Category Archives: Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser

Will big question be exposed in High Court?

Posted on August 6, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban A question of profound and long lasting importance will be laid bare before the High Court on Friday, August 12, 2022, when the application for special leave to appeal her 2010 murder conviction by Sue Neill-Fraser will … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 28 Comments

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

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

Dear Attorney – your silence is damning

Posted on April 5, 2022 by andrew

We publish this self-explanatory letter we wrote to Tasmania’s Attorney-General, The Hon. Elise Archer, to demonstrate the State’s callous disregard for transparency and for ensuring that justice is served in the case of Sue Neill-Fraser. 

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 29 Comments

Did Inspector Powell have the answers in the murder investigation? ‘Who knows?’

Posted on March 30, 2022 by andrew

Retired Hobart police Inspector Peter Powell led the investigation into the disappearance-turned-murder of Bob Chappell on Australia Day 2009, which led to the arrest and 2010 conviction of Sue Neill-Fraser for Chappell’s murder. But in interviews between 2012 and 2016, … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 23 Comments

The police inspector, the reporter, the filmmaker and the truth

Posted on March 27, 2022 by andrew

Retired Hobart police Inspector Peter Powell has come out of the woodwork trying to discredit the 90 page Etter Selby dossier, critical of the 2009 police investigation which he led, into the now controversial case of Sue Neill-Fraser. But his … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 26 Comments

Former Sue Neill-Fraser lawyer Barbara Etter’s mixed results in court

Posted on March 2, 2022 by andrew

It has taken some seven years but the Tasmanian DPP’s complaint against former Sue Neill-Fraser lawyer Barbara Etter has been dismissed, while other complaints are upheld.

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser, General articles | 13 Comments

Former Hobart police inspector’s newspaper claim contradicted by evidence

Posted on March 2, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban A claim reported in The Australian (March 2, 2022) that “The policeman in charge of the Susan Neill-Fraser murder ­investigation has quashed a key claim used to justify calls for a royal commission-style inquiry,” is contradicted by … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 16 Comments

Sue Neill-Fraser alleged 2016 prison phone conversation underlines need for a review of her case

Posted on February 19, 2022 by andrew

Andrew L. Urban Sue Neill-Fraser’s alleged 2016 phone conversation from prison, newly revealed, in which she is claimed to express regret for having returned to Four Winds “that night”, raises more doubt, underlines the need for a full review of … Continue reading →

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 63 Comments