Clarrie Briese, former chief magistrate of NSW, granted access to senate documents … One of Lionel Murphy’s main accusers to tell his story … “And now, what about my little mate?” … The saga that keeps on giving 

Clarrie has successfully applied for access to records held by the senate relating to two select committee inquires into allegations against the High Court judge. 

According to a paper tabled in the senate on February 7 Clarrie is writing a book “that will refer to aspects of the evidence he provided to the committees”.  

The access was authorised on January 5, so presumably the former chief madge is scribbling away right now. 

The second inquiry was called the Select Committee on Allegations Concerning a Judge and it was established in September 1984 and reported at the end of October that year. 

The first committee concentration of the evidence of then chief stipendiary magistrate Briese – that Murphy had tried to interfere in his friend Morgan Ryan’s committal proceedings. 

Sydney solicitor Ryan was facing charges of forgery and the High Court judge had arranged for various meetings and dinners with the CSM at which the judge supported Briese’s ambition to see magistrates elevated to independent judicial officers, rather than public servants. 

The claim was that in return for his support Murphy had expected Briese to help his “little mate”. 

By majority the first senate committee found there was nothing in The Age tapes or in the evidence of Briese that could nail Murphy for proved misbehaviour. 

See statement of committee chairman Senator Michael Tate.   

Ryan’s trial was before a jury and Judge Paul Flannery. He was convicted and given a non-custodial sentence. After some agonising and public attacks on Briese by premier Nifty Neville Wran and his faithful mouthpiece at The Bulletin, Malcolm Turnbull, Flannery stepped forward and told chief judge Jim Staunton and others that he felt Murphy had tried to “nobble” him. 

The second senate inquiry concentrated on Flannery’s evidence, which now made Briese’s earlier evidence much more credible. 

Diamond Jim McClelland also gave evidence, saying that Murphy had approached him to get Staunton to speed up Ryan’s trial. 

Murphy’s legal team comprised Frosty Tom Hughes, Bubba Bennett and Mrs Bennett, instructed by Macphillamy Cummins & Gibson. 

Peter Capelin and Terry Tobin appeared for Flannery; Murray Gleeson and Bruce Collins for Briese; Maurice Neil for Murray Farquhar; and Linton Morris for Morgan Ryan. 

This time the witnesses were cross examined, except for Murphy who, again, refused to give evidence. 

At one point Bubba asked Flannery: 

This time a majority of the committee made adverse findings against the High Court judge – that his conduct could be proved on the balance of probabilities and that it could amount to “proved misbehaviour”. The sole dissent was senator Nick Bolkus (ALP SA). 

It was a great fest for some of the lawyers, the committee costing taxpayers about $320,000 in fees. 

Shortly afterwards DPP Ian Temby charged Murphy with attempting to pervert the course of justice. He was convicted at the first trial on the Briese count, but not the Flannery count, won an appeal and was found not guilty at the second trial. 

However, more allegations emerged against the judge, some from a secret chapter in the report from the Stewart Royal Commission of Inquiry into Alleged Telephone Interceptions. 

A Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry was established to further probe the new allegations with three former judges as commissioners, Sir George Lush (Victoria), Sir Richard Blackburn (ACT and Federal courts) and Andrew Wells (SA). 

The validity of the commission was unsuccessfully challenged in the High Court, but before the commissioners could complete their work Murphy gave notice that he was terminally ill and the investigation was wound up. 

The 30 year embargo on access to the documents ended on September 25, 2016, but the presiding officers of the Senate and House of Representatives are still to decide which of the Class A pieces of paper should be made public.  

Already the Murphy case has spawned a small library of works. Ian Hancock’s recent biography of Tom Hughes covered much of the senate inquiries; academic historian Jenny Hocking wrote a biography of Murphy; and Stephen Walmsley’s recent book The Trials of Justice Murphy is a runaway best seller. 

Hold tight for Clarrie’s version – an opportunity for him to address some of the nasty personal attacks he faced, not least from the current prime minister.