Channel 7 Today Tonight (Adelaide)

Dr Alan Cala and the DPP 4 August 2006

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

In order of appearance

Rosanna Mangiarelli – presenter
Graham Archer - interviewer and producer
Stephen Pallaras QC, DPP
Dr Bob Moles - author and legal researcher

Program

Rosanna Mangiarelli

It’s rare these days to attend a really spirited media conference, but this afternoon was an exception when the DPP Stephen Pallaras decided to swop from prosecutor to defender, going in to bat for controversial forensic pathologist Dr Allan Cala. Dr Cala’s troubled past came to light recently when it was revealed he had mistaken a double homicide for a car accident in New South Wales six years ago. But Mr Pallaras says it’s premature to judge Dr Cala’s competence and will continue to use him. The media on the other hand were of one mind about the need to exercise caution with regard to expert opinion which could put people in jail for life or let killers go free. What is surprising is that whilst he urged Today Tonight to hold off on a story that involved Dr Cala that may have influenced a jury, his office has shown no interest in what we might know but he does not. Here is Graham Archer.

Graham Archer at media conference

Are you not personally concerned about the credibility of expert witnesses that you engage in murder trials?

Stephen Pallaras QC

Of course I am. It’s important that we call people of repute, that we call people as experts who are experts. My point however, is this; I am not in a position to judge the expertise of scientists, doctors or people who are specialists in areas in which I am not.

Graham Archer

This afternoon, the DPP, Stephen Pallaras set out to prosecute the media and defend an expert Crown witness who currently faces the most serious questions about his professional credibility.

Stephen Pallaras QC

Unhelpful publicity surrounding the position of senior consultant pathologist Dr Allan Cala has caused much unnecessary anguish in the community.

Graham Archer

Last night we exposed yet another possible scandal within our justice system involving Adelaide’s senior forensic pathologist Dr Allan Cala over this terrible bungle.

Voice over news bulletin – file tape

When Bill and Pam Weightman’s bodies were discovered in their car six years ago Dr Cala found it was an accident.

Graham Archer

What he missed was that the Weightman’s son David had drugged them and smothered them before rolling them down the embankment. It was left to the bereaved family to catch the killer themselves and expose his accomplice.

Graham Archer

Have you spoken to the family involved?

Stephen Pallaras QC

Which family? Involved in what?

Graham Archer

The family in New South Wales who from the very start ….

Stephen Pallaras QC

No I haven’t is the answer.

Graham Archer

We also revealed Dr Cala as a pathologist with other possible skeletons in his closet.

Voice over news bulletin file tape

For years, staff at Glebe Morgue removed organs and bones and undertook plastic surgery without relatives even knowing or consenting.

Graham Archer

Dr Cala was one of those involved in the body snatchers inquiry and though no one was charged he was singled out as the only one who didn’t accept that what he’d done was inappropriate.

Voice over Glebe Mortuary Report

Only Dr Cala, one of the pathologists on the Institute staff, appeared partly to contest this…

Graham Archer

We also discovered that when Dr Cala gained entry to the Royal College of Pathologists back in 1994 one of his examiners was none other than disgraced forensic pathologist Dr Colin Manock.

Does it surprise you that Dr Manock was nominated as an examiner when the Royal College of Pathologists must have known then about his history?

Bob Moles

Oh absolutely. I mean these are matters of public record for many years past now - and the very idea that Dr Manock would be accepted as an Examiner - at the very time his conduct was under question in the Baby Deaths cases - is a shocking situation.

Graham Archer

Does it concern you that he was given his Fellowship to the Royal College of Pathology by an examination taken in front of Dr Colin Manock when he himself was at the time in the process of being discredited over misdiagnosing the deaths of three babies?

Stephen Pallaras QC

I’m not prepared to debate all of the assumptions in that question. I’m simply not qualified to answer that.

Graham Archer

However, from the start, Dr Cala's conduct in Adelaide was not what's expected of an objective scientist. At the Attorney-General's nasty bidding he produced a vicious and grossly inaccurate report attacking Professor Tony Thomas - the pathologist who'd exposed Manock's Baby Deaths bungles - and later raised serious concerns about aspects of Manock's work in the Keogh case.

Now, that was a pretty dirty business wasn't it?

Bob Moles

Yes, it was it was a very shabby affair.

Graham Archer

After all that the DPP called a press conference to say that his office had been assured by Dr Cala the double homicide bungle was a simple mistake and that he would continue to use him as an expert. Hardly what we’d expected to hear.

Stephen Pallaras QC

We cannot have, until proven, allegations being constantly made in the public arena about people who as best as I can see so far have made a mistake and have admitted to it.

Graham Archer

The DPP said that they had consulted the Forensic Science Centre and that they had confidence in Dr Cala.

Stephen Pallaras QC

And so long as this remains the position and the advice of the Forensic Science Centre to this office, advice upon which we must rely, this office will continue to ue Dr Cala as an expert witness in coming cases.

Graham Archer

However, the DPP’s office has not done its own inquiries beyond that.

How would it be that the family saw the bodies on the day they died and said to Dr Cala and police, and this concerns a boilermaker, they looked like they’d been in a fight?

We’d planned to run our story on Dr Cala on Monday night but were contacted by the Crown Solicitor on behalf of the DPP asking us to hold off because a jury was about to retire in a murder trial in which Dr Cala had been a Crown witness. And we did.

You, as I understand it, because this was the situation I got from my lawyers, asked us to hold back the story because some of the evidence may have affected the jury which we did. Since then ..

Stephen Pallaras QC

That was good advice don’t you think?

Graham Archer

Well, I would have thought that it would have made sense for you to then to follow up and ask exactly what it was that you thought might be so important as the affect the jury’s decision.

Stephen Pallaras QC

I’m astonished that your lawyers, or those involved, didn’t have the wit to understand why this was a dangerous situation. You were threatening in your ridiculous promotions to expose something or other that clearly would impinge upon a jury’s decision. Why you as a journalist of many years experience couldn’t see the danger in that…

Graham Archer

Mr Pallaras … Mr Pallaras

Stephen Pallaras QC

Just wait, Mr Archer, I haven’t finished. And it’s clear that the advice that was suggested to your lawyers was accepted so they saw the sense in it. So why you can’t …

Graham Archer

The decision was mine …

Stephen Pallaras QC

Is there any other question?

Graham Archer

One question … why didn’t you follow up?

If what we were about to reveal would have influenced the decision of a jury, why didn’t the DPP’s office follow up and ask what it was that we had on Dr Cala?

These have been raised, so why wouldn’t you follow up – why wouldn’t you follow up and ask us what we had in the background that gives us the confidence to publish a story like we did. And the reason we’ve got the confidence Mr Pallaras is that we’ve actually done our homework.

Stephen Pallaras QC

You sir, whatever qualifications you do have, do not have qualifications in forensic pathology. That’s why.

Graham Archer

The rest of the media also expressed concern that the most prudent approach was surely to put Dr Cala on ice until the DPP could be one hundred per cent sure of his professional competence.

Stephen Pallaras QC

That assumes that he is not worthy of presentation as an expert witness. I’m not in a position to make that assumption. I’m relying upon advice which was given to me but a few days ago by those who employ him, by his professional peers who give me advice.

Graham Archer

Dr Cala is involved in around a dozen cases currently in the hands of the DPP. No doubt this press conference will prove to be seriously embarrassing to someone. Time will tell who that might be.

Top of Page