BACKGROUND: (From a previous post of this Blog.)..."Rotten to its core’: No saying sorry in Tasmanian justice," by Hugh Selby," March 18, 2026: ("The abominable list of serious errors blossoming into a complete cover-up continues): "Most recently they have made a mockery of “Right to Information” by using far-fetched excuses to refuse to release documents. They have even claimed in writing that sharing scientific information obtained from an interstate laboratory would damage relations among the States and so must be kept secret. Go figure! Their dirty tricks department has resorted to threats of defamation against publishers to have articles exposing the errors taken down, threats of contempt of court proceedings to keep misconduct under wraps, interference in court processes to delay the handing down of a decision and change the composition of a hearing bench. People with nothing to hide don’t play those sorts of games."............"The paper also sets out serious shortcomings in the police investigation, not only in 2009 and 2010, but also up to and beyond Ms Neill-Fraser’s 2021 appeal. These shortcomings include the failure to carry out some basic investigations into the movements of people who should have been suspects because of their criminal history and associates, coupled with a failure to disclose relevant material to the prosecution. This in turn meant that Ms Neill-Fraser’s lawyers were short changed on information to which they were entitled. Worse, important scientific material that pointed to a young woman being on the yacht that Australia Day afternoon was not put before the 2021 appeal judges, despite it being in the papers prepared for that appeal."
-----------------------------------------
QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Sarah Schwartz, legal director at the Human Rights Law Centre, said the removal of the condition was an important vindication of Neill-Fraser's rights. "Freedom of expression is a fundamental right, and we are pleased that Susan is no longer subject to a restriction that prevented her from being able to participate in public debate," Ms Schwartz said. "People who have experienced incarceration are often among the most important voices in discussions about the criminal legal system, and protecting their ability to speak out and advocate for change is an important safeguard against injustice."
------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "On her behalf, the Human Rights Law Centre challenged this new condition in the Supreme Court of Tasmania last year, arguing it was unreasonable and breached her freedom of political communication. In a statement, the law centre said the parole board agreed to remove that condition on Tuesday.
-------------------------------------------
STORY: "Convicted murderer Sue Neill-Fraser can now talk to media after parole condition challenged, law centre says," by Scout Wallen, published by ABC, on August 25, 2026.
In short:
The Human Rights Law Centre says a restrictive parole condition that stopped Sue Neill-Fraser from being able to claim her innocence in the media has been removed after a court challenge.
Neill-Fraser was found guilty of murdering her partner Bob Chappell on their yacht in Hobart in 2009. She served 13 years in jail and was released on parole in 2022.
In short:
The Human Rights Law Centre says a restrictive parole condition that stopped Sue Neill-Fraser from being able to claim her innocence in the media has been removed after a court challenge.
Neill-Fraser was found guilty of murdering her partner Bob Chappell on their yacht in Hobart in 2009. She served 13 years in jail and was released on parole in 2022.
What's next?
The Parole Board would not confirm the removal of the condition. The case will return to the Supreme Court on Monday.
Convicted murderer Sue Neill-Fraser will be allowed to speak to the media after a gag order that was part of her parole conditions was removed, the Human Rights Law Centre says.
Neill-Fraser was found guilty of murdering her partner Bob Chappell aboard his yacht in Hobart in 2009.
She served 13 years in prison and was released on parole in 2022.
In December 2024, the Tasmanian Parole Board added a condition that she not speak "directly or indirectly with any media outlet to claim [her] alleged innocence and/or wrongful conviction".
This was replaced by a new parole condition in May 2025, which the Human Rights Law Centre said was more restrictive.
The new condition prevented her from communicating "directly or indirectly — including through third parties, written statements, electronic communications, social media platforms, television, radio, podcasts, streaming services, online video-sharing platforms, or any other public or broadcast media — to assert claims regarding your alleged innocence, wrongful conviction, or dispute the legitimacy of your conviction or sentencing".
On her behalf, the Human Rights Law Centre challenged this new condition in the Supreme Court of Tasmania last year, arguing it was unreasonable and breached her freedom of political communication.
In a statement, the law centre said the parole board agreed to remove that condition on Tuesday.
The Parole Board refused to confirm the condition's removal, telling the ABC it was unable to comment on individual matters or matters currently before the court.
In a statement, a spokesperson said the Tasmanian government had been "advised that the Parole Board has made a decision to withdraw a parole condition it had previously placed on Susan Neill-Fraser".
"The Parole Board makes its decisions entirely independent of government," the spokesperson said.
Neill-Fraser maintains innocence
Sarah Schwartz, legal director at the Human Rights Law Centre, said the removal of the condition was an important vindication of Neill-Fraser's rights.
"Freedom of expression is a fundamental right, and we are pleased that Susan is no longer subject to a restriction that prevented her from being able to participate in public debate," Ms Schwartz said.
"People who have experienced incarceration are often among the most important voices in discussions about the criminal legal system, and protecting their ability to speak out and advocate for change is an important safeguard against injustice."
Neill-Fraser was arrested in August 2009, about seven months after Mr Chappell disappeared, and was convicted of murder by a jury.
She has always maintained her innocence and has gained a loyal following of supporters over the years.
The parole conditions case returns to court on Monday."
The Parole Board would not confirm the removal of the condition. The case will return to the Supreme Court on Monday.
Convicted murderer Sue Neill-Fraser will be allowed to speak to the media after a gag order that was part of her parole conditions was removed, the Human Rights Law Centre says.
Neill-Fraser was found guilty of murdering her partner Bob Chappell aboard his yacht in Hobart in 2009.
She served 13 years in prison and was released on parole in 2022.
In December 2024, the Tasmanian Parole Board added a condition that she not speak "directly or indirectly with any media outlet to claim [her] alleged innocence and/or wrongful conviction".
This was replaced by a new parole condition in May 2025, which the Human Rights Law Centre said was more restrictive.
The new condition prevented her from communicating "directly or indirectly — including through third parties, written statements, electronic communications, social media platforms, television, radio, podcasts, streaming services, online video-sharing platforms, or any other public or broadcast media — to assert claims regarding your alleged innocence, wrongful conviction, or dispute the legitimacy of your conviction or sentencing".
On her behalf, the Human Rights Law Centre challenged this new condition in the Supreme Court of Tasmania last year, arguing it was unreasonable and breached her freedom of political communication.
In a statement, the law centre said the parole board agreed to remove that condition on Tuesday.
The Parole Board refused to confirm the condition's removal, telling the ABC it was unable to comment on individual matters or matters currently before the court.
In a statement, a spokesperson said the Tasmanian government had been "advised that the Parole Board has made a decision to withdraw a parole condition it had previously placed on Susan Neill-Fraser".
"The Parole Board makes its decisions entirely independent of government," the spokesperson said.
Neill-Fraser maintains innocence
Sarah Schwartz, legal director at the Human Rights Law Centre, said the removal of the condition was an important vindication of Neill-Fraser's rights.
"Freedom of expression is a fundamental right, and we are pleased that Susan is no longer subject to a restriction that prevented her from being able to participate in public debate," Ms Schwartz said.
"People who have experienced incarceration are often among the most important voices in discussions about the criminal legal system, and protecting their ability to speak out and advocate for change is an important safeguard against injustice."
Neill-Fraser was arrested in August 2009, about seven months after Mr Chappell disappeared, and was convicted of murder by a jury.
She has always maintained her innocence and has gained a loyal following of supporters over the years.
The parole conditions case returns to court on Monday."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. 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. Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog. FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."Lawyer Radha Natarajan: Executive Director: New England Innocence Project; FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true;
