Category Archives: Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser

No valid reasons to dismiss calls for an independent review of the Sue Neill-Fraser case

Posted on November 18, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban  Given the failures of two previous appeals by Sue Neill-Fraser against her discredited murder conviction, Tasmania’s legal system is still defying serious scrutiny. The latest Etter/Selby report highlights both the reasons and the need. Former Tasmanian Attorney … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 4 Comments

Hobart Mercury readers again voice their concern at Sue Neill-Fraser conviction

Posted on November 17, 2025 by andrew

It’s been 15 years since Sue Neill-Fraser’s now discredited trial, but spurred on by the latest Etter/Selby report tabled in Parliament which sets out new material challenging the conviction, Tasmanians are calling for an inquiry– again.

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 4 Comments

Bring on the Valkyries to recover Sue Neill-Fraser

Posted on November 15, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban  There seem to be two schools of thought on how to try and overturn Sue Neill-Fraser’s murder conviction by those who believe, as we do, that it is plainly wrongful. One school holds that the best way … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 3 Comments

Failure to investigate and properly disclose information – why?

Posted on November 13, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban  In the latest explosive Etter/Selby report tabled in the Tasmanian Parliament this week digging into the police investigation of the Sue Neill-Fraser conviction, the authors ask: Why did that failure to investigate and properly disclose information happen? … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | Leave a comment

DNA red herring bites prosecutor – new report

Posted on November 13, 2025 by andrew

If you see furious senior Tasmanian police lurching red faced out of their HQ, they are probably clutching a 78-page report that just landed which sets out why an independent inquiry into the conviction of Sue Neill-Fraser can no longer … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 20 Comments

Can we legitimately call it a ‘justice’ system?

Posted on October 28, 2025 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban In just the three cases that were cited in our recent series (Oct 20 – 26 2025) allocating seven of our Red Herring Certificates to a total of 8 judges and 3 prosecutors who we believe have … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, Case 11 Robert Xie, Case 26 Frank Valentine, CCRC | 5 Comments

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

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