Prosecutor’s allegation haunts forthcoming Jeff Thompson trial

Andrew L. Urban

The allegation by Jack Shapiro, a lawyer at the Office of the Tasmanian DPP, that Hobart solicitor Jeff Thompson “duped” a prisoner in the course of working on the Sue Neill-Fraser appeal, is haunting Thompson’s forthcoming trial on charges of perverting justice. The next directions hearing on the matter is listed for next Monday (April 26, 2021); will the court address the allegation against Thompson, who has yet to be tried? Is Shapiro’s allegation likely to ‘poison the jury pool’?  Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 34 Comments

Shadow of Doubt – the movie that shone a light

As the judges of the Tasmanian Court of Criminal Appeal consider their decision in the case of Sue Neill-Fraser, we publish ANDREW L. URBAN’s review of the Eve Ash documentary, Shadow of Doubt, published on the film’s July 2013 release. The movie alerted the public to the egregious miscarriage of justice that was perpetrated against Neill-Fraser by the Tasmanian criminal justice system.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 12 Comments

The 000 call that rang the wrong alarm

Andrew L. Urban

Fire, police, ambulance … and a packet of assumptions, all turned up together at a suburban Sydney house on a hot December afternoon, in response to a 000 call by a woman in a red jumper. That call on December 2, 2013 never really ended until March 30, 2021.  Continue reading

Posted in General articles | 1 Comment

Dysrationalia can explain wrongful convictions new study shows

This 2021 April Fool story has now been taken down.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Katheleen Folbigg – science misunderstood, legal issues scrambled

The Australian Academy of Science issued a strongly worded statement (24/3/2021) immediately challenging the Court of Appeal’s rejection of Kathleen Folbigg’s appeal*, re-stating “there are medical and scientific explanations for the death of each of Kathleen Folbigg’s children”. But the judge on the inquiry had also erred in law, argues Flinders University legal academic DR BOB MOLES.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 17 Kathleen Folbigg | 3 Comments

Meaghan Vass abandoned by the court

Andrew L. Urban.

 Our interview with Meaghan Vass, published yesterday, answers the question why she panicked. It doesn’t explain why the entire court abandoned its duty of care to this witness.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 29 Comments

Meaghan Vass – the aftermath interview

“My 2019 60 mins interview + affidavit is true and correct.” – Meaghan Vass In the aftermath of the dramatic Tasmanian Supreme Court appeal against Sue Neill-Fraser’s conviction for the murder of her partner Bob Chappell, the key witness, a traumatised and betrayed Meaghan Vass, sought safety and comfort among her close friends. But she agreed to this written Q&A with Andrew L. Urban.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 01 Sue Neill-Fraser | 43 Comments

Kathleen Folbigg – science fobbed off; how the law gets a bad name

Andrew L. Urban.

When science clashes with the courts and science loses, the rule of law also loses – not to mention public confidence in the criminal justice system.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 17 Kathleen Folbigg | 5 Comments

Robert Xie murder appeal failure compounds the errors

The dismissal in February 2021 of the appeal by Robert Xie against his 2017 conviction for the 2009 murder of five members of his wife Kathy Lin’s family compounds the incompetence – or the malice – of the police investigation and the subsequent prosecution.  Continue reading

Posted in Case 11 Robert Xie | 2 Comments

Juries or Judges – or both?

Andrew L. Urban.

As learned legal practitioners and academics will tell you, there are convincing arguments for both jury trials and judge-only trials. There is one important difference – judges must give reasons for their decisions – juries must not. On the other hand, juries are more representative …  Continue reading

Posted in General articles | 14 Comments