Henry Keogh

Last updated

Henry Keogh
Born1954
Criminal statusConviction quashed 19 December 2014
Conviction(s) Murder
Criminal penalty26 years imprisonment

Henry Vincent Keogh (born 1954) is an Australian who was convicted of murder but was eventually released twenty years later on appeal. He grew up in Adelaide, South Australia and was educated at Saint Ignatius College [1] and briefly at the School of Dentistry at The University of Adelaide. [2]

Contents

In 1995, he was sentenced to 26 years in prison for the 1994 murder of his 29-year-old fiancée, Anna-Jane Cheney, [3] then head of Professional Conduct at the Law Society of South Australia: it was alleged that Keogh had planned the murder for over two years. [2]

Keogh and his family have always claimed his innocence, and raised their doubts regarding some of the evidence upon which the conviction was based.

Keogh admitted to signing five life insurance policies on behalf of Cheney. [4] Whereas the prosecution alleged the combined value of $1.15 million AUD was motive for the murder, Keogh claimed that these were submitted to prevent insurance agencies he had established from lapsing, and that the amount eligible to claim was closer to $400,000. The prosecution conceded during the trial that Cheney was aware of at least two of these policies. [5]

The conviction was overturned on 19 December 2014. [6]

The third trial was set for March 2016 but a key prosecution witness fell ill. On 13 November 2015 the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) announced they had entered a nolle prosequi and would not be proceeding with a retrial at this stage. [7]

Petitions and appeals

In a petition lodged in 2002, Keogh's legal team, led by Kevin Borick QC, provided material in support of a substantial number of complaints. Keogh's key complaint was against then chief forensic pathologist Colin Manock's handling of the autopsy on Cheney and his evidence in the trial. [2]

South Australian Deputy Premier Kevin Foley said that after considering the report of the Solicitor General, delivered after an exhaustive examination over two and a half years of the 37 complaints contained in Keogh's third petition, he formed the opinion that it did not disclose any arguable basis on which the Supreme Court could find that there had been a miscarriage of justice. [8]

In May 2007, Keogh applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of South Australia. [3] The appeal was dismissed on 22 June 2007.

On 16 November 2007, the High Court of Australia rejected Keogh's application for special leave to appeal against a decision by the South Australian Court of Criminal Appeal that it did not have jurisdiction to reopen his appeal. [9]

On 4 February 2009, a fourth petition was lodged by Keogh with the Governor of South Australia. [10] It alleged that his conviction was obtained by fraud, deceit and manifest error. The petition has been referred by the Governor to the Attorney-General of South Australia. Previously, the Attorney-General has stated that in the event of a further petition being lodged, he would ensure that it was assessed and determined by an Acting Attorney-General (not himself) in view of his published comments about Keogh's conviction.[ citation needed ]

Complaints raised by the petitions

Keogh's defence team had raised a number of complaints concerning evidence that has come to light since Keogh's final appeal.

No presence of bruise

Manock, when photographing the body, saw what he believed to be four bruises on the left calf of Cheney, caused by what he believed to be a grip mark. When a sample was taken of the thumb bruise and examined for bruising, the result was negative. [11] Despite this, this apparent bruise was used in Manock's proposed theory that Keogh had gripped Cheney's legs to hold her underwater in the bath, drowning her.

When asked about the age of the bruises during the trial, he responded: "I could find no evidence of white blood-cell migration into the areas and therefore, I felt they were peri-mortem. In other words, they’d occurred close to the time of death. I felt that was probably within 4 hours." [12]

The prosecution stated during the trial: "But there are two things, you might think, that are crucial to this case. If those four bruises on her lower left leg were inflicted at the same time, and that time was just before she died in the bath, there is no other explanation for them, other than a grip. If it was a grip, it must have been the grip of the accused. If it was the grip of the accused, it must have been part of the act of murder." [13]

Manock has since stated that the bruise could have occurred up to a number of days prior to Cheney's death. [11]

Infeasibility of drowning scenario

The method of drowning proposed by Manock was not possible when the physical location of the bath against the wall was considered, requiring an attacker to be positioned where a wall was located. [11] Manock did not visit the scene until three months after the drowning theory was proposed. [12]

Maciej Henneberg, Professor of Anatomy at the University of Adelaide, South Australia, has stated that it would be impossible to drown someone by holding his or her legs over his or her head, as the power of the extensor muscles in a woman’s leg would always be greater than the power which a man could exert through a fingertip grip of the woman’s calf as proposed by Manock. [12]

Lack of review of autopsy

Cheney's body was released for cremation on the same day that her death was considered a murder. The body was not examined by anybody other than Manock.

Lack of consideration of other possibilities by Manock

Manock stated at the committal hearing in Keogh’s case that: “I was at no time looking or thinking that the death was accidental because I could find no explanation as to why she would drown.” Photographs taken at the scene reportedly show marks and swelling which may indicate the possibility of a severe allergic reaction. Manock did not at any stage review the medical records of Cheney. [12]

No control of scene of death

The scene of Cheney's death was not cordoned off nor controlled by police, and photos taken at the scene reportedly appear to show that Cheney's body had been 'tidied up'. Keogh's defence claim that this is evidence that the body was tampered with. [14] Only three days following Cheney's death was the death considered suspicious. [12]

Successful appeal and release

On 19 December 2014, the conviction was quashed after the Full Court of the Court of Criminal Appeal set aside his conviction for murder. Keogh was released on bail on 22 December 2014. He was to be arraigned for retrial on 2 February 2015. [15]

After initially announcing it would proceed with a retrial in early 2016, the DPP announced it would not be proceeding with a retrial at this time. [7]

Related Research Articles

In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases prosecutorial and/or judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law – in civil law, a similar concept is that of res judicata. The double jeopardy protection in criminal prosecutions only bars an identical prosecution for the same offence, however, a different offence may be charged on identical evidence at a second trial. Res judicata protection is stronger – it precludes any causes of action or claims that arise from a previously litigated subject matter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Acquittal</span> The legal result of a verdict of not guilty

In common law jurisdictions, an acquittal means that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charge presented. It certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as criminal law is concerned. The finality of an acquittal is dependent on the jurisdiction. In some countries, such as the United States, an acquittal prohibits the retrial of the accused for the same offense, even if new evidence surfaces that further implicates the accused. The effect of an acquittal on criminal proceedings is the same whether it results from a jury verdict or results from the operation of some other rule that discharges the accused. In other countries, like Australia and the UK, the prosecuting authority may appeal an acquittal similar to how a defendant may appeal a conviction — but usually only if new and compelling evidence comes to light or the accused has interfered with or intimidated a juror or witness.

<i>R v Carroll</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

R v Carroll (2002) 213 CLR 635; [2002] HCA 55 is a decision of the High Court of Australia which unanimously upheld the decision by a Queensland appellate court to stay an indictment for perjury as the indictment was found to controvert the respondent's earlier acquittal for murder. The court held that charging Raymond John Carroll with perjuring himself in the earlier murder trial by swearing he did not kill the baby Deidre Kennedy was tantamount to claiming he had committed the murder and was thus a contravention of the principles of double jeopardy. The case caused widespread public outcry and prompted calls for double jeopardy law reform.

David Harold Eastman is a former public servant from Canberra, Australia. In 1995, he was wrongfully convicted of the murder of Australian Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Colin Winchester and was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. A 2014 judicial inquiry recommended the sentence be quashed and he should be pardoned. On 22 August of the same year, the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory quashed the conviction, released Eastman from prison, and ordered a retrial.

Andrew Mark Mallard was a British-born Australian who was wrongfully convicted of murder in 1995 and sentenced to life imprisonment. Almost 12 years later, after an appeal to the High Court of Australia, his conviction was quashed and a retrial ordered. However, the charges against him were dropped and Mallard was released. At the time, the Director of Public Prosecutions stated that Mallard remained the prime suspect and that if further evidence became available he could still be prosecuted. He was released from prison in 2006 after his conviction was quashed by the High Court, and was paid $3.25 million compensation by the state government. The Western Australian Commission on Crime and Corruption investigated whether there was misconduct by any public officer associated with this case and made findings against two policemen and a senior prosecutor.

Shareef Cousin is an African-American man from New Orleans who was convicted of the first-degree murder of Michael Gerardi in 1996 and sentenced to death as a juvenile in Louisiana. At age 17, he became the youngest condemned convict to be put on death row in Louisiana, and one of the youngest in the United States.

Robert Donald William Farquharson is an Australian man convicted of murdering his three sons on 4 September 2005, by deliberately driving his car into a farm dam.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." The four essential protections included are prohibitions against, for the same offense:

The Nancy Kissel murder case was a highly publicised criminal trial held in the High Court of Hong Kong, where American expatriate Nancy Ann Kissel was convicted of the murder of her husband, 40-year-old investment banker Robert Peter Kissel, in their apartment on 2 November 2003. It was arguably the highest profile criminal case involving an expatriate in Hong Kong's history, and was closely covered in the media.

John Harris Byrne is a retired Australian jurist who previously served as Senior Judge Administrator of the Supreme Court of Queensland. Having been a judge of that court since 1989, he was one of the court's most experienced judges. He was also Chair of the National Judicial College of Australia, a body which provides programs and professional development resources to judicial officers in Australia. He is now a private Commercial Arbitrator.

Sabrina Butler is a Mississippi woman who was eventually exonerated of all wrongdoing after initially being wrongfully convicted as a teenager for the alleged murder and child abuse of her nine-month-old son.

Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate (2011) UKSC 24 is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom relating to the effect of non-disclosure of evidence to the defence at trial and the role of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in Scots criminal law.

Christine Marie Lundy, 38, and her 7-year-old daughter Amber Grace Lundy were murdered in Palmerston North, New Zealand, on 29 or 30 August 2000. In February 2001, after a six month investigation, Christine's husband and Amber's father, Mark Edward Lundy, was arrested and charged, and in 2002, he was convicted of the murders and sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 17 years.

This is a list of notable overturned convictions in Canada.

Debra Jean Milke is a German-American woman who spent over 25 years in prison in the state of Arizona. She was one of three people sentenced to death for the December 2, 1989 shooting death of her four-year-old son, Christopher Conan Milke. Her alleged conspirators were her roommate James Lynn Styers and his friend Roger Mark Scott. Neither testified against her and both agreed that she was not present at the shooting. Scott implicated Milke as the mastermind while Styers said she had no involvement whatsoever. They implicated each other as the actual shooter. Who that was remains a subject of speculation.

The murder of Tair Rada, a 13-year-old Israeli schoolgirl, was committed in 2006, in the girls' bathroom of her school in Katzrin. Roman Zdorov, a Ukrainian national residing in Israel and working at the school as a floorer, was convicted of the murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment on September 14, 2010. His prosecution and conviction have been a source of controversy, receiving much media coverage, as well as being the focus of an Israeli documentary TV series called Shadow of Truth that has gained worldwide attention on Netflix. On August 26, 2021, Zdorov was released from prison to house arrest after many appeals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Lana Clarkson</span> 2003 murder by Phil Spector

On the morning of February 3, 2003, American actress Lana Clarkson was found dead inside the Pyrenees Castle, the Alhambra, California, mansion of record producer Phil Spector. In the early hours of that morning, Clarkson had met Spector while working at the House of Blues in Los Angeles.

Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1 (1978), is a United States Supreme Court decision that clarified both the scope of the protection against double jeopardy provided by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the limits of an appellate court's discretion to fashion a remedy under section 2106 of Title 28 to the United States Code. It established the constitutional rule that where an appellate court reverses a criminal conviction on the ground that the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the Double Jeopardy Clause shields the defendant from a second prosecution for the same offense. Notwithstanding the power that appellate courts have under section 2106 to "remand the cause and direct the entry of such appropriate judgment, decree, or order, or require such further proceedings to be had as may be just under the circumstances," a court that reverses a conviction for insufficiency of the evidence may not allow the lower court a choice on remand between acquitting the defendant and ordering a new trial. The "only 'just' remedy" in this situation, the Court held, is to order an acquittal.

The Eastburn family murders were the murders of Kathryn "Katie" Eastburn and her daughters, Kara and Erin, which occurred in Fayetteville, North Carolina, in May 1985. In 1986, United States Army Sergeant Timothy Hennis was tried and convicted for the three murders. In 1988, Hennis's conviction was overturned on appeal, and he was acquitted the following year. In 2006, the Cumberland County Sherriff's Office obtained DNA evidence linking Hennis to the crime. Despite the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause prohibiting retrials after acquittals, the United States Army was able to initiate prosecution and trial proceedings against Hennis under the dual sovereignty doctrine. In 2010, Hennis was tried and convicted by an Army court-martial for the triple murders and sentenced to death.

References

  1. ↑ St. Ignatius' College Year Books, 1970-1972, ed. F.X. Wallace, S.J., Manresa Court, Athelstone, South Australia
  2. 1 2 3 State of Injustice, Robert N. Moles, Lothian Books, Melbourne, Australia, 1994.
  3. 1 2 "Bathtub murderer wants appeal reopened". The Australian. News Corp Ltd. AAP. 23 May 2007. Archived from the original on 10 May 2009.
  4. ↑ Jackman, Christine (19 February 2014). "The devil in the detail". The Canberra Times. Fairfax Media. Archived from the original on 19 February 2014.
  5. ↑ Keogh Insurance Evidence Archived 10 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine , Today Tonight , 9 April 2008.
  6. ↑ "Daughter of Henry Keogh, Alexis Atkins, speaks of excitement over her dad's possible release from jail". 19 December 2014.
  7. 1 2 "Henry Keogh murder charge dropped by Director of Public Prosecutions in South Australia Supreme Court". 13 November 2015.
  8. ↑ Keogh’s third petition for mercy refused Archived 25 August 2006 at the Wayback Machine , Ministerial press release, SA Government, 10 August 2006.
  9. ↑ "Keogh loses appeal". The Advertiser . 17 November 2007. Archived from the original on 17 November 2007.
  10. ↑ The Henry Keogh 4th Petition
  11. 1 2 3 Reasonable Doubt, 60 Minutes , 5 June 2011
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 The Henry Keogh 2nd Petition
  13. ↑ The Henry Keogh 3rd Petition
  14. ↑ Henry Keogh - Second Petition (part 2)
  15. ↑ Andrew Dowdell (22 December 2014). "Henry Keogh granted bail in Supreme Court, out of jail for first in almost 20 years" . Retrieved 5 August 2017.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.