Sunday, December 21, 2014

Henry Keogh; (Aftermath (1): Repercussions of the Keogh decision on other cases are already being felt - including the appeal launched by Derek Bromley which also involved discredited former chief forensic pathologist Dr. Colin Manock; The Australian also reports Keogh and Bromley's supporter legal scholar Robert Moles' call on the South Australian government to set up a forensic review panel to identify any cases that may need to be reviewed as a result of the Keogh decision.

STORY: "Keogh ruling adds validity to Derek Bromley appeal, say legal experts," by reporter Meredith Booth, published by the Australian on December 22, 2014.

GIST: Former  royal commissioner and NSW Supreme Court judge Greg James QC will represent long-term prisoner Derek Bromley in an appeal to South Australia’s highest court on grounds of a miscarriage of justice, in the wake of the court’s landmark decision on Friday. Bromley’s appeal, which has been worked on for some time and may be lodged imminently, will be galvanised by the Court of Criminal Appeal’s decision to set aside the “body in the bath” murder conviction of Henry Keogh (after the 1994 death of his fiancee Anna-Jane Cheney) on flawed and in­adequate forensic evidence provided by then chief forensic pathologist Colin Manock. Dr Manock’s evidence formed part of Bromley’s murder conviction in 1984, one of an estimated 400 cases in which he appeared as an expert witness in South Aus­tralia over 30 years to 1995.".........
Bromley, now serving his 29th year in prison, has refused to show remorse or apologise for the 1984 drowning murder of Stephen Docoza, which he maintains he did not commit. His co-accused, who also maintained his innocence, walked free on parole in 2004. Bromley’s legal team includes the former Federal Court and NSW Supreme Court judge Marcus Einfeld. Robert Moles, legal academic and supporter of Mr Keogh and Bromley, called on the South Australian government to set up a forensic review panel to identify any cases that may need to be reviewed as a result of the Keogh decision.  “The government needs to get on the front foot here and help to identify any defective cases,’’ he said. “If there have been problems, why not set up the review panel which would have the power to refer things back to the courts?” Dr Moles said a review panel would be an efficient alternative to a royal commission into the state’s forensic pathology service. The South Australian ­Attorney-General, John Rau, would not comment on the Keogh decision yesterday."

The entire story can be found at:

See previous post of this Blog on the Derek Bromley case: "Manock gave a number of descriptions of injuries: this one would have been caused by a kick; this one could have been caused by a barbell; this one could have been caused by scraping on the ground. All those descriptions exactly correlated with [Carter's] description of the fight. So you have a good match between the scientific evidence and the eyewitness evidence. You put them together and you come up with a conviction." Manock's opinions went through the trial and the appeal uncontested. But one of Australia's foremost forensic experts on drowning, Professor Vernon Plueckhahn, as quoted in the tabled document, said it was his "firm opinion that there is no scientific basis in the post-mortem findings for an unequivocal diagnosis of death from drowning". In fact, Moles says, there wasn't enough evidence to say that Docoza was even murdered. "Once a body's been immersed in water for about two days," he says, "the tissues become putrefied and they become a bit like jelly, so if you could identify injury to the body you couldn't possibly determine if it's happened before or after death."";postID=1748007273089758395


Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.

The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;