Networked Knowledge - Media Reports

[This page has been prepared by Dr Robert N Moles]

Henry Keogh homepage
Article: Australian law on miscarriages of justice
Article: UK law on miscarriages of justice
Article: USA law on miscarriages of justice

On 25 January 2008 Jeremy Roberts of The Australian reported “Forensic expert on medical charges”.

He said, South Australia's "body in the bath" case took a dramatic turn when the state medical board launched misconduct proceedings against the pathologist who gave evidence for the prosecution at the murder trial of banker Henry Keogh. Documents lodged in the District Court registry show that former chief forensic pathologist Colin Manock faces a complaint from the Medical Board of South Australia that he was incompetent and / or negligent in performing the autopsy on Keogh's victim, Anna Jane Cheney.

Keogh, now 52, is serving a life sentence for the 1994 murder of his then fiancee, who was drowned in the bath of their Adelaide home. He has always maintained he is innocent of the murder. Dr Manock performed the autopsy on Cheney's body and concluded that "grip marks" detected on her lower left leg were consistent with the woman being pushed beneath the water and drowned. He declined to comment when approached by The Australian yesterday.

The particulars of the two-page complaint by the Medical Board allege that Dr Manock failed to adequately consider alternative causes and scenarios for Cheney's death. "In reaching his opinion as to the cause and manner of death of Ms Cheney, namely non-accidental drowning, he failed to consider and to exclude ... all reasonable and feasible hypotheses," the complaint by the Medical Board says. It is further alleged that Dr Manock failed to retain sufficient evidence and written records, or to collect adequate forensic samples from the woman's body.

These alleged failures by Dr Manock "rendered any future substantiation of a particular observation or observations impossible", the complaint says. The complaint will be decided by a four-member tribunal, presided over by a District Court judge, on a date to be set. The action by the Medical Board may lead to Dr Manock being, fined, censured or deregistered.

Keogh had exhausted his appeal options through the South Australian and High courts. Three petitions for mercy to the state governor have been turned down, on advice from the state Government. The High Court last year denied a separate application from Keogh for leave to appeal against his conviction. In 2005, the Medical Board cleared Dr Manock of the earlier Keogh complaint, first lodged in 2003. But last September, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Doyle quashed that decision, sending the complaint back to the Medical Board.

Asked yesterday if he intended to contest the Medical Board complaint, Dr Manock said: "I have nothing to say on the matter."

The Professional Conduct Tribunal, presided over by a District Court judge, will stage public hearings and decide the complaint on the balance of probabilities. It is understood the Medical Board has assigned counsel to the case. Lawyers for Keogh declined to comment yesterday.

Top of Page