STORY: "High-profile Queen’s Counsel Robert Richter met with Premier Will Hodgman over murder case," by reporter Patrick Billings, published by The Mercury on August 18, 2017.
GIST:" One of Australia’s most prominent silks, Robert Richter QC, has called on the State Government to launch an independent inquiry into the Susan Neill-Fraser case. The
request was made in a behind-closed-doors meeting with Premier Will
Hodgman, Tasmania’s Acting Attorney-General Matthew Groom and
Solicitor-General Michael O’Farrell on May 11 this year. At the
meeting, Mr Richter, who lists Mick Gatto and mass killer Julian Knight
as past clients and is representing Cardinal George Pell over historical
sex abuse charges, pressed for the independent probe. Neill-Fraser is serving 23 years for the 2009 killing of partner Bob Chappell on their yacht on the River Derwent. The
62-year-old is fighting the conviction under landmark legislation that
allows for new appeals if “fresh and compelling” evidence emerges. Mr
Richter has previously questioned Neill-Fraser’s conviction, which was
upheld on appeal, writing to former attorney-general Brian Wightman
about the matter in 2013. At the May meeting, attended by two
other unnamed people, Mr Richter argued for Meaghan Vass to be granted
indemnity from prosecution. Ms Vass was a then homeless 15-year-old who was called to give evidence at Neill-Fraser’s murder trial, after her DNA was found on the couple’s yacht. Ms Vass denied ever being on the Four Windsand prosecutors argued her DNA was likely transferred from elsewhere to the yacht. The Mercury
understands Ms Vass has since provided a statutory declaration claiming
Neill-Fraser was not on the boat the day Mr Chappell, whose body has
never been found, disappeared. She is understood to have put two
other suspects in the frame. Her evidence was part of the dossier Mr
Richter gave the Government in a bid to launch an inquiry. Mr
Richter and his companions asked that any inquiry be held by an
interstate former judge or director of public prosecutions. But they
were told there would be no inquiry and any application for immunity
should be made to Tasmania’s Director of Public Prosecutions, Daryl
Coates SC. The Government confirmed the meeting but would not comment further on it. “A
meeting was held at the request of Mr Richter. It would be
inappropriate to comment on the topics of discussion,” a Government
spokesman said. News of the meeting comes in the wake of a chaotic few weeks for the case. The
charging of Karen Patricia Nancy Keefe, 41, on August 9, with
perverting justice and corrupting a witness kicked off a demoralising
week for Neill-Fraser and her supporters. Police allege Ms Keefe
provided false evidence in the form of an affidavit including evidence relating to Neill-Fraser and Ms Vass. On
the corrupting a witness charge, police allege Ms Keefe agreed to
receive $3000 cash in property, a $40,000 reward and a $50,000 education
fund for herself and her children “in consideration for an
understanding that Meaghan Vass be called as a witness, in a judicial proceeding, to provide false evidence”. A
few days later, police arrested Stephen John Gleeson, 57, and will
charge him on summons with perverting justice. Police said they will
allege the man provided false evidence in an application by Neill-Fraser
to appeal her 2010 conviction. Then on Wednesday, another
bombshell — Hobart lawyer Jeffrey Ian Thompson was charged with
perverting justice in relation to the case. Police allege Mr
Thompson, who was working with Neill-Fraser’s former defence solicitor
Barbara Etter at the time, deliberately influenced Mr Gleeson and
prejudiced photographic evidence in support of Neill-Fraser’s appeal. The Mercury does not suggest Ms Etter, who left the defence team in June and could not be reached, is guilty of any wrongdoing. In
the wake of Mr Thompson’s arrest, police for the first time talked
about an alleged “conspiracy” to pervert the course of justice that had
began in November. A police spokeswoman said that during an
unrelated investigation in early February, police were given information
alleging a possible conspiracy to pervert justice by falsifying
evidence in support of Neill-Fraser’s appeal, which is currently before the court. The word from inside the force is there will more charges to follow. Outside
court after Mr Thompson’s appearance on Wednesday, Neill-Fraser’s
daughter Sarah Bowles said her mother would be “shocked and in disbelief
with regard to this latest development”. Renowned barrister Tom
Percy QC, who is representing Neill-Fraser pro bono, declined to comment
on developments this week, saying he “might have more to say” on
Wednesday when the case heads to the Supreme Court in Hobart for a
mention. Melbourne criminal law specialist Paul Galbally has confirmed he is still on the defence team but declined to comment further. Legal
reform activist Bob Moles — who runs a project investigating alleged
wrongful convictions in South Australia — believed the appeal could go
ahead despite the charges. “I’m of the view that the Neill-Fraser
appeal could and would be successful if the appeal court was informed of
the errors which had occurred at trial,” he said. “They have nothing
whatever to do with the current events.”
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.themercury.com.au/subscribe/news/1/index.html?sourceCode=TMWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&mode=premium&dest=http:%2F%2Fwww.themercury.com.au%2Fnews%2Ftasmania%2Fhighprofile-queens-counsel-robert-richter-met-with-premier-will-hodgman-over-murder-case%2Fnews-story%2F959fff4981f095b99a7f6401c3feed28&memtype=anonymous
See Mercury commentary by veteran TV reporter and columnist Charles Wooley for TAS Weekend at the link below; "Robert Richter QC is one of Melbourne’s most eminent barristers and yet another interstate legal expert urging for a judicial inquiry into the Susan Neill-Fraser murder conviction. On May 11, Mr Richter and two others made a personal representation to the Tasmanian Government, meeting in the Premier’s Murray St office with Will Hodgman, acting Attorney-General Matthew Groom and Solicitor-General Michael O’Farrell. Mr Richter QC expressed his concern that there had been a miscarriage of justice. He offered the Tasmanians a detailed investigative dossier exonerating Neill-Fraser and naming the two men his team believed killed Bob Chappell. It also named the young woman Meaghan Vass whom it says had been aboard the Four Winds at the time of the murder and who was “in danger and required protection as well as witness indemnity”. Mr Richter QC requested the Government institute a judicial inquiry, even a Royal Commission if they preferred. He presented the Tasmanian political leaders with the dossier and suggested recruiting investigators with more experience in complex murders than could be expected in Tasmania. He suggested the inquiry be led by someone removed from local pressures, possibly a Director of Public Prosecution from another state. One of Mr Richter’s team told me that neither the dossier nor the advice was well received. “The three of them looked like they had consumed sour milk,” he said. “They were very dismissive. Anywhere else in Australia when Richter QC walks into a room he is the centre of attention. This was an unusual reaction.” Four months on, the Richter dossier has not surfaced. Nor is it likely to in any greater detail than reported here. Issues of contempt of court limit the extent of public statements about legal proceedings before the courts. The mechanism is fair enough where it protects a charged person from prejudgment, but not so desirable when it stops reportage and fair comment in the public interest on a vital, confounding issue of justice. In the light of the recent extraordinary and arresting events in the long-running Susan Neill-Fraser affair, the darker it gets, the more difficult it is to report. Initially, there was a degree of public and legal unease that a murder conviction could be so easily secured in the absence of a body, a weapon and any witness. Later the forensics were revealed to be misleading and we learned the crime scene, by the police’s own confusing admission, was contaminated by DNA tracked on to the yacht Four Winds on the investigator’s boots. Since, we have seen a growing public and expert legal apprehension concerning aspects of the investigation of Bob Chappell’s death. But in the past 10 days have come dramatic events that now seem to compromise the integrity of Neill-Fraser’s long-running appeal. The Mercury newspaper and this columnist are legally constrained in what we can report of this week’s arrest of a Hobart lawyer. It closely follows last week’s charges against two would-be witnesses who allegedly intended to give false evidence in Neill-Fraser’s appeal. In the interest of shedding light in a dark place and in maintaining public faith in the justice system, now is time for Mr Richter’s independent judicial inquiry into the investigation and conviction of Neill-Fraser. As with Mr Richter QC, much of the legal concern over the conduct of the Neill-Fraser case has predictably come from outside of Tasmania. Australian expert on miscarriages of justice, Bob Moles, says the Neill-Fraser conviction is “Australia’s worst miscarriage of justice since Lindy Chamberlain”. Mr Robert Richter QC does not disagree. It may be the Tasmanian Government was not aware of the reputation of the eminent Richter QC. If so, he is no trendy Lefty do-good lawyer. He has defended corporate heavyweights like John Elliott and Ray Williams, and also is representing George Pell. What he offered our Premier and law officers besides a detailed dossier on the murder case was a quite conservative way out of this imbroglio."
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/highprofile-queens-counsel-robert-richter-met-with-premier-will-hodgman-over-murder-case/news-story/959fff4981f095b99a7f6401c3feed28
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/c
http://www.themercury.com.au/subscribe/news/1/index.html?sourceCode=TMWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&mode=premium&dest=http:%2F%2Fwww.themercury.com.au%2Fnews%2Ftasmania%2Fhighprofile-queens-counsel-robert-richter-met-with-premier-will-hodgman-over-murder-case%2Fnews-story%2F959fff4981f095b99a7f6401c3feed28&memtype=anonymous
See Mercury commentary by veteran TV reporter and columnist Charles Wooley for TAS Weekend at the link below; "Robert Richter QC is one of Melbourne’s most eminent barristers and yet another interstate legal expert urging for a judicial inquiry into the Susan Neill-Fraser murder conviction. On May 11, Mr Richter and two others made a personal representation to the Tasmanian Government, meeting in the Premier’s Murray St office with Will Hodgman, acting Attorney-General Matthew Groom and Solicitor-General Michael O’Farrell. Mr Richter QC expressed his concern that there had been a miscarriage of justice. He offered the Tasmanians a detailed investigative dossier exonerating Neill-Fraser and naming the two men his team believed killed Bob Chappell. It also named the young woman Meaghan Vass whom it says had been aboard the Four Winds at the time of the murder and who was “in danger and required protection as well as witness indemnity”. Mr Richter QC requested the Government institute a judicial inquiry, even a Royal Commission if they preferred. He presented the Tasmanian political leaders with the dossier and suggested recruiting investigators with more experience in complex murders than could be expected in Tasmania. He suggested the inquiry be led by someone removed from local pressures, possibly a Director of Public Prosecution from another state. One of Mr Richter’s team told me that neither the dossier nor the advice was well received. “The three of them looked like they had consumed sour milk,” he said. “They were very dismissive. Anywhere else in Australia when Richter QC walks into a room he is the centre of attention. This was an unusual reaction.” Four months on, the Richter dossier has not surfaced. Nor is it likely to in any greater detail than reported here. Issues of contempt of court limit the extent of public statements about legal proceedings before the courts. The mechanism is fair enough where it protects a charged person from prejudgment, but not so desirable when it stops reportage and fair comment in the public interest on a vital, confounding issue of justice. In the light of the recent extraordinary and arresting events in the long-running Susan Neill-Fraser affair, the darker it gets, the more difficult it is to report. Initially, there was a degree of public and legal unease that a murder conviction could be so easily secured in the absence of a body, a weapon and any witness. Later the forensics were revealed to be misleading and we learned the crime scene, by the police’s own confusing admission, was contaminated by DNA tracked on to the yacht Four Winds on the investigator’s boots. Since, we have seen a growing public and expert legal apprehension concerning aspects of the investigation of Bob Chappell’s death. But in the past 10 days have come dramatic events that now seem to compromise the integrity of Neill-Fraser’s long-running appeal. The Mercury newspaper and this columnist are legally constrained in what we can report of this week’s arrest of a Hobart lawyer. It closely follows last week’s charges against two would-be witnesses who allegedly intended to give false evidence in Neill-Fraser’s appeal. In the interest of shedding light in a dark place and in maintaining public faith in the justice system, now is time for Mr Richter’s independent judicial inquiry into the investigation and conviction of Neill-Fraser. As with Mr Richter QC, much of the legal concern over the conduct of the Neill-Fraser case has predictably come from outside of Tasmania. Australian expert on miscarriages of justice, Bob Moles, says the Neill-Fraser conviction is “Australia’s worst miscarriage of justice since Lindy Chamberlain”. Mr Robert Richter QC does not disagree. It may be the Tasmanian Government was not aware of the reputation of the eminent Richter QC. If so, he is no trendy Lefty do-good lawyer. He has defended corporate heavyweights like John Elliott and Ray Williams, and also is representing George Pell. What he offered our Premier and law officers besides a detailed dossier on the murder case was a quite conservative way out of this imbroglio."
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/highprofile-queens-counsel-robert-richter-met-with-premier-will-hodgman-over-murder-case/news-story/959fff4981f095b99a7f6401c3feed28
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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: http://www.thestar.com/topic/c
