STORY: "Anna-Jane Cheney autopsy report inadequate, expert tells court hearing Henry Keogh appeal," by reporters Jordanna Schriever and Sea Fewstwer, published by Adelaide Now on September 22, 2014.
SUB-HEADING: An autopsy report into the death of murder victim Anna-Jane Cheney
was substandard and lacked description and detail, a forensic expert has
told a landmark appeal hearing."
GIST: "The Full Court of the Court of Criminal Appeal today began hearing
an application from Henry Vincent Keogh to appeal against his conviction
for Ms Cheney’s 1994 murder. UK forensic pathology expert
Professor Derrick Pounder told the hearing the standard of the autopsy
report, authored by SA’s then-chief forensic pathologist, Colin Manock,
was “very poor”. “In the most general terms the detail of
description in the report and the quality of the report is far below the
quality which I know was operating (at the time) at the Forensic
Science Centre of Adelaide,” he said.........Keogh’s lawyers said allegations their client
drowned
Ms Cheney in her bathtub by grabbing her legs and lifting them up over
her head could not be supported by forensic evidence. His
conviction, they said, was based on incorrect claims bruises on her
ankle were caused just hours before her death and matched the “grip
mark” of a human hand. They said those claims had been disproved
by a 2004 report prepared for then Solicitor-General — and now Chief
Justice — Chris Kourakis. That report, by Professor Barrie
Vernon-Roberts, formed part of the Labor Government’s refusal of Keogh’s
third petition for mercy. Today, Prof Pounder said the report and
erroneous markings on a body chart accompanying the report were below
the standards that were operating in 1994. Prof Pounder, who had
worked under Mr Manock in Adelaide, said the report was “very poor,
specifically with relationship to the bruises”, and contained “errors of
fact” about the size and location of bruises on her head, neck and leg. But,
he said he could not label Dr Manock as incompetent based on the one
report, but said it was “inadequate based on what Dr Manock taught me”.Prof
Pounder did not believe bruises on Ms Cheney’s left leg were caused by a
hand grip and could have been caused by numerous things. Prof
Pounder said bruises on the back of Ms Cheney’s neck and head were
caused by the autopsy itself, which was conducted over two days. He
said he would normally accept the statements and reports of the first
pathologist to conduct an autopsy, but could not do so in Ms Cheney’s
case. “I feel that the question of the autopsy and erroneous
documentation of other bruises raises very serious doubts as to where
the bruise was truly present,” he said. Keogh’s push for an appeal
hinged on the evidence of Flinders University Associate Professor
Anthony Thomas, who re-examined Professor Roberts’ 2004 report. In February, he suggested Ms Cheney
may have suffered an extreme allergic reaction to the antihistamine drug hismanal prior to her death, rather than having been murdered."
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/annajane-cheney-autopsy-report-inadequate-expert-tells-court-hearing-henry-keogh-appeal/story-fni6uo1m-1227066548718
See related story: "Henry James Keogh has lost a number of appeals against his conviction for murdering Anna-Jane Cheney in March 1994. But under new South Australian legislation, he has begun a landmark
challenge arguing there is fresh and compelling evidence in the case. His lawyers contend that fresh evidence, including the possibility
his fiancee may have suffered an extreme allergic reaction, undermined
his conviction."
http://indaily.com.au/news/2014/09/22/henry-keoghs-landmark-challenge-begins/
For background on Wrongful Conviction Day see the following link:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2014/06/wrongful-convictions-day-aidwyc.html
Interested participants may sign up by contacting Win Wahrer of The
Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted at:
winwahrer@aidwyc.org.
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;
