❓ Hon Peter Foss questions the Attorney General regarding advice received from the Solicitor General about Mr. Kucera's evidence in relation to the Mickelberg trial and subsequent appeals, and the handling of potential miscarriages of justice.
AnsweredQoN 212Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Attorney General’s statement in the other place that - I have said that the Solicitor General drew my attention to the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal . . . and said that the evidence of Mr Kucera . . . would become an issue about which people would comment; that is the point to which he drew my attention. (1) When did the Attorney General previously say he was advised by the Solicitor General not only about Mr Kucera’s evidence but also that such evidence would become an issue? (2) When the Solicitor General advised the Attorney General that the evidence would become an issue, did he say what issue would arise? (3) Did the Solicitor General advise the Attorney General that the evidence might become an issue in the Court of Criminal Appeal? (4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(2) When the Solicitor General advised the Attorney General that the evidence would become an issue, did he say what issue would arise? (3) Did the Solicitor General advise the Attorney General that the evidence might become an issue in the Court of Criminal Appeal? (4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(3) Did the Solicitor General advise the Attorney General that the evidence might become an issue in the Court of Criminal Appeal? (4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(2) When the Solicitor General advised the Attorney General that the evidence would become an issue, did he say what issue would arise? (3) Did the Solicitor General advise the Attorney General that the evidence might become an issue in the Court of Criminal Appeal? (4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(3) Did the Solicitor General advise the Attorney General that the evidence might become an issue in the Court of Criminal Appeal? (4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(4) Was the possibility of Mr Kucera’s evidence becoming an issue the reason the Attorney General spent so much time reading the transcript and other documents relating to the Mickelberg trial and appeals? (5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(5) After finding out about a miscarriage of justice, is it normal for an Attorney General to spend so much time - four days - reading about the matter and discussing it with the Premier? (6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(6) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? (7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(7) Does the Attorney General usually discuss the possible granting of a right to appeal with a person who was a witness at the previous appeal? (8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(8) Did he do the same for the Mallard appeal; if so, what did he do? Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. The Attorney General has provided the following response - (1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(1) During the weeks following the release of the contents of the affidavit. (2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(2) Yes. (3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(3) No. (4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(4) No. (5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(5) Yes. (6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(6) Yes, if reading and discussing relevant material. (7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(7) If relevant. (8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
(8) No, it was not a relevant way to proceed in that case.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.