Bulletin: Henry Keogh: Australia; Hearing winds up; His lawyers say allegations their client drowned Ms Cheney in her bathtub by grabbing her legs and lifting them up over her head cannot be supported by forensic evidence. But the Director of Prosecutions replies that claims of fatal allergic shock and disputes over bruising are insufficient reason to reopen the controversial case; Decision reserved; The Advertiser;

STORY: SA Supreme Court told Henry Keogh's latest claims insufficient to warrant landmark appeal case," by Chief Court Reporter Sean Fewster, published by the Advertiser, on February 21, 2014.

GIST: "Claims  of fatal allergic shock and disputes over bruising are insufficient reason to reopen the controversial Anna-Jane Cheney murder case, a court has heard. Director of Public Prosecutions Adam Kimber, SC, urged the Supreme Court on Friday not to grant Henry Keogh’s landmark challenge to his conviction for the 1994 murder of his fiancee. He said any medical material had to be looked at in context with the rest of the case, including Keogh’s admission he forged million-dollar insurance policies on Ms Cheney’s life. “Ms Cheney’s cause of death was never based solely on the pathology evidence, it was based on the entirety of the prosecution case,” he said. “Those are the things that have not been mentioned by Keogh’s counsel, including millions of dollars in insurance policies forged by Keogh, on his own admission......... Keogh’s challenge arises from new laws allowing the court to hear an appeal, even after all appeal rights have been exhausted, if “fresh and compelling evidence” emerges. His lawyers say allegations their client drowned Ms Cheney in her bathtub by grabbing her legs and lifting them up over her head cannot be supported by forensic evidence.  Keogh’s team must convince Justice Kevin Nicholson they have an arguable case in order to win a hearing before the Full Court of the Supreme Court. The Full Court will then decide whether or not to overturn Keogh’s conviction.   Justice Kevin Nicholson will hand down his decision at a later date."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/sa-supreme-court-told-henry-keoghs-latest-claims-insufficient-to-warrant-landmark-appeal-case/story-fni6uo1m-1226834008558

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.