Author Archives: andrew

Sue Neill-Fraser case moves out of Tasmania to the High Court

Posted on July 24, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban At 9.30am on Friday, August 12, 2022, the (probably three) High Court judges assigned to hear the seeking leave to appeal her 2010 murder conviction by Sue Neill-Fraser, will watch their screens wherever they are geographically, but … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 41 Comments

Speculation undesirable (and impermissible) prosecutorial tool

Posted on July 9, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Society does not want prosecutors to win convictions in circumstantial cases based on speculation. It is also impermissible. If it weren’t for professional immunity, the practice would cease. 

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 02 Henry Keogh, Case 11 Robert Xie, General articles | 17 Comments

Science in service of the court – or not?

Posted on July 4, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban How really reliable is testimony from expert witnesses? How can juries and judges tell if what they are told is unbiased, grounded in solid scientific knowledge and not just opinion? How should such witnesses conduct themselves? Try … Continue reading →

Posted in Forensic evidence | 9 Comments

The Boxing Butterfly takes wing – beware its sting

Posted on June 30, 2022 by andrew

A month after its publication, the book chronicling the career to date of Margaret Cunneen SC, The Boxing Butterfly, is in its second print-run, after a rush of demand, according to publisher Michael Wilkinson of Wilkinson Publishing. The book was … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 11 Comments

Further right to appeal passes WA parliament

Posted on June 19, 2022 by andrew

The Criminal Appeals Amendment Bill 2021, the new statutory right of (second and subsequent) appeal, has now been introduced in Western Australia. It passed the parliament on June 15, 2022, and now awaits formal assent before being enacted.  

Posted in General articles | 15 Comments

Fresh evidence at appeal cannot bolster Crown case

Posted on June 11, 2022 by andrew

In response to a question about the Derek Bromley case by reader Jerry Fitzsimmons, Flinders University legal academic Dr Bob Moles explains why fresh evidence at appeal can help overturn an unsafe conviction, but the Crown cannot use fresh evidence … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 05 Derek Bromley | 4 Comments

Inadmissible forensic evidence still haunting Bromley conviction 38 years later

Posted on June 9, 2022 by andrew

The SA Director of Public Prosecutions should be directed to inform the High Court that the evidence of Dr Colin Manock, former chief pathologist in South Australia, was inadmissible as he was not qualified to do autopsies or to give … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 05 Derek Bromley | 7 Comments

Tas Govt ignores calls for a review, petition climbs over 32,300

Posted on June 9, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Requests to the Tasmanian Premier and Attorney-General for comment on the Etter/Selby documents repudiating the police investigation into Bob Chappell’s disappearance tabled in Parliament last August have been ignored, while signatures on the petition calling for a … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 65 Comments

Second inquiry into 2003 Folbigg conviction – what’s the hurry?

Posted on May 19, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban. We report (sourced with thanks from The Australian, May 18, 2022) and comment (in red) on the latest development in this case. 

Posted in Case 17 Kathleen Folbigg | 18 Comments

There but for the grace of God go … you

Posted on May 2, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban. The High Court adjourned for just four minutes before resuming at 2.45pm on Wednesday, September 11, 2019, with a unanimous decision that Steven Fennell’s appeal against his murder conviction should be upheld. A verdict of acquittal was … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 40 Comments