Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Bulletin: Andrew Mallard; Australia; His prosecutor, Ken Bates, fined $10,000, reprimanded for professional misconduct. Perth Now.

STORY: "Mallard prosecutor Ken Bates fined $10,000, reprimanded," by reporter Phil Hickey, published in Perth Now on June 25, 2012.

GIST: "The State's top Crown Prosecutor in the wilful murder trial of Andrew Mallard has been hit with a $10,000 fine for "unsatisfactory professional misconduct in the case. Prosecutor Ken Bates' conduct during the trial, which ran from September to November 1995, “fell short to a substantial degree”, the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) ruled. Andrew Mallard spent 12 years in jail for the 1994 murder of Mosman Park jeweller Pamela Lawrence. His conviction was quashed in 2006 and he was later granted a $3.25 million ex-gratia compensation payment.........In its statement the SAT said the fine handed down to Mr Bates was the maximum fine available and that he had "accepted responsibility for his conduct."

The entire story can be found at:

See earlier story by reporter Colleen Egan, published in the West Australian, on the decision to charge Bates with professional misconduct: "However, the Legal Profession Complaints Committee decided not to commence proceedings against Mr Bates in the SAT on the more serious allegation that he deliberately withheld evidence. In a letter explaining its response to a complaint by Mr Mallard, who spent almost 12 years in jail for Mrs Lawrence's murder before being exonerated in 2006, the committee said it accepted Mr Bates' explanation that he accidentally overlooked a forensic test. The test on a pig's head before Mr Mallard's trial showed the injuries to Mrs Lawrence were unlikely to have been caused using a Sidchrome wrench. Despite being told about the test, Mr Bates conducted the trial on the basis of a false confession that included a claim that Mrs Lawrence was killed with a Sidchrome wrench. "Having considered this issue, the committee is of the view that the proposition that the practitioner deliberately withheld the relevant information of the pig's head testing appears extremely unlikely," the committee's complaints officer wrote. "The committee considers that the practitioner's explanation is plausible, that is, that he failed to recall such information."


I am monitoring this case. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments.

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:

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.