Author Archives: andrew

Extinguishing reasonable doubt with unreliable allegations

Posted on February 15, 2023 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban.  The 2015 double murder conviction of Marco Rusterholz presents a significant concern about the Tasmanian criminal justice system, as it extinguishes the requirement for guilt to be established beyond reasonable doubt, relying on questionable allegations.    

Posted in Case 19 Marco Rusterholz | 7 Comments

Folbigg diaries a “dump” of her emotions

Posted on February 15, 2023 by andrew

Convicted child killer Kathleen Folbigg told a close friend she used her incriminating diaries to “dump” her negative emotions in her grief and blamed herself, feeling that she had “failed as a mother, a woman”, letters tendered in an inquiry … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 17 Kathleen Folbigg | 51 Comments

Derek Bromley “on the steps of the High Court”

Posted on February 4, 2023 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban.  On the eve of his 40th year of imprisonment, Derek Bromley “finds himself, figuratively speaking, on the steps of the High Court of Australia for the second time,” writes his long-time friend and supporter ROBYN MILERA on … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 05 Derek Bromley | 10 Comments

Malpractice, Incompetence And Lies: the Manock curse – Part 2

Posted on February 2, 2023 by andrew

Journalist Andrew L. Urban and retired barrister Kevin Borrick KC reveal how South Australia’s legal fraternity contributed to the ongoing scandal that began with the unqualified forensic pathologist Dr Colin Manock and spread like cancer, infecting the entire system. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 02 Henry Keogh, Case 03 David Szach, Case 04 Gordon Wood, Case 05 Derek Bromley, Forensic evidence, General articles | 14 Comments

Malpractice, Incompetence And Lies: the Manock curse – Part 1

Posted on February 2, 2023 by andrew

Journalist Andrew L. Urban and retired barrister Kevin Borrick KC reveal how South Australia’s legal fraternity contributed to the ongoing scandal that began with the unqualified forensic pathologist Dr Colin Manock and spread like cancer, infecting the entire system. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 02 Henry Keogh, Case 03 David Szach, Case 05 Derek Bromley, Forensic evidence, General articles | Leave a comment

Did “mistakes and misdirections” prompt Marco Rusterholz murder conviction?

Posted on January 21, 2023 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban.  It’s one thing for a man convicted of murder to protest the verdict. It’s quite another to painstakingly dissect the trial judge’s summing up, as Marco Rusterholz did, to point out where he thinks “mistakes and misdirections” … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 19 Marco Rusterholz | 29 Comments

ALERT: ‘chip-in’ to petitions doesn’t help the cause

Posted on January 12, 2023 by andrew

Don’t let your generosity be fooled: when signing a petition, you’ll be asked to ‘chip in’ to help promote the cause. ‘Chipping in’ sounds benign but it’s just a way of asking for money while you are in a vulnerable … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 4 Comments

Calling for disclosure – why mobiles matter

Posted on January 12, 2023 by andrew

The role of mobile phones in sexual assault cases is crucial, often providing exculpatory evidence – which is why some police investigations prefer not to answer the call for disclosure, as gender issues commentator BETTINA ARNDT explains with a couple … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 1 Comment

Could reform help secure safer convictions in circumstantial cases?

Posted on January 6, 2023 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban.  The most recent – and highest profile – murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence was that of Christopher Dawson, for the murder 40 years ago of his then wife Lynette. The conviction, in a judgement delivered August … Continue reading →

Posted in General articles | 14 Comments

Duty of disclosure lasts forever

Posted on December 23, 2022 by andrew

The duty of disclosure of “all matters within their knowledge” applies to all those who represent the Crown – and is a duty in perpetuity, write BIBI SANGHA and Dr BOB MOLES of Flinders University, in their December 21, 2022, … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 05 Derek Bromley, Case 17 Kathleen Folbigg, General articles | 10 Comments