Lehrmann’s hell in legal purgatory

Andrew L. Urban

 Now that Bruce Lehrmann’s appeal against the negative result in his defamation case against TEN and Lisa Wilkinson has been dismissed in the Federal Court, the legal quagmire has deepened. He is living in the hell of legal purgatory. This is not a victory for the rule of law. Continue reading

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 6 Comments

Tasmanian Legislative Council urged on “a wide-ranging powerful commission of inquiry” into Sue Neill-Fraser case

Andrew L. Urban

You won’t be surprised that the Tasmanian Government is continuing to stonewall on the calls for an inquiry into the Sue Neill-Fraser case, firmly keeping a blind eye on the mountain of reasons in favour of one. The latest exhibition of this happened in the Legislative Council in the evening of Tuesday, December 2, 2025, when the latest Etter Selby report was tabled by Michael Gaffney (Ind, Mersey). And then that mysterious phone call …  Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 12 Comments

Is Sue Neill-Fraser’s murder conviction built on fraud? LIA says yes.

LIA, the new Legal Intel AI, has identified at least four issues as potential grounds that might be framed as a ‘fraud on the court’ in the case of Sue Neill-Fraser. One would be enough. Given the shameful history of the case at the hands of Tasmania’s legal system, nobody should be surprised. But why now?  Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 4 Comments

Is Marco Rusterholz really the murderer? A private investigation

JAKE HOLLAND

 A friend of Marco’s asked me to look at the case a couple of years ago but I originally shrugged it off as a typical “I didn’t do it story” and then some time later in a moment of boredom, I had a look at it and was shocked that the evidence seemed to point to a man named Matthew  Coventry. The more I researched about him, the more it seemed like he was indeed involved.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 19 Marco Rusterholz | 4 Comments

Misplaced morality in our criminal justice system

One could argue that juries these days are more likely to be sympathetic to the ruling orthodoxies; hence the George Pell and Noel Greenaway* convictions, to cite two examples. It’s no surprise, since juries are chosen from the general population, subject to the same jostling forces that produce ruling orthodoxies. That includes the ethos of the #MeToo movement and ‘believe all women.’ Judges may be just as likely to base their decisions on the same orthodoxy, if the case of Frank Valentine* is any guide. The late KEITH WINDSHUTTLE published this prescient article in March 2019; it is totally relevant today, confirming how misplaced morality has corrupted the rule of law.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 07 George Pell, Case 22 Noel Greenaway, Case 26 Frank Valentine | 1 Comment

New AI tool shames legal system

Andrew L. Urban

He was accused, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced; his appeal was dismissed. His Petition for Mercy to the Governor was put aside by the A-G as was his claim of innocence. His otherwise exemplary life, his family and business were all destroyed. But there has always been a concern that a miscarriage of justice has occurred. Now a new, specialised AI tool called LIA has confirmed it. What is LIA and why should the law act on its findings? Continue reading

Posted in General articles | 2 Comments

Higgins can of worms still can of worms

This is an unedited copy of a comment posted on the story “As Higgins lied about the cover up…” by reader Anne, on 23 November, 2025, for the benefit of readers.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 1 Comment

As Higgins lied about the cover up …

Andrew L. Urban

Two judges, Justice Lee and Justice Tottle, have found Brittany Higgins lied about a political cover up of her alleged rape in then Minister Linda Reynolds’ Parliament House office. Yet Justice Lee accepted her word over Bruce Lehrmann’s to find on the balance of probabilities that Lehrmann had raped her.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 18 Bruce Lehrmann | 11 Comments

The Crown’s resources $$$$$ v the accused $ – unequal arms

Andrew L. Urban

By the time Robert Xie faced his fourth trial in June 2016 for the murder of the Lin family, he was physically, mentally – and financially – exhausted. Convicted, the appeal was still to come … he had to rely on the public defender’s office. It didn’t end well. This scenario is far from unique, even when there are less than four trials. The Crown holds significant resource advantages over defendants — including dedicated investigators, expert witnesses, and unlimited funding. Fair it ain’t. We propose some overdue reforms.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 04 Gordon Wood, Case 11 Robert Xie | 3 Comments

Presumption of innocence OUT, guilt by say-so IN

Andrew L. Urban

All Australian jurisdictions have abolished the mandatory requirement for corroboration of claims in sexual crime prosecutions. This means no jurisdiction requires independent evidence to support a complainant’s testimony for a conviction. This has negated the presumption of innocence leading to guilt by say-so, as three examples demonstrate.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 06 'Paul', Case 22 Noel Greenaway, Case 26 Frank Valentine | Leave a comment