Losing Their Grip - the case of Henry Keogh

Author: Dr Robert N Moles

Go to: Networked Knowledge - the Henry Keogh homepage
Go to: A state of Injustice: table of contents

Losing Their Grip - table of contents

Chapter Three - The Investigation

In spite of the conclusion by the police at the scene that night that there were no suspicious circumstances, further investigations soon got under way. From what we now know, we can say that the Keogh case was essentially about an investigation that lasted barely longer than a week.

Within that first week, the death was determined to be a murder. That meant someone had to be responsible for it. By the end of that week, things were set on course for a conviction.

The public, of course, only learn about an investigation through the media. Within ten days of the death, it had been declared to be a ‘major crime’. The newspapers were informing the public that the death was a murder and the police were looking for the killer. The police were concerned to narrow down the range of suspects as quickly as possible. Here, there was really only one serious suspect - Henry Keogh.

As in the previous chapter, we tell the story using the statements taken by the police from the people involved. In addition, we also refer to records known as ‘running sheets’. These are records used by the police and the Coroner’s office in which they keep details of the tasks that have been assigned to people and how they have progressed.

Saturday 19 March 1994

Henry’s neighbour and friend Robert Peters first saw Keogh around 7 am. Henry came to his house to let him know that Anna had died. Robert’s wife had died in December, so he had some idea of what Henry might be going through. Henry was crying and very upset. Later in the day Robert went over to his house. At 8 am that morning Henry had called his former wife Sue to let her know that Anna had died. Sue said he seemed very upset.

Joanne Cheney, Anna’s mother, said that early that morning she offered to clean-up for Henry. He said he didn’t sleep that night and had already done it. She asked several times how Anna was in the bath. Henry said her face was completely under the water. Joanne asked, ‘was she in the bath when you left Henry?’ He said, ‘no, she was running the bath as I went out the door. We were going to have an early night and a cuddle.’ Anna had suggested he should go to see his mother, as she had not been invited to the wedding.

David Keogh said that around 10 am, his brother Michael came around and said Anna had died. They went next door and Henry was there. He looked withdrawn and tearful. ‘We just gave each other hugs. I didn’t ask what happened.’ Michael took Henry for a drive in the car. David said that a month before, Henry had talked to him about the wedding. Henry seemed extremely happy about it. David was not aware of any other women he may have been with. David said, ‘I do not talk about finances or anything else with anyone’. He left a note on Henry’s door inviting him for dinner on Sunday. The next day he came over and had a glass of water. ‘We did not ask what happened to Anna, just how he was coping.’

Sharon Tonkes was a lawyer-friend of Anna’s. Around 5.30 pm, Henry appeared at her house. Henry had never been there before. He was distressed, with tears in his eyes. She embraced him for a while, then took his hand and took him inside. Her fiancé George Mancini (also a lawyer) was there. Henry said he didn’t sleep last night; there was a lot of mess to clean up. George offered to help with the legal stuff. They talked about the wills and the funeral. Sharon said that in the late 1980s she went with Anna to America and they had shared a room. She could not recall Anna taking a bath. ‘In 12 years, I have never known her to have a liking for baths.’ The Coronial running sheet shows that the Coroner directed that a post mortem examination be conducted. The undertakers had already requested a cremation. Dr Forbes, Anna’s general practitioner, rang to say there was no previous medical history of significance; ‘can she be advised of the provisional cause of death?’ 

Sunday 20 March 1994

The Journal at Holden Hill Police Station states that at 1640 Roberts and Reinhardt report a phone conversation with Walkley from the Coroner’s Office. Further information was now to hand. The deceased had bruises on the head area which were not apparent until the post mortem. This needs a follow-up with the investigating officer regarding a suspicious death.

They said they went to Payneham Police Station and liaised with Tyson and Williams to see if any information had arisen regarding the relationship between Anna and Henry. There was nothing substantial, or able to be followed up by the night-shift. The running sheet said that a full copy of the file should be obtained and handed to the investigators at CIB for the day-shift to follow up.

Anna’s mother was still asking Henry how she was in the bath. He said, ‘on her back with her head facing towards the shower alcove.’ Joanne said she asked, ‘where were her legs?’ He said, ‘I was too upset to notice. I wanted to get her out of the water but she was too heavy to lift.’ He put his arms under her arms and pulled her out that way.

The Coroner’s running sheet had an entry by Julian Zuffi, a police officer attached to the Coroner’s office, that Dr Manock had advised that the provisional cause of death was ‘drowning’. He was awaiting ‘histo’, diatoms testing and alcohol and EMIT (drug) tests. [1] There was a 3 cm bruise on the top of the head, not consistent with the head falling back or forward. Further enquiries will be needed. ‘Dr Manock states body free after mid-day Mon [21 March]. Murray Billet to take photos in the morning’.

An entry at 1545 by Walkley stated:

“Dr Cheney rang regarding the cause of death. Explained the above. Funeral arranged for 10.30 am Wednesday at White Lady Funerals. We hold body until Monday. The patrol delivered statements. Still to interview Susan Cheney - seeing her tonight 2100. If unable to type it up before knock-off, will photo notebook and fax to us until back on Wednesday, when they will be typed up.”

Anna’s father, Kevin, said that Henry came to the house that day to see if he had been in touch with the Coroner. Kevin said that Anna appeared to have drowned and that further tests were under way. The results of blood and toxicology tests would be known soon. Kevin said Henry specifically asked him if they had found anything else. He said, ‘yes, a deep bruise on her head’. Henry asked him whereabouts. He said he didn’t know. Kevin said that Henry returned to this matter several times over the next few days. It seems that Henry couldn’t understand why the police were so interested.

Kevin asked Henry about Anna’s finances, and whether she had a policy to cover the mortgage repayments. Henry told him that Anna had a $17,000 loan plus $5,000 for the car. He didn’t know of any insurance policies other than that she had some superannuation. Kevin said, ‘I asked him again, has Anna any insurance policies?’ He said, ‘none’. ‘He was definite about that. He then left.’ 

The Coroner’s running sheet had an entry by Walkley, timed at 2230. It read:

“Tyson rang. Spoke with Susan Cheney. Keogh is possessive and didn’t tell his mother until Saturday she was dead. On Saturday, Keogh was vacuuming the house. The house was hers, but bought for her on the condition that Keogh was not there. The family are concerned she had an insurance policy and he was the beneficiary. They are unhappy with the events. Keogh has an ex-wife and three children he is supporting. I wonder if he hasn’t come home and found her asleep in bath and pushed her head down into the water, hence the mark on the forehead. Not too pleasant. He is odd and strongly built.”

Interestingly, the mark on the forehead mentioned here was not evident in the first photographs taken at the scene on the night of the death. However, it appears in a photograph taken later that evening. The mark is not mentioned in the autopsy report.

Mark Roberts, Detective Senior Constable at Holden Hill CIB was rostered to commence duty at 11.00 pm. Shortly before, he spoke to Walkley on the phone. She said she was concerned about the death. The post mortem had revealed bruises to the head that were not previously apparent. Roberts, with Reinhardt, spoke to Tyson and Williams. Roberts noted a family member or close friend had said that they were not happy with their marriage. ‘We believed there were no grounds for enquiry during that shift.’  

The Coroner’s running sheet entry at 2250 stated that information was to be sent to Holden Hill CIB for the night shift. ‘Det Mark Roberts to ensure a full copy of the statements and there is to be a follow up first thing in the morning.’

Detective Inspector Thomson from Holden Hill CIB said he was at home at 11 pm that evening when he received a phone call from Walkley. She said there was a suspicious death. Apparently, there was a circular bruise on the head that was not explained by a fall. Anna had been drinking. He said to find out from Dr Manock how much she had been eating and drinking; Dr Manock was to look at the digestion; was the house locked? She had a sheepdog. Why did the fiancé use the phone in the kitchen or hallway when there was one in the bedroom? What was the time of death? What was the temperature of the water? How did he lift her out? Why was the plug not able to be lifted out? They were marrying in one month, so look at the insurances and the will. The family disliked him. He cleaned the apartment the next day. Man and Fielding had attended but there was no statement from them yet. No statement from the female friend. Walkley said, ‘he did not appear that upset, crocodile tears.’

Walkley’s entry in the running sheet at 2315 states that she spoke to Det Insp Thompson at home; he will get CIB moving first thing in morning. ‘Not looking too good’.

An entry at 2345 stated that the day-shift is to read the running sheet and advise Dr Manock. CIB may need information sooner regarding the diatoms, alcohol and EMIT tests. 

Amanda Caryana was the mortuary assistant at the Forensic Science Centre. She said she came in to assist Dr Manock over the weekend. If they were busy they would sometimes do three autopsies on the Sunday to ease the workload. She collected the police report of the death (with the statements attached) and then typed the details into the computer. She went to the mortuary and set up the instruments. There were four autopsies that morning. Anna Cheney’s was the last. Amanda said that only she and Dr Manock were there.

They examined the body. Amanda noticed bruising at the top of the head, and drew it to Dr Manock’s attention. She found more bruising at the back of the head. Dr Manock said it was unusual where the bruising was at the top of the head. Dr Manock asked if she knew anything about the case. All she knew was that it was a drowning. He asked if she could smell alcohol. She couldn’t. She didn’t recall seeing any other bruising, or Dr Manock commenting about any other bruising. Dr Manock was concerned about the bruising on the head and he said he was going to go to Coroner’s office to advise them.

Monday 21 March 1994

Sandra Zubranich had been a business friend of Henry. On the Monday she went round to see Henry. He talked. She was with him for several hours. She ‘just listened and let him talk.’

Walkley said that Fielding had phoned her at home. She also had a conversation with Detective Man. She said Keogh was the beneficiary to Anna Cheney’s superannuation and the insurance on her mortgage. ‘Money was everything to Keogh and he was still possibly having sex with his ex-wife.’ She also said in her statement, ‘Not entered on the running sheet is that when I commenced duty at 1530 I went to mortuary and viewed body of AC – noted bruising on her right lower leg.’

The Holden Hill Police Station Journal notes that at 1545 Man reported he had gone with Fielding to speak with Dr and Mrs Cheney. They then talked to Susan Cheney, and then with Lucinda Reu, about the death. They attempted to locate the staff that had been on duty at the hotel the previous Friday evening. They reported that they spoke with ‘Peter Mackenzie’, the boss of the deceased, regarding their suspicions. [2]

At 0730, Fielding spoke to the Coroner’s office. He phoned Walkley at home and spoke about the bump on the head. ‘Manock wants it explained although not too worried about it.’ He spoke to Anna’s workmates, friends and Keogh, to see if any of them could explain a bump or knock to the head. No one was able to enlighten them about it. Dr Manock phoned the office and claimed his inexperienced assistant missed further bruising on the legs. ‘A person could have lifted the legs to drown her.’ Fielding phoned someone at the Bank who had worked with Keogh and had described him as ‘a snake-oil salesman’.

At 0830, the police journal entry states that the alcohol and drug tests had not been returned. ‘Nil obvious pills in stomach.’ Obtained information from Anna’s mother. There were ‘doubts about Keogh’. Dr Kevin and Mrs Cheney believed Keogh had been deceiving Anna by still seeing his ex-wife. Mrs Cheney saw Keogh’s car parked in the driveway of his ex-wife’s house at 10 pm, and again the following morning at 6 am, on an occasion when he was supposed to be on a business trip interstate. When confronted, he claimed that although he was living with Anna at the time, he decided to spend some time with his children. The entry states, ‘unknown whether he denied staying at ex-wife’s home.’ It appeared to the police that this information had been given to Mrs Cheney by Anna. They also noted, ‘Dr Cheney was somewhat of a mediator in the matter.’

Mrs Cheney openly admitted she disapproved of Keogh. The entry stated:

“… both are suspicious of the death. All friends of the deceased except Reu don’t like Keogh (he is secretive and a liar). No statements taken at this time. Statements to be obtained.”

The police interviewed Susan Cheney. She said that along with Lucinda Reu, she was the best friend of the deceased. She too did not like Keogh. She and Marc had suspicions about the death. She could not account for the bruising on Anna’s head.

Lucinda Reu also could not account for the bruising on the head. Anna was in ‘good spirits’ when she saw her last. She too had suspicions about the death. The police went back to see Dr Manock, who said that further bruising had been located beneath the scalp. He had also found bruising on the ankles. Dr Manock believed Anna could have been drowned, with little force, by her legs being lifted in the bath.

The police interviewed a person, who had worked with the State Bank. He told the police Keogh, ‘jumped at resigning to avoid being sacked.’ It was he who said that Keogh was a snake-oil salesman. He said that his boss and another person could be spoken to. Neither of them liked Keogh either. The police obtained the name of Mr Beeby who owned a part-share in the house at Hone Street, Parkside. The police journal noted that these people were to be spoken to regarding any hidden financial problems adding, ‘check the accounts and any debt at this bank.’ 

The police journal notes at 1640 that Man said Anna had superannuation and that there was life insurance on her mortgage:

“Keogh is the beneficiary. He got her to do her will some weeks ago. He is still having sex with his ex-wife. Money is everything to him. He froze all her accounts today. He gets two cars.”

Amanda Caryana said that Murray Billet attended the mortuary and took photos of the bruising on the head. At this time, bruising was noticed on one of her ankles. There were several small circular bruises, only light in colour, and not bruises that stood out or were readily noticed. Amanda said she saw Anna’s body three times that week. Manock and Billet were present; ‘the bruising on the ankle got darker as the week progressed.’

There was some confusion as to whether the photographs had been taken on Monday or Tuesday. Billet confirmed they were taken on the morning of Monday 21 March. The work-sheet records show they were taken on that day; the negatives were on the film he used that day; they are the last negatives on that film. The other negatives on it related to photos of other bodies and autopsies that were done on 21 March.

Billet said that, at the direction of Dr Manock, he photographed apparent bruising using a Polylight variable wavelength light source to enhance the contrast of the areas of interest. Dr Manock’s evidence at the trial was that:

“This photo was taken with a plain flash without any fancy colour lighting to improve the contrast.”

Billet said that the images were developed and printed by him. He used the notation ‘KO888’ [the Coroner’s body number] and labelled the photos MRB 1 - 5 inclusive. ‘There are five photos of the deceased leg(s) which are all in black-and-white.’

Dr Manock had requested the photos. Billet did not work on weekends. He was not aware if any photos were taken at the autopsy. The photos were taken, ‘at the direction of CHM’. Dr Manock commented about the bruises on the ankle and how they may have occurred. Billet said Sgt van Dijk was around during the week, although he didn’t believe he was there when the photos were taken. He said van Dijk had a look at the negatives. He was satisfied they were OK and that no further photos were required. Billet was unaware if van Dijk had taken any photos. It was not uncommon for van Dijk, or someone from Technical Services, to speak with him to see if the photos had turned out OK.

Tuesday 22 March 1994

Man was with Fielding at Holden Hill CIB and took a statement from Keogh about his movements. At 1630 Man and Fielding went to Keogh’s house, where they arranged to get Anna’s will. Man’s account continues:

“We were in the lounge all seated. I said, ‘Henry, who is the beneficiary of Anna Jane’s will?’ He said, ‘I don’t know’. I was given an envelope by Keogh with his name on the front. I removed the copy of the will in the name of Anna-Jane Ross Cheney that actually showed Keogh to be beneficiary. The envelope was clearly open. I recall that Keogh had said to me that same morning during the taking of his statement that he obtained the copy of the will on Monday 21 March 1994. Just prior to receiving the copy of the will from him I was explaining why we needed to know about the will, the beneficiary and the financial affairs when he said in response, ‘I understand it’s not the first time nor the last time that someone has been killed for money’. At the time I was taken aback by the comment thinking that I may have misheard it. On the way back, at the police car away from Keogh, I asked Mick Fielding if he had heard what I thought I heard. He confirmed the comment made by Keogh.”

As Fielding said in his statement, ‘I thought it was a strange comment.’

Of course, punctuation can make a great deal of difference. If the comment by Keogh was, ‘I understand. It’s not the first time …’ then he is simply saying that he is not taking offence at being asked to provide the documents to the police. The police statements indicate it was their understanding that Keogh would benefit from the will, the insurances and the home, which may have had a total value of $600,000.

Later that afternoon, Man and Fielding picked up Sue Keogh from her home and took her to the police station, where they obtained a statement from her. She also produced to them some divorce documents. Sue was informed by Man and Fielding that Henry was to have married Anna on 24 April 1994. They had been engaged for six months. Sue said she was amazed to hear of this. She said she had not had a sexual relationship with Henry since he left home in May 1991. At no time had he stayed overnight since then.  Sue explained she had married Henry in 1977. They were divorced on 30 March 1992. They had been separated since June 1991. In May 1991, Henry confessed to having an affair with Anna, which had been going on for two years. He said he wanted to finish the affair and return to her and the family. He told her that Anna was pressuring him to get a divorce and to reverse the vasectomy. He began to act irrationally. On one occasion he went for a walk and returned two days later. After two weeks, he said no matter how much he loved Sue, he loved Anna more. Sue said she would wait for him. Six months later Henry told her that he and Anna had separated. 

The police report states, ‘at this point Keogh is a suspect’. It said that Man and Fielding were to liaise with the surveillance unit for the targeting of Keogh for a period. It also records that the target was approved and the surveillance commenced.

The Coronial running sheet notes at 1530, ‘Manock no longer requires the body. Negatives OK.’ Then at 1815:

“Dr Cheney rang regarding the release of the body. I have contacted Senior Constable Zuffi at home. Manock told him he no longer required the body and that the negatives were OK.”

Wednesday 23 March 1994

At 0915, the Coronial running sheet noted, the undertakers, White Lady, would be handling the funeral arrangements. They enquired when the body would be free. The undertakers were to be advised when CIB had contacted the Coroner’s office.

At 1200, detective Kipling telephoned to advise the body was free. Dr Cheney and White Lady were advised.

At 1220, Sgt Munro advised CIB wanted a 24-hour stay so that further photos could be taken. Again, Dr Cheney and White Lady were advised. 

During the day, Henry came to Dr Cheney’s house and spoke to him and his wife. Henry said there was no need to worry about expenses and that everything would be covered. He said Anna had taken out a $400,000 policy before their trip to Hong Kong. He had one for $700,000. Kevin said he was taken aback by this, because it was the opposite of what Henry had said a few days earlier. He said that Henry had never asked him or his wife to take out an insurance policy. Henry had never tried actively to encourage him to invest money with him, but Anna had said that Henry would help him to re-invest if he wanted him to.

At 9.10 pm Man went with Fielding to Keogh’s house and Lucinda Reu came to the door. Man asked for Henry and she got him. Man told Keogh he needed to speak with him about the death and the police needed to clarify aspects of his statements. Man said they also wanted to put things to him about the death and that they would like him to go back to the police station to do that. Henry asked if it had to be that night. Man said it was important to get things cleared up that night. Henry said he was really tired and wanted to sleep. Man said they would like to get this done now, and they intended to have the home examined by crime scene examiners that evening.

Keogh said he wanted to make a phone call, which he did. After speaking with someone, he asked Man to speak with Michael David, who was Keogh’s lawyer. He introduced himself as Detective Kerrie Man and then had a conversation with Mr David who said his client was tired and would speak with them later. Mr David gave the police the phone numbers and details of Keogh’s solicitor and of himself as Keogh’s barrister.

Man said he explained to Mr David about the examination of the premises by the crime scene officers and then handed the phone back to Keogh. Man said that although he understood that Keogh didn’t want to answer any questions at this time, he would still like him to hear about his concerns. He asked Keogh if he would listen to him while he explained some things. Keogh said he would. Man then spoke to Keogh whilst the Technical Services officers began their search of the house.

It is quite clear that the police were well advanced in their theorising about the cause and circumstances of the death. Man said he wanted to put things fairly to Keogh and that the tape recorder was going.

Man said the police didn’t believe Keogh’s story. There were quite a few inconsistencies in it. He said Keogh had lied about his divorce proceedings and that there were certain discrepancies between his first and his second statement. Man asked Keogh if he wanted him to detail the discrepancies. Keogh said he didn’t want to do that because he was too tired.

Man said the police suspected Keogh killed Anna in the bath by lifting her legs up over the top of her. Keogh stood to gain some $455,000. There had been some deceit in the past regarding the divorce and the ex-wife. The police thought Keogh had taken Anna to the hotel with the intention of getting her intoxicated. The arrangement about the dogs had interrupted the plan. Keogh said it was Anna who rang him to go for a drink. Man explained that a healthy 29 year old does not just slide into the bath and drown.

Man said Keogh told Joanne Cheney that he left Anna running the bath. Yet, in his statement, he said she hadn’t run the bath and was getting food out for the dogs. Yes, it seemed that there were quite a few holes in things.

Man put it to Keogh that there was no other person with a motive for Anna’s death. There was no break-in, no rape. He put it to him that the forensic evidence certainly suggested some intervention whilst she was in the bath. Keogh, as if not getting the point, asked, ‘you mean sexual?’ Man replied that it looked like she didn’t drown naturally and that the drowning was forced.

Man put it to Keogh that in his first statement he said he went to the bedroom when he got back; then in his second statement he said he didn’t get to the bedroom. Again, the discrepancy caused some suspicion. Then, on one occasion Keogh told Anna’s mother he found her on her back. Yet, in his statement, he said he found her on her right side facing north. Keogh said, ‘no, I said three-quarters’. Man said, ‘well, in your statement you said on the right side.’

Man put it to Keogh he had said that he couldn’t remember whether the emergency phone number was triple 0 or triple 1. Well, he said, the triple 1 number was directly under 000. He asked him how long he had been in ambulance training. Keogh said that it had been back in 1977. Man said that it just seemed odd that he was ex-ambulance and yet he couldn’t remember the emergency number. Man said that they could understand he may have panicked, but they were not happy that Anna had died accidentally. They believed there was intervention by another. As Keogh was the only person in the house, the police would have to look closely at him.

Man said that Anna was probably pulled under the water by her ankles. ‘We have forensic evidence regarding that, Anna hitting the bath as she was pulled down.’ The police have to make enquiries. They want to find out whether Keogh had any other female friends, lovers or affairs. Man asked if he would care to comment. Keogh said, ‘no’. The ‘interview’ concluded at 9.34 pm.  

David Inman from the Crime Drafting Unit had measured up the place so that he could prepare plans of the premises. Detective Senior Constable Peter Juers noted he was part of the search team with Man, Fielding, Clarke, Batty and McCue. He searched the main bedroom where he found some tracksuit pants that had dry vomit on the outside. McCue noted the items, which were then given to Sheldon of Technical Services.  

Thursday 24 March 1994

The Coronial running sheet states that at 1300 Sgt van Dijk noted further bruising had been found on the feet. The body was to be held to Monday 28 March; then see Manock and Kipling for the release date.

Around 3pm, Man telephoned Mr Munt, the solicitor for Keogh, to request a voluntary medical examination of Keogh. Man noted that Munt got back to him and tentatively suggested the following day might be appropriate. 

Kipling spoke with Munro and learned the Coroner’s Office had authorised the release of the body as soon as extra photos had been taken by van Dijk. The Major Crime running sheet indicated that Anna had been involved in a search of premises at her work and that Fairclough (the third party) was also concerned that he may be at risk. It was noted, ‘determined low risk’. 

Friday 25 March 1994

The Advertiser, which is the main daily paper in South Australia, \ included the following headline, ‘Police suspect murder in lawyer death probe’, by Bill Power. The article went on to say that the police suspected that prominent Adelaide lawyer, Anna Cheney, may have been murdered, after investigations had so far all but ruled out her death as being accidental.

It is worth bearing in mind that when the morning newspaper runs with a story, it would usually have to be written up and edited by around 11 pm the previous evening. This means that in six days, accidental and natural cause explanations had been virtually ruled out of the inquiry.

That morning Man again phoned Munt regarding the medical examination of Keogh. Munt said that Michael David QC was still considering the request and he had not received a reply.

The Major Crime running sheet shows that on this day the case was declared to be a major crime, with Couch as the administration person. Sgt Kokegei and Yelland were to be the primary investigators, with Man and Fielding the secondary investigators. The files in the case were to be transferred to the office of Major Crime. There was to be a conference with Thompson and Kipling at Holden Hill CIB. 

At 10.05 pm Paul Burnside, a police officer, deposited two bags, which included the track pants and top, at the Adelaide Police Station property section. He obtained a receipt.

Saturday 26 March 1994

Today, The Advertiser ran with the headline, ‘Police quiz man on lawyer murder’, by Nigel Hunt. The article went on to say that the police have extensively questioned a man over the murder of Adelaide lawyer Anna Cheney. This was revealed yesterday as senior police declared her death a major crime and stepped up inquiries.

From this day on, there seemed to be no doubt in the public discussion of the case that Anna’s death was a murder. This was despite the fact that many of the scientific tests arising from the autopsy had not yet been completed and we were still a very long way from any legal determination of the matter. Dr Manock was later to say that during this time he was still looking at other possibilities. Over the next few days the idea that Anna had been murdered was to be fully entrenched in the public mind.

The Coronial Inquiries running sheet states that the body was to be held until Det Sgt Couch advises that it is free.

Sunday 27 March 1994

The Sunday Mail ran the following headline, ‘Help find my girl’s killer’, by Sean Whittington. It went on to say that the distressed mother of murdered Adelaide lawyer Anna Cheney had made a heartfelt plea to track down her daughter’s killer. Mrs Joanne Cheney said she was worried other young women were now at risk.

Another article ran with the heading, ‘Special Report: She was more than a daughter – we were best friends’. It said that Anna once had a dream of becoming a vet. But at the age of 14, she stunned her family and friends when she announced she wanted to become a lawyer. Shortly after, she had matriculated from Pembroke College and was studying law at Adelaide University. Her family had no doubt she would succeed. Only recently during an evening stroll she discussed her idea to one day enter politics. Her life came to a tragic end nine days ago when her body was found in the bath. Her fiancé Henry Keogh made the grisly discovery on returning to the home he shared with Ms Cheney, after being out for an hour or so, according to police.

Another article was headed, ‘‘Nothing stolen – no forced entry.’ It said that senior police had failed to rule out murdered Adelaide lawyer Anna Cheney knew her killer.

As mystery surrounding the nine day old murder deepened, detectives revealed there was no forced entry and nothing had been stolen.

The Major Crime running sheet has an item with regard to a woman Ms B, who had faxed Major Crime. She said she was involved with Keogh and could supply instances of his lying.

Monday 28 March 1994

The Coroner’s running sheet shows that Tyson was advised to come in and complete the chain-of-evidence to Dr Manock. Couch advised that when the chain-of-evidence was complete the body would be free.

Lynda Tyson said at 11.15 am she attended the mortuary where she formally identified to Dr Manock the body.

At 1115 the running sheet notes, ‘the chain completed’.

At 1345 the entry is:

“From State Coroner. Mr Chivell requests it be in writing from CHM [Dr Manock] and Det Couch they have no objection to body being cremated.”

The next entry is at 1405:

“CHM letter on file. Det Couch letter on file. Coroner advised & signed cremation order.”

Man says that at 3 pm he received an airline itinerary in the names of Keogh and Ms B for a flight to Hong Kong. He then went with Ms B to premises in Davis St, Norwood, where she showed him a granny flat which was said to have been occupied by Keogh. Fielding and Man examined the exterior of the building, which was the rear yard of the State Bank premises.

The Major Crime running sheet notes that Ms A has information to assist regarding Keogh. Statement obtained (14 pages) from Ms B, who was Keogh’s girlfriend for the last two years.

Tuesday 29 March 1994

The Advertiser headline was, ‘Funeral for murdered lawyer’. It said that the funeral service would be held the next day for murdered Adelaide lawyer, Ms Anna Cheney. At the same time, the Coronial Inquiries running sheet noted, ‘file post mortem report. Toxicology and diatoms reports to come.’

The following day, the funeral of Anna took place, and her body was cremated.

It appears that even though the officials had no doubt that they were dealing with a murder -- they still disposed of the body before any legal proceedings had even been commenced. Contrast this with the situation in the UK, for example, where a body would not be cremated in a case of a suspected murder until all of the legal procedures had been completed.

Thursday 31 march 1994

Today, The Advertiser ran with the headline, ‘Lawyer was light and joy’. The article included pictures of Anna, her fellow lawyers, and best friend Sharon Tonkes and Anna’s mother Joanne at the funeral. It stated that her closest friend said at the funeral yesterday that the murdered Adelaide lawyer Anna Cheney was the silver thread that wove their lives together.

Tuesday 12 April 1994

The Advertiser headline was, ‘Check into murdered lawyer’s finance dealings’. Detectives are examining in detail the financial dealings of murder victim, lawyer Anna Cheney. The investigation was confirmed yesterday by Detective Sergeant Trevor Couch, head of the team of detectives from the Major Crime Task Force.

Wednesday 13 April 1994

Dr Cheney said that Henry came to see him at the Red Cross Blood Transfusion Service. Keogh said he had popped in to see how Kevin was. Apparently he had been to a grief counsellor who told him to ring the Coroner’s Office and find out as much as he could about Anna’s death. They had not told him anything. Kevin said he asked if Henry had heard from the police. Henry said ‘no’. Kevin told Henry he was sure the police were pursuing a detailed investigation. Kevin said that he could not accept the circumstances of Anna’s death or the way in which she was killed. It was horrendously cruel. Henry told Kevin that if he wanted anything in the house to help himself.

Thursday 14 April 1994

The audit manager for the National Australia Bank was served with orders regarding the financial records of Keogh and Anna Cheney by Yelland of Major Crime Task Force. The accounts had been reconstructed and photocopies of statements on microfiche were taken. Fielding went to the other places where Keogh had worked and collected other documents relating to his employment.

Tuesday 19 April 1994

Ms B gave a statement in which she said she was currently on sick leave and had been since January 1994. She had met Keogh in the second-half of 1991. He was then the manager of some ten branches of the bank. He came over to her, ‘chatting me up’ and invited her out to dinner. He rang a couple of days later and was obviously interested in her as a person. He clearly wanted to take her out. She outlined the rest of her involvement with Keogh up until shortly before Anna’s death.

Sunday 24 April 1994

>In the Sunday Mail there was a general reminder to the community that there seemed to have been an outbreak of murder and mayhem. It is worth bearing in mind that during the investigation of the Keogh case, the police were also involved in the investigation of the bombing of the National Crime Authority in Adelaide, in which Sergeant Bowen had been killed. This time the headline was, ‘Six weeks of savagery’, by Peter Haran. It continued, ‘Chad Fain gassed to death; Anna Cheney; Sen Sgt Bowen’. The article stated that one killer is still on the loose, and no fewer than 15 men, women and children are facing courts for murder and attempted murder after one of the most intensive six weeks of major police investigations in South Australia.

After that first month

The remaining entries relate to the taking of statements from various people to provide confirmation of what the police knew (or thought that they knew) up until the time of Henry’s arrest. There is nothing in the police running sheets made available to the defence, about any other suspects or any other lines of inquiry.

Kokegei said that he arranged with police surveillance (undercover) to observe the house and other family premises from 6.30 am on 6 May to 12.30 am on 7 May. During this time there were no vehicles at the house other than the Volvo owned by Anna. Surveillance re-commenced from 9.05 am on 7 May. Later in the morning Keogh was identified attending and leaving his ex-wife’s home. He and his children were followed to the basketball stadium at Athol Park.

Kokegei said that at the basketball stadium he introduced himself and the other officers to Keogh, who said that on the advice of his solicitor he would refuse to answer any questions. Kokegei said, ‘I am now apprehending you’. On the way to Major Crime, Keogh’s pager sounded and he asked Kokegei to phone Michael David QC. At 1.35 pm Kokegei phoned Mr David who advised that Ian Sampson, Keogh’s solicitor, would attend at the interview. Sampson spoke with Keogh, who was then interviewed.

The note of interview continues:

“I said we thought that the insurance policies were not made out by her. He said ‘no comment’. I said the application forms were not signed by her and that they are forgeries. He said ‘no comment’. I said that the application forms were made out by you as agent for the insurance companies. He said ‘no comment’. I said I now formally arrest you, and terminated the interview at 3.05 pm.”

Keogh was charged with murder. At 4.00 pm Dr McCleave conducted a medical examination. Thomas from Technical Services took photos. The statement said that at no stage did the accused protest his innocence, or ask about the investigation. Kokegei continued that at 7.00 pm he attended at the home address with other officers and the solicitor. Thomas took photos of the house. Also attending at the house were Yelland, Fielding, Ray, Thomas and Sampson, solicitor. Documents were seized, including a spiral counter book and a note book, which were initialled by him.

Dr McCleave said he attended at the city Watch House (police station) at 1605-1700 and examined Keogh, aged 38, financial planner, under S81 of the Summary Offences Act. The statement continues:

“I was briefed by the police. I checked his general physical status and his ‘crook-back’. He had a few minor problems with wrist. He said he had seen a counsellor as a result of Anna Cheney’s death. He had taken medication and ended up as an inpatient at hospital. He is not suicidal. His back has prolapsed discs with some instability of the spine. It arose from a fall 14 years ago. There is no evidence of any condition that would prevent him from carrying out a full range of activities.”

Fielding’s note of 6.30 pm says he attended at the house with Kokegei of Major Crime, Thomas of Technical Services and Ray of the Bureau of Criminal Intelligence. Solicitor Ian Sampson was also present. They conducted a search. The following items were retained -- receipts, keys, cheque books, handwritten papers, etc. All were taken back to Major Crime Task Force and handed to Kokegei. They finished about 8.47 pm. Kokegei and Ray signed the notes of items taken.

The cell guard said that at 1830, Saturday 8 May, he fingerprinted and photographed Keogh and completed a hand-writing sample.

Sunday 8 May 1994

Today’s headline in the Sunday Mail was, ‘Lawyer Murder Arrest - no bail for fiancé’, by Sean Whittington. It said the fiancé of prominent Adelaide lawyer Anna Cheney had been arrested and charged with her murder. Henry Keogh was arrested by Major Crime Task Force detectives, yesterday afternoon. He was taken from his home to police headquarters in Angus Street for questioning, and was later charged.

Monday 9 May 1994

Kokegei conveyed and seized documents, including the insurance policies and associated documents and financial records, to the Forensic Science Centre.

Tuesday 10 May 1994

In May, proceedings took place in the Adelaide Magistrates Court, principally in relation to applications for bail. The Advertiser headline was, ‘Lawyer killed over money, says prosecutor’, by Chris Hackett. The article said the Adelaide Magistrates Court was told that the alleged murder of Anna Cheney was premeditated and meticulously planned over a significant period of time. Mr Paul Rofe QC, DPP, alleged financial reasons were behind the death, which had been made to appear accidental. Henry Keogh has been charged with murder.

Friday 13 May 1994 

The Advertiser headline ran, ‘Dead lawyer insured for $1m’, by Chris Hackett. It said the Supreme Court had heard the fiancé of the Adelaide lawyer insured her life for $1m some 12 months before her death. The court was told he had taken out five policies with himself as the beneficiary.

Wednesday 18 May 1994

>It was only at this date that the samples from Anna Cheney’s autopsy were eventually handed by Dr Manock to the toxicologist for testing. ‘Full drug screen target analysis for chloroform’ was requested. We will see later that Dr Manock was to explain that they were busy, and things had to take their course. However, one might have thought that with a murder inquiry, it would have been necessary to rule out a drug overdose, or perhaps a suicide, before murder charges were proceeded with.

Friday 17 June 1994

The Major Crime running sheet states that Yelland, Kokegei and Couch were at the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions with Paul Rofe QC and Rebecca Gray. Statements were provided to the DPP.

Sunday 19 June 1994

The Major Crime running sheet states that the DPP was checking the wills.

Thursday 23 June 1994

Peter Felgate, from the Toxicology Section at the Forensic Science Centre, produced his report. It said he was provided with containers with blood, liver and stomach contents from the Cheney autopsy. It said that after analysis the items were resealed and retained in the freezer. The blood was screened for chloroform, and the blood and liver were analysed for drugs, including morphine and cannabinoids. He reported that chloroform was not detected, nor were ‘common’ drugs. The stomach contents were apparently not analysed.

Monday 27 June 1994

On this day Dr Manock eventually attended at the scene. He was later to tell the court at the trial that whilst he could describe the scenario to the police in the first week of the inquiry, he could not write it down until after he had visited the scene. Ten years later, he was to tell the Medical Board that whilst he kept asking to be taken to the scene, the police, for whatever reason, did not take him there. Dr Manock was also to tell the Medical Board that he still hadn’t written down the full details of the depicted scenario.

Dr Manock, in his report, said that he attended at the home address with Kokegei and prosecutor Rebecca Gray. He went on to say that a person sitting at the plug end of the bath could be immersed with ease by lifting the feet and pressing down on the head. The right hand goes under the right leg to grip the left ankle. The flotation effect means that little effort is required. If the legs are folded down to the head, the person is unable to struggle. Effectively, the shape of the bath means that the shoulders are on the bottom of the bath. The bruise at the neck and head could be caused as the deceased was forced down into the bath.

Wednesday 20 July 1994

>The Major Crime running sheet stated that Yelland contacted Rebecca Gray of DPP. Does no wish any further enquiries made re further experts at this stage.

Saturday 23 July 1994

At this stage, moves began to take place to ensure that Keogh would not obtain any financial benefit from what had occurred. The Advertiser carried an article, ‘Court asked to cut alleged killer from victim’s will’, by Michelle Weidenhoffer. The article said that the father of murdered Adelaide lawyer Anna-Jane Cheney was taking Supreme Court action to try to stop her alleged killer benefiting from her will.

Tuesday 26 July 1994

Matters were now ready to proceed to the committal hearing. These are the proceedings to determine if there is a prima facie (meaning ‘on the face of it’) case against the accused sufficient to warrant him going to trial on the matter. It is not uncommon (especially in South Australia) for suppression orders to be issued regarding such proceedings, or elements of them, so as not to prejudice any potential jurors at a future trial. However, suppression orders were not put into effect with regard to some of the key elements of this case. For example, whether or not the deceased had actually been murdered, or may have died from some other cause. The Advertiser headline was, ‘Cheney murder hearing date set.’ The article said that three days had been set aside for a preliminary hearing into charges against Keogh accused of murdering her.

Tuesday 23 August 1994

The committal proceedings came on for hearing in August. The Advertiser headline was, ‘$1m murder motive court told’, by Sylvia Kriven. The article referred to allegedly forged insurance policies, and the fact that Anna Cheney could have been deliberately drowned by a method known as, ‘the brides in the bath’. The alleged motive was $1.125m in life insurance taken out by her fiancé a year before her death.

Wednesday 24 August 1994

The outcome of the committal was announced in The Advertiser, ‘Man to face murder trial’. The article stated that Keogh had been remanded in custody to stand trial in the Supreme Court. He had pleaded not guilty.

Tuesday 27 September 1994

This stage of the proceedings concluded with the headline in The Advertiser, ‘Man accused of bath murder denied bail’ by Sylvia Kriven. The article said that Keogh was refused bail despite the offer of a surety of $305,000 by his family and friends, and that Keogh, 39, pleaded not guilty to murdering Anna Cheney.

Saturday 8 October 1994

The Major Crime running sheet says that the DPP now required statements from the ambulance personnel to see if they could recall vomit on the floor or in the mouth or throat at the time of resuscitation. This explains the reason for taking the supplementary statements, so many months after the event. To proceed with murder charges, the DPP would have to show that resuscitation had not been attempted.

Saturday 26 November 1994

>We can see from the media coverage that the Inquiry into the baby deaths cases by the Coroner was running in parallel to the inquiries into the Keogh case by the police. The headline in The Advertiser was, ‘Some SIDS babies suffocated, court told’. It said a lang=EN-US> senior forensic pathologist (Dr Manock) told a court he was ‘quite sure’ some babies are suffocated and their deaths attributed to SIDS [Sudden Infant Death Syndrome[. Dr Colin Manock, forensic pathologist at the State Forensic Science Centre since its inception in 1978, said it was ‘acceptable’ to attribute deaths to SIDS. He said, ‘I think there is an enthusiasm for ascribing cause of death to SIDS, which really just means, I don’t know.’ Apparently, he said, it has a ring to it that doesn’t raise an eyebrow. ‘I am reluctant to say it is SIDS when I can see other indicators … I am quite sure there are deaths due to asphyxiation that are put down to SIDS.’ Dr Manock was giving evidence into the unrelated deaths of three babies in Adelaide.

Tuesday 29 November 1994

Shortly after, The Advertiser headline was ‘SIDS cause unlikely, inquest told’, by Sylvia Kriven. The article stated that the chances of SIDS claiming more than one child in the same family are so rare they are not worth considering. A second ‘unexplained’ SIDS death was either because of a rare metabolic problem, which would be detected at autopsy, or by accidental or deliberate suffocation. Paediatrician and director of the Women’s and Children’s Hospital Child Protection Unit, Dr Terry Donald, said this at an inquest into the deaths of three babies whose post mortem X-rays indicated they had been severely abused.

Wednesday 30 November 1994

The following day The Advertiser headline was, ‘Baby Death Findings attacked again’, with the caption, ‘Dr Anthony Thomas ... more “tests” needed.’ The article said that a leading pathologist’s work (Dr Manock’s) had been criticised again, this time by three detectives and a medical specialist (Dr Thomas) at an inquest into the suspicious deaths of three babies. It said the latest evidence had forced the State Coroner to adjourn the inquest until February.

Wednesday 14 December 1994

The Major Crime running sheet notes that Medicare is to be contacted to see if any doctors had been treating the deceased. Again, one might think that this is the sort of thing that would have been investigated much earlier. In any event, it seems that this was not done. Dr Manock’s comment at the Medical Board hearing ten years later, was to the effect that he still didn’t see any need to inform himself of the deceased’s full medical history.

Thursday 15 December 1994

The Major Crime running sheet states that Dr Forbes (Anna’s General Practitioner) had no record of Anna being prescribed the medication found in her bathroom. She explained that vitamin B and C can be bought over-the-counter without prescription. It is sometimes used to relieve menstrual tension.

Wednesday 11 January 1995

Kokegei attended at the home with Yelland and Paul Rofe DPP. They ran the bath to two-thirds to three-quarters full, which they thought to be a comparable amount to that shown in the photographs. They used both hot and cold taps. It took three and a half minutes. They said that depending on the temperature, it would take between three minutes and five minutes.

Endnotes

[1] In the committal proceedings, Dr Manock stated that EMIT analysis is for general drugs of abuse and that it would not have detected analgesics such as aspirin. Transcript, committal proceedings, at p 38.

[2] Doc 6 Holden Hill Journal 557006 entered 21.3. In fact, Anna’s boss at the Law Society was Barry Fitzgerald.

Top of Page