Keogh Case

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (14:20): My question is to the Attorney-General. Did the Attorney-General have any contact before the 2018 state election with Dr Bob Moles and any member of the Keogh defence team or any representatives of Henry Keogh?

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (14:20): I have met Mr Bob Moles. He was the author of a book in relation to pathology and certainly was running some kind of campaign in relation to Mr Manock, who was then the state's appointed pathologist. Dr Manock, whom I didn't ever meet personally, was someone who, of course, over a some 30-year career with various governments as the senior pathologist, came under some scrutiny in relation to his evidence, not just in the case that is the subject of this question but in relation to a number of other cases. Ultimately, they were matters that were presented to the Medical Board of South Australia. So, yes, I have met Mr Moles; I can't remember when, but certainly during the time. I think he published a book, from memory.

In relation to his other legal team, I think I have already advised the parliament that Mr Kevin Borick QC was an ardent advocate for law reform during the time I have been in the parliament to look at the question of changing the law and allowing appeals where there is fresh and compelling evidence. The previous government ultimately presented a bill to the parliament which did just that.

In fact, subsequent to that, applications have been made. I am not sure at this stage whether Mr Borick made the final application to the court culminating in the 19 December decision, but certainly he was the representative in relation to a number of other cases. Bartholomew comes to mind, but there were a number of other cases of historical convictions that were the subject of applications to both the High Court and also under the fresh and compelling evidence amendment.

In short, yes, I knew Mr Borick. He lives in my electorate, not far down the road from Don Farrell actually, on Waterfall Gully Road—interesting street. His wife was a legal practitioner during the time I was in practice, so, yes, I know him. Marie Shaw QC was the counsel who presented submissions in the final case. I think Mr Borick was largely involved with representations and, I think, one of a number of five petitions that went to the previous government for mercy to seek the Governor's excusing of the conviction

Marie Shaw QC was counsel, as I recall, in the case before the Full Court culminating in the decision led by Tom Gray on 14 December 2014. Yes, I certainly know them all, or have met them.