Ms Roseanne Catt Quashed Convictions
|About this Item||Subjects||Law Courts; Director of Public Prosecutions
||Speakers||Breen The Hon Peter; Della Bosca The Hon John
||Business||Questions Without Notice
||Commentary|| Question answered by John Della Bosca 23 November 2006
The Hon. PETER BREEN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Commerce, representing the Attorney General. Is the Minister aware that a letter the Attorney General wrote to the Blue Mountains Gazette and published on 4 October 2006 contains false and misleading information regarding a decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal to quash six of eight convictions obtained by the Director of Public Prosecutions against Roseanne Catt? How can the Attorney General say the Court of Criminal Appeal ordered a retrial when paragraph 234 of the court's judgment said it is for the Director of Public Prosecutions and not the court to determine whether a new trial should take place? How can the Attorney General say that Roseanne Catt has not been vindicated or not found to be the victim of a conspiracy when paragraph 40 of the court's judgment says the evidence which is now available could support her submission that she was the object of a conspiracy between Detective Sergeant Thomas and Barry Catt? When will the Minister recognise that Roseanne Catt has been wrongly convicted by fraudulent police evidence and that a fraudulent claim of $89,000 has been paid by the Victims Compensation Fund?
The Hon. JOHN DELLA BOSCA: It is a tribute to the Hon. Peter Breen that he is always very consistent about these matters. I am not aware of the Attorney General's letter to the Blue Mountains Gazette. The honourable member is probably asking me about my level of awareness of the facts in this matter, but it seems to me to steer dangerously close to asking me for a legal opinion. Notwithstanding all of that, I am sure the Attorney General will be happy to provide a full and adequate answer in the fullness of time.