Channel 7 - Today Tonight (Adelaide)
The Case of Gerald Warren - 7 May 2003

This version of the transcript has been edited by Dr Robert N Moles

The Gerald Warren homepage
The Aboriginal Advocates homepage
Article on Australian miscarriage of justice cases
Article on UK miscarriage of justice cases
Article on USA miscarriage of justice cases

In order of appearance

Leigh McClusky - Presenter
Mike Rann - Premier
Graham Archer - Producer and Interviewer
Rob Kerin - Leader of the Opposition
Bob Moles
Frances Nelson QC - Head of the Parole Board
Paul Rofe QC - Director of Public Prosecutions

Program

Leigh McClusky:

Good evening and welcome to the program. The decision by Premier Rann to overturn the decision of the Parole Board and keep convicted murderer Alan Ellis in jail will get the thumbs up from many South Australians. It also raises some serious questions. Amazingly, neither Alan Ellis nor his co-offender would now be in jail if they'd known that the State's head forensic pathologist had ruled their victim's death was accidental. Fortunately their ignorance led to a confession. But what of the scores of other cases where murderers have gone free and the innocent may have been locked up? Graham Archer has this remarkable story and with it a warning that it contains images of the deceased which may offend Aboriginal viewers.

Voice over song:

Everybody knows that the dice is loaded - everybody rolls with their fingers crossed.

Mike Rann in Parliament:

A recommendation of the Parole Board that her Excellency the Governor approve the conditional release of Alan Charles Ellis was rejected by her Excellency on the advice of the Government.

Graham Archer:

This is taking on the justice system Mike Rann style.

Mike Rann in Parliament:

The public interest and community safety will remain our central concern.

Rob Kerin:

What we've seen over the past months is a criminal justice system where basically the parole policy has just depended upon what is the best headline for the week.

Graham Archer:

No question Alan Ellis's murder of Gerald Warren in 1984 was abhorrent and he may well deserve to stay in jail, but should it be prison term by press release?

Bob Moles:

It is interfering in a system of due process without any process of his own, and that seems to me to be a fundamental contradiction.

Graham Archer:

And wouldn't you know it, only in South Australia can the Government overrule the Parole Board. Head Frances Nelson QC accepts that law, but questions the motives.

Frances Nelson:

I think my concern is that this is only one of a couple of decisions which attracts the headlines and detracts from the fact that there are areas where I really think the Government should be doing something more for public safety.

Graham Archer:

And while the Premier dismisses our questions about breaches in due process in the criminal justice system, he's happy to indulge in a spot of it himself. First, tipping off the 'Tiser for maximum splash.

Bob Moles:

It seems unacceptable for a Premier or a Government to arbitrarily overturn decisions of the Parole Board. It could appear to people as if it's some form of tabloid political grandstanding.

Graham Archer:

But now Mike Rann's raised the Gerald Warren murder case, lets see how genuine he is about fixing failings in the justice system that have actually let murderers go free.

Bob Moles:

Now, whilst I have no reason to suggest that the Parole Board has not done it's job properly, we have very clear reasons to suggest that other parts of the justice system have failed.

Graham Archer:

For a strt, it's a pure fluke the killer the Premier has taken such an interest in, is in jail at all.
Do you think the Premier knows that Gerald Warren's murder would never have been investigated, if it had been left to the State's chief pathologist at the time?

Bob Moles:

Well first of all, he should know because we have explained that to his Attorney General. If he doesn't know then clearly they're not communicating very well with each other. If he does know, then I think it's quite disgraceful the he hasn't looked into that part of this particular case.

Graham Archer:

Research by former Adelaide Uni Associate Law Professor Bob Moles and others reveals that according to the State's 30 year chief of forensic pathology, Dr Colin Manock, no murder ever occurred.

Bob Moles:

In his autopsy report Dr Manock said that Gerald had fallen out of a moving vehicle whilst he was intoxicated, and that was the cause of his death.

Graham Archer:

It was as simple as that?

Bob Moles:

That's right.

Graham Archer:

Just an accidental death?

Bob Moles:

Yes. Well, at least an explanation consistent with accident yes.

Graham Archer:

Dr Manock attended the scene when young Gerald's battered body was found on a dirt road on the outskirts of Port Augusta. And this is the autopsy report he produced.

Voice over Dr Manock:

In my opinion the deceased received his injuries as a result of leaving a moving vehicle. I could find no evidence which would allow me to speculate on how he left the vehicle except that he had a high alcohol level for a 15 year old.

Graham Archer:

Not a whiff of foul play, and equally baffling is the State's senior sleuth's assessment of abrasions in the form of parallel lines found on the victim's face and on the back of his right hand.

Bob Moles:

When asked to explain the injuries to his hands and face, he said that they were caused by the fabric of corduroy, his trousers coming into contact with his hands and face.

Graham Archer:

Corduroy?

Bob Moles:

Corduroy trousers.

Graham Archer:

As a result of this and other bizarre observations, the official finding was that there was no murder to investigate, in spite of the family's anguished protests.

Bob Moles:

On the autopsy report produced by Manock there would never have been a conviction - and that means that the Parole Board wouldn't have anything to look at at all, would they?

Graham Archer:

In fact, it was just dumb luck that 3 years later, the murderers Stefan Niewdach and Alan Ellis admitted involvement and were dobbed in.
So what really happened?

Bob Moles:

The perpetrators said that they'd first of all taken him out of the vehicle - smacked him about the head and face with a metal pipe with a thread on the end of it - then when he was on the ground they drove the vehicle backwards over the top of his body, and then forwards over the top of his body again.

Graham Archer:

The injuries would have been significant?

Bob Moles:

That's correct.

Graham Archer:

And here are the witness statements of those admissions.
First Stefan Niewdach.

Voice over female witness:

Stefan told me the aboriginal was on the ground so they got in the car and ran over him, but his body got hooked under the car and they kept going dragging the aboriginal under the car. He said he flattened it and did a 360 and the aboriginal flung out and they drove back to Port Augusta.

Bob Moles:

If the murderers had known what Dr Manock had to say, then I imagine that they would not have confessed.

Graham Archer:

And here is the witness account of Alan Ellis's confession.

Voice over police officer:

Alan, I have information here that Stefan and you picked up an aboriginal bloke at Port Augusta late in December 1984 and killed him. What do you say to that?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

I know what you're talking about.

Voice over police officer:

Alan, were you involved in this bloke's death?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

Yes.

Voice over police officer:

How much were you involved?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

I hit him with an iron bar.

Voice over police officer:

How many times?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

A couple.

Voice over police officer:

What was Stefan doing?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

Holding him.

Voice over police officer:

What then?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

Stefan said get back, I'm going to run him over - and did a wheelie on him.

Voice over police officer:

Run him over?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

Yes.

Voice over police officer:

Did this kill him?

Voice over Alan Ellis:

He was dead alright.

Graham Archer:

But things got even more bizarre when the matter came to court. Defence barrister Gordon Barrett QC acting for Ellis, in trying to cast doubt on his client's guilt, cross-examined Dr Manock. To everyone's amazement, in the face of the confessions, Dr Manock still clung to his version of accidental death.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

That damage to the boy could possibly have been caused by the body having been run over by a motor car could it?

Voice over Dr Manock:

Yes.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

Or could it have been caused by the body leaving a motor vehicle?

Voice over Dr Manock:

Yes, the forces involved in either scenario are very similar.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

The possible cause that you gave for those marks on the back of Gerald's hand and face was the fabric of corduroy wasn't it?

Voice over Dr Manock:

Yes.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

I take it that's still, in your view, a possible cause of those marks?

Voice over Dr Manock:

It would certainly produce a patterned mark.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

So, while you agree with my learned friend that those marks may have been caused, as she asked you to hypothesise, by the thread of a piece of iron, and you agreed that's consistent with that?

Voice over Dr Manock:

Yes.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

But also consistent, you would still say, I think, with the pressure from the corduroy of the pants?

Voice over Dr Manock:

Yes.

Voice over Gordon Barrett:

You'd have no reason to resile from that view?

Voice over Dr Manock:

Correct.

Graham Archer:

So, he continued to make the prosecution more difficult?

Bob Moles:

Absolutely. Yes, without his scientific explanation so-called about the circumstances of the death the conviction would have been much easier.

Graham Archer:

Has anyone investigated this?

Bob Moles:

Not to my knowledge. We have put the information to the Attorney General, but he said that there's nothing to be investigated.

Graham Archer:

And this is far from the only case where Dr Manock's findings have thwarted murder investigations - and possibly put innocent people behind bars. In the Peter Marshall shooting, he failed to recognise a bullet hole in Marshall's head and concluded no suspicious circumstances. And the Terry Akritidis case where he claimed Terry committed suicide by jumping from the police communications tower at Yankalilla. Dr Manock concluded he fell head first onto a concrete roof with such force to punch a hole in the 5cm thick concrete, bounced off and landed on the ground. Amazingly, he escaped head injuries and Dr Manock's explanation for the limited body injuries was that clothing protected him. Conclusion - no suspicious circumstances. And then there's the Infant Death cases, Kingsley Dixon, John Highfold, Kenneth Hill, Charles Stewart and so on.

Bob Moles:

I think that if any of your viewers were sitting in court, they'd want to put their hands up and say look, could that be right? And the answer is clearly, no it couldn't.

Graham Archer:

And if Mike Rann really wants to take on a Board that hasn't exercised it's authority - perhaps he should have a chat to the Medical Board.
Aren't they required to investigate complaints?

Bob Moles:

That's right. It's their job to supervise the certification of medical practitioners and to guarantee that they're fit to continue in practice.

Graham Archer:

Despite doubtless concern from Board Chairman, Dr Tony Clarkson, who says they are investigating, letters from the Board say the very opposite.

Bob Moles:

Well, they said, first of all, we have no doubt that the allegations that you have raised, could give rise to findings of unprofessional conduct. But secondly, they went on to say, they think it would be unfair for Dr Manock to have to answer questions about his cases years after the event.

Graham Archer:

The most recent letter says it's the families and victim's responsibility to prosecute the complaints themselves, and if they lose, they pay the costs.

Bob Moles:

The Medical Board won't itself go out and investigate any of the cases and I think that's disgraceful.

Graham Archer:

And regardless of the catalogue of concerns, and possible miscarriages of justice, no one, not judges, lawyers Attorney's General - no one has wanted to tackle this issue.

Bob Moles:

In fact, we can hear the doors shutting and the shutters coming down all over the town. Nobody's interested.

Graham Archer:

And while the DPP is not happy with the Premier's Parole Board posturing, he's more forgiving of Dr Manock.

Paul Rofe:

I had confidence in Dr Manock from previous cases.

Graham Archer:

Do you still feel confident about Dr Manock now?

Paul Rofe:

Yes.

Graham Archer:

And the Attorney General is prepared to stake his reputation on Dr Manock's work while indulging in some injustice of his own, with a baseless attack in Parliament on respected pathologist Tony Thomas for daring to speak out. We await the apology. As for the Premier - well, he's not talking.

Voice over song:

Everybody knows. Everybody knows.

Top of Page