Rolling police surveillance at Risdon Prison … Lawyers and other visitors illegally recorded for over two months … Case dropped against lawyer on charges of perverting the course of justice … Trouble at The Map
There’s been a police surveillance snafu in the Apple Isle which has resulted in the withdrawal of a case against lawyer Jeffrey Ian Thompson on charges of perverting the course of justice.
The wallopers had installed a surveillance-listening device in a visitors’ meeting room at Risdon Prison.
It was installed on June 16, 2017, after a magistrate issued what turned out to be an invalid warrant. As a result of listening to phone intercepts, police knew that Thompson would be seeking to speak to Stephen John Gleeson who was in Risdon Prison, and they promptly secured a warrant to monitor the meeting room.
Thompson was assisting Sue Neill-Fraser’s campaign for a second appeal. She was convicted in 2010 of murdering her husband, Bob Chappell, on his yacht Four Winds.
The police claimed that the surveillance from Risdon Prison indicated Thompson attempted to influence Gleeson to identify from a photo board a particular person as someone who was seen in the vicinity of the wharf at the time of Chappell’s disappearance.
At the time Gleeson was living in his car on the Marieville Esplanade where the Four Winds was moored.
Thompson and Gleeson were both charged with conspiracy to pervert the court of justice. Gleeson was already in jail serving five years for repeatedly striking a friend with an antique iron.
He pleaded guilty to the charge of conspiracy and was sentenced to 12 months more porridge.
Justice Michael Brett, of the Tasmanian Supremes, discharged the case against Thompson and released his reasons of July 28 for doing so.
He found that the police had kept the Risdon surveillance device running for two months from June 13, 2017 till August 17, 2017 and the magistrate who granted the warrant had not been told this.
“… during this time there would have been many sensitive and privileged conversations between lawyers and their clients, and perhaps other private conversations which were completely irrelevant to this investigation and not authorised for recording by the warrant.”
The warrant “did not satisfactorily respond to the risk to privacy inherent in this proposal”.
The judge exercised his discretion against admitting the surveillance material in the case against Thompson.
“… ultimately, I am heavily influenced by the considerable risks to privacy which were inherent in this proposal for covert surveillance, and the failure of police to consider and properly address those risks and to fully inform the magistrate of the circumstances of the surveillance which compounded those risks.”
Apart from that the evidence was unlawfully obtained and should not be admitted.
The impugned evidence was gathered in 2017, now here we are in 2022 and the police say they are going to have an investigation into what went wrong.
In a statement issued on August 31, commissioner Darren Hine said there had been a review of police procedures. He also announced that former solicitor general Michael O’Farrell SC would look into things.
Greg Barns SC, chair of the Prisoners Legal Service, said he was troubled that the police had arranged to investigate themselves.
“We are concerned to ensure the terms of reference are broad enough to ensure that if there has been any unlawful downloading of material, that is identified and those individuals whose privacy has been breached will be notified.”
The Law Society has yet to make a statement.