❓ The Attorney General advises the house that the Director of Public Prosecutions has recommended charges against former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission, Ms Moira Rayner, for corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
AnsweredQoN 594Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Will the Attorney General advise the house whether the Director of Public Prosecutions has made any decision yet about former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission, Ms Moira Rayner? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
I advise the house that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Robert Cock, QC, has finalised his consideration of the evidence supporting the prosecution case against Ms Moira Rayner, the former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission. On 11 October 2005 investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service provided the DPP with a brief of evidence. The DPP has today advised me that he has come to the view that on the basis of the facts disclosed by the investigation, a prima facie case can be established for a breach of sections 83(a) and 143 of the Criminal Code for the offences of corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice respectively. Of significance are new materials that the parliamentary inspector, Malcolm McCusker, QC, referred to the DPP on 1 September. These materials relate to a conversation recorded by a listening device installed at the hospice at which Mr Marquet was residing. In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied : I advise the house that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Robert Cock, QC, has finalised his consideration of the evidence supporting the prosecution case against Ms Moira Rayner, the former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission. On 11 October 2005 investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service provided the DPP with a brief of evidence. The DPP has today advised me that he has come to the view that on the basis of the facts disclosed by the investigation, a prima facie case can be established for a breach of sections 83(a) and 143 of the Criminal Code for the offences of corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice respectively. Of significance are new materials that the parliamentary inspector, Malcolm McCusker, QC, referred to the DPP on 1 September. These materials relate to a conversation recorded by a listening device installed at the hospice at which Mr Marquet was residing. In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
I advise the house that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Robert Cock, QC, has finalised his consideration of the evidence supporting the prosecution case against Ms Moira Rayner, the former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission. On 11 October 2005 investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service provided the DPP with a brief of evidence. The DPP has today advised me that he has come to the view that on the basis of the facts disclosed by the investigation, a prima facie case can be established for a breach of sections 83(a) and 143 of the Criminal Code for the offences of corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice respectively. Of significance are new materials that the parliamentary inspector, Malcolm McCusker, QC, referred to the DPP on 1 September. These materials relate to a conversation recorded by a listening device installed at the hospice at which Mr Marquet was residing. In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied : I advise the house that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Robert Cock, QC, has finalised his consideration of the evidence supporting the prosecution case against Ms Moira Rayner, the former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission. On 11 October 2005 investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service provided the DPP with a brief of evidence. The DPP has today advised me that he has come to the view that on the basis of the facts disclosed by the investigation, a prima facie case can be established for a breach of sections 83(a) and 143 of the Criminal Code for the offences of corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice respectively. Of significance are new materials that the parliamentary inspector, Malcolm McCusker, QC, referred to the DPP on 1 September. These materials relate to a conversation recorded by a listening device installed at the hospice at which Mr Marquet was residing. In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
I advise the house that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Robert Cock, QC, has finalised his consideration of the evidence supporting the prosecution case against Ms Moira Rayner, the former Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission. On 11 October 2005 investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service provided the DPP with a brief of evidence. The DPP has today advised me that he has come to the view that on the basis of the facts disclosed by the investigation, a prima facie case can be established for a breach of sections 83(a) and 143 of the Criminal Code for the offences of corruption and attempting to pervert the course of justice respectively. Of significance are new materials that the parliamentary inspector, Malcolm McCusker, QC, referred to the DPP on 1 September. These materials relate to a conversation recorded by a listening device installed at the hospice at which Mr Marquet was residing. In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
In coming to this decision, the DPP has advised that he considers it in the public interest to institute such proceedings. Accordingly, Mr Cock has written to investigating officers of the Western Australia Police Service recommending that Ms Rayner be charged. In order to face these charges, the DPP has authorised the extradition of Ms Rayner, pursuant to the commonwealth Service and Execution of Process Act 1992. I understand that Ms Rayner will be charged today as follows: first, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner, being a public officer, without lawful authority or excuse, acted upon knowledge and information obtained by reason of her office so as to gain a benefit for Laurence Bernhard Marquet, contrary to section 83(a) of the Criminal Code; and, secondly, between 1 and 17 August 2005 at Perth, Moira Emilie Rayner attempted to obstruct the course of justice, contrary to section 143 of the Criminal Code. Both offences are punishable by a prison term of up to seven years. I am advised that police have spoken to Ms Rayner’s lawyers this morning and are in the process of arranging her appearance at the Perth Magistrates Court on 3 November 2005. As Ms Rayner’s case is now a matter for the courts to decide, I do not intend to make any further public comment on this issue.
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.