posted on May 3, 2026 by andrew

STEVEN FENNELL explores both sides of the Nicola Gobbo debate, wrongful convictions and the fracture of Australian justice. 

Posted in General articles | 2 Comments

Marco Rusterholz: the ‘maybe’ case that courts found ‘sure’

Posted on May 1, 2026 by andrew

Convicted of a 2012 double murder, Marco Rusterholz believes he is (like Sue Neill-Fraser), a victim of Tasmania’s discredited legal system. To avoid an apprehension of bias, we have sought an independent, structured, adversarial analysis of his case by LIA … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 19 Marco Rusterholz | Leave a comment

The Cost of Appellate Complacency — a personal account

Posted on April 27, 2026 by andrew

In his post on April 25, 2026, The Record and the Reality:  What Transcripts Don’t Show in Criminal Appeal, STEVEN FENNELL argued that transcripts are an incomplete reconstruction of a trial. In this companion piece, he provides a cautionary tale … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 1 Comment

From the archives: Justice cast to the Four Winds

Posted on April 26, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban* The Australian featured this extensive article in the March 25, 2015, edition.  It was  the first detailed mainstream media analysis of the Sue Neill-Fraser case and serves to inform those new to the subject – and a … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 10 Comments

The Record and the Reality:  What Transcripts Don’t Show in Criminal Appeal

Posted on April 25, 2026 by andrew

There is an unspoken assumption at the heart of the criminal justice system: that the written record is an accurate and sufficient representation of what occurred in court, writes STEVEN FENNELL. It is not. Transcripts are treated as authoritative. They … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 11 Robert Xie | 8 Comments

Ben Roberts-Smith: principle of legal equality trashed

Posted on April 24, 2026 by andrew

Some have mistakenly asserted that the prosecution of Ben Roberts-Smith proves the principle of legal equality is well-respected in Australian law. It proves the reverse, writes CHRIS MERRITT in The Australian.

Posted in General articles | 1 Comment

Meaghan Vass was on the yacht, Sue Neill-Fraser was not. OK?

Posted on April 21, 2026 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban  I just have to share this with readers who may have missed it. In recent weeks, a number of comments have turned up on previous stories about the Sue Neill-Fraser case. It’s been 16 years since the … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 43 Comments