A parliamentary question seeks clarification on protocols for reviewing video evidence in court cases, specifically regarding the case of Penelope Jane Challice. The Attorney General clarifies the DPP's role and responsibilities.

AnsweredQoN 4816Legislative Assembly
Asked
15 March 2011
Portfolio
Attorney General

QuestionView source ↗

(1) What protocols exist between the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and Western Australia Police, where video evidence exists, to review that evidence before a matter is dealt with in court?
(2) Please advise, in the case of Penelope Jane Challice charged with assaulting a public officer:
(a) whether the tape in that case was reviewed by DPP personnel prior to the matter going to court; and
(i) if not, why not; and
(b) whether any submissions received from solicitors for Ms Challice to discontinue the matter were considered by DPP personnel?

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
5 April 2011
Response time
21 days
(1)When the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has conduct of a prosecution the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) lawyer reviews all exhibits including video evidence prior to the trial. That review is undertaken as part of normal preparation and is not subject to any protocol.
(2) (a) The prosecution of Penelope Jane Challice was conducted by the Western Australian Police. The DPP had no involvement with the prosecution at any time.
(i) Not applicable
(b)Not applicable
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more