Tuesday, February 9, 2016
Bulletin: Susan Neill-Fraser; Tasmania; She argues that there is "fresh and compelling evidence" which should open the door for a final right of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal. She identifies three people who could have killed her partner Bob Chappell - and, "A fresh analysis by forensic science consultant and former top West Australian homicide investigator Mark Reynolds had debunked the Crown’s case the DNA was a secondary transfer, but was rather bodily fluids deposited by direct contact, according to the application. It also claims fresh analysis of forensic evidence cast doubt on police methods. “In certain areas of forensic investigation, the application of accepted forensic techniques ... had not been undertaken with proper attention to detail or had not been undertaken correctly.” It goes on to say Neill-Fraser could not have dumped Mr Chappell’s body overboard in the way police claimed. The analysis claims it would have been “mechanically impossible for the applicant to have winched the deceased in the manner described by police." The Mercury;
"Convicted murderer Susan Neill-Fraser has identified three other people who could have killed her partner Bob Chappell — including a suspected hitman. In documents lodged with the Supreme Court as part of her bid to overturn her conviction, Neill-Fraser’s legal team claims to have fresh evidence that police withheld evidence and bungled forensic tests. Neill-Fraser. above, is serving 23 years in prison for the murder of Mr Chappell, who disappeared from the couple’s yacht moored near Sandy Bay, on Australia Day 2009. His body has never been found. Neill-Fraser has protested her innocence from the outset and has a determined band of supporters who have been seeking to clear her name. New legislation allows a convicted person a final right of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal if there is “fresh and compelling evidence” and there has been “a substantial miscarriage of justice”. “There is fresh and compelling evidence ... regarding persons other than the applicant who may have had the opportunity to murder or cause the disappearance of the deceased” In her appeal documents lodged by former Integrity Commissioner Barbara Etter, Neill-Fraser names three other people — including one she claims is a hitman.........A fresh analysis by forensic science consultant and former top West Australian homicide investigator Mark Reynolds had debunked the Crown’s case the DNA was a secondary transfer, but was rather bodily fluids deposited by direct contact, according to the application. It also claims fresh analysis of forensic evidence cast doubt on police methods. “In certain areas of forensic investigation, the application of accepted forensic techniques ... had not been undertaken with proper attention to detail or had not been undertaken correctly.” It goes on to say Neill-Fraser could not have dumped Mr Chappell’s body overboard in the way police claimed. The analysis claims it would have been “mechanically impossible for the applicant to have winched the deceased in the manner described by police”.........If granted leave to proceed, this appeal is a final avenue for Neill-Fraser to establish her innocence. If successful, she would be entitled to an acquittal or a new trial."
