By Andrew L. Urban
Several serious legal errors were made at the 2010 trial of Sue Neill-Fraser, any one of which warrants the murder conviction being set aside, according to a legal expert in miscarriages of justice, Dr Bob Moles.
“The evidence given to the court by the forensic scientist was totally inadmissible. This error warrants the conviction being set aside.”
By Andrew L. Urban
By Andrew L. Urban
Tunnel vision by police investigators is one of the leading causes of wrongful convictions, according to a respected former Detective Inspector, when alternative theories to the crime are not considered and potential suspects are eliminated from the investigation. ‘Improper forensic science’ is another.
By Andrew L. Urban
Tasmanian MPs have been invited to attend a special Parliamentary briefing (August 19, 2014) by Adelaide based law expert Dr Bob Moles, canvassing the errors and flaws Dr Moles has identified in relation to the (arguably unsafe) murder conviction of Sue Neill Fraser, who is serving 23 years in Risdon prison for the 2009 murder of her partner Bob Chappell, whose body has never been found.
By Andrew L. Urban
August 20, 2014, marks 5 years to the day since the arrest of Hobart grandmother Sue Neill Fraser, for the murder of her partner Bob Chappell. She has been in custody ever since, without pre-trial bail allowed; she is now in Hobart’s Risdon Prison. This is nothing to celebrate, since it is not a case of bringing a murderer to justice, but a catastrophic failure of the Tasmanian legal system to produce a fair trial. A failure that is so blatant and shocking hardly anyone who hears of the case can believe it really happened the way it did.
The way it really happened has been denounced by lawyers as respected and informed about the system as Chester Porter QC, no stranger to miscarriages of justice (refer Lindy Chamberlain Royal Commission). Likewise Dr Bob Moles, an authority – and literally an author – on the subject (refer his pivotal role in South Australia introducing new laws to allow further appeals in serious cases where the verdict is in doubt).
By Andrew L. Urban
Sue Neill-Fraser will celebrate – if that’s the word – her 60th birthday on March 3, 2014 inside Hobart’s Risdon prison, shut away from her daughters and grandchildren, serving a 23 year sentence for the murder of her partner Bob Chappell, which she vehemently denies. The case is destined to be a cause célèbre because, in the absence of hard evidence, the prosecutor literally manufactured a murder scenario by speculation, unsupported by any physical evidence.
The DPP, Mr Tim Ellis, speculated that Neill-Fraser had murdered Chappell with a wrench (no wrench was produced in evidence yet it was mentioned 27 times, and there is no body to check for injuries). He went on to speculate that afterwards, she used a latex glove to ‘cover up’ what she had done. But the DNA that was found in the glove, on which Mr Ellis relied to convince the jury of this speculation, actually belonged to Tim Chappell, Bob’s son. It was well after the trial – well after the jury had delivered their verdict – that Mr Ellis admitted this mistake.
By Andrew L. Urban
Alan Turing (1912 – 1954), some readers will remember, is the man from Manchester who broke the German’s Enigma code and doing so, probably helped shorten WWII by two years or more, saving hundreds of thousands of lives.
Just seven years after the war ended, in 1952, Turing underwent chemical castration after pleading guilty to a homosexual act. No, I’m not making this up. It came about when he admitted to sexual relations with a man while reporting a burglary.
By Andrew L. Urban
Saturday, January 25, 2014: Independent MP Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Tas) became the first Tasmanian MP to speak out publicly about the controversial murder conviction of Sue Neill-Fraser, jailed in 2010 for 23 years. He spoke last Saturday morning at a protest rally outside Hobart’s Parliament House and said: “You cannot convict anyone in this country where there is any doubt. It’s as simple as that.”
By Andrew L. Urban
I may be unlearned in law, a lay man, but I don’t think I’m an intellectually lame man. I have been looking at the sentencing remarks in the controversial Sue Neill-Fraser case (about which I have written at great length) as a journalist. What strikes me about the sentencing remarks of Justice Blow (October 2010) is the apparent eagerness with which he has accepted the prosecution’s speculative and unproven case.
Here is a critical passage from the sentencing remarks, which goes a long way to reveal His Honour’s willingness to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on matters which are quite evidently in doubt.
By Andrew L. Urban
A murder conviction which eminent lawyers and legal experts say is quite possibly a gross miscarriage of justice has exposed serious deficiencies in Australia’s criminal justice system. Not only are the restrictive and limited appeal provisions in contravention of Australia’s international human rights obligations, but innocent people can be jailed for long terms – with no further right of appeal.
“The criminal trial and the criminal appeal system is not operating correctly,” says Dr Robert Moles, former Associate Professor of Law, who has investigated alleged miscarriages of justice for 14 years, and is a joint author of Forensic Investigations and Miscarriages of Justice, (Irwin Law, Toronto, 2010).