Author Archives: andrew

The fifth Red Herring Certificate goes to … Justice Elizabeth Fullerton

Posted on October 24, 2025 by andrew

In 2016, at the fourth and final multiple-murder trial of Robert Xie, Justice Fullerton was directly offered at least one chance to ensure a fair trial. She refused. She also erred in some of her directions to the jury. 

Posted in Case 11 Robert Xie | 7 Comments

The fourth Red Herring Certificate goes jointly to … Mark Tedeschi KC & Tanya Smith

Posted on October 23, 2025 by andrew

The headlines have gone but a lifetime jail sentence remains for Robert Xie for the 2009 murder of the Lin family. (Three adults and his two young nephews.) Xie was convicted without any real evidence. The case was fashioned in … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 11 Robert Xie | Leave a comment

The third Red Herring Certificate goes jointly to … Justices Wood & Pearce

Posted on October 22, 2025 by andrew

The second appeal against her 2010 (wrongful) conviction and 23 year sentence for the 2009 murder of her partner Bob Chappel by Sue Neill-Fraser was heard in March 2021. Wood J and Pearce J voted to dismiss the appeal while … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 5 Comments

The second Red Herring Certificate goes to … Alan Blow (CJ rtd)

Posted on October 21, 2025 by andrew

The Red Herring Certificate identifies prosecutors and judges who, in our sincere opinion supported by evidence, have helped bring about wrongful convictions. The Inaugural Red Herring Certificate went to Tim Ellis SC, the former Tasmanian DPP whose 2010 prosecution (speculation?) … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 7 Comments

The Inaugural Red Herring Certificate goes to … Tim Ellis SC

Posted on October 20, 2025 by andrew

The Red Herring Certificate identifies prosecutors and judges who, in our sincere opinion supported by evidence, have helped bring about wrongful convictions. 

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 5 Comments

Tendency evidence risks unfair trials, eg Frank Valentine

Posted on October 8, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Arguably the most insidious area of the criminal law in Australia is the application of Tendency & Coincidence evidence, a constant threat to fair trial protections. 

Posted in Case 26 Frank Valentine | 3 Comments

Note to detective: tunnel vision is unwarranted certainty

Posted on October 6, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban The trouble with certainty without good evidence in crime investigation is that it easily leads to a wrongful conviction. We have reported on several cases to show this. One former detective has now claimed his ‘certainty’ should … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 22 Noel Greenaway, Case 26 Frank Valentine | 3 Comments

Reforms to make convictions safe(er)

Posted on October 5, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Too many unsafe convictions have put innocents behind bars. Our deformed criminal justice system must be reformed. Following on from our most recent posts examining various ongoing flaws and weaknesses in Australia’s criminal justice system (see * … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 02 Henry Keogh, Case 17 Kathleen Folbigg, General articles | 5 Comments

To correct atrocities of the law relieve politicians of the burden

Posted on October 4, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Advocating for a review of what is arguably a wrongful murder conviction doesn’t make you soft on murder. Likewise, advocating for a review of what is arguably a wrongful sexual assault conviction doesn’t mean you support sexual … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 06 'Paul' | 7 Comments

Prosecutors hunting for convictions

Posted on October 3, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Prosecutorial (bad) behaviour is partly responsible for nearly 1 in 5 wrongful convictions in Australia. That is the statistic reported in a Griffith University study. That study looked at just 71 wrongful convictions. Behind the statistic is … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 11 Robert Xie, Case 19 Marco Rusterholz | 3 Comments