❓ Ms Walker asks the Attorney General to refer specific claims and discrepancies related to the Mickelberg case to the Royal Commission. The Attorney General confirms referral and cites legal advice supporting the Commission's ability to investigate, while also presenting a contrasting viewpoint from an individual close to the Mickelbergs.
AnsweredQoN 1078Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Attorney General to the sworn affidavit of Anthony Lewandowski regarding the July 1982 interview of Peter Mickelberg at the Belmont CIB office and the Attorney General’s announcement on Monday that the affidavit would be referred to the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers. Will the Attorney General also refer the following to the police royal commission - (1) Peter Mickelberg’s claim that he complained to then Detective Sergeant Kucera that he had been beaten but was ignored? (2) The apparent discrepancy between Assistant Commissioner Kucera’s evidence in 1998 that he saw notes being taken in the interview, and Lewandowski’s sworn affidavit that these notes were fabricated two months later. Mr McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
(1) Peter Mickelberg’s claim that he complained to then Detective Sergeant Kucera that he had been beaten but was ignored? (2) The apparent discrepancy between Assistant Commissioner Kucera’s evidence in 1998 that he saw notes being taken in the interview, and Lewandowski’s sworn affidavit that these notes were fabricated two months later. Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
(2) The apparent discrepancy between Assistant Commissioner Kucera’s evidence in 1998 that he saw notes being taken in the interview, and Lewandowski’s sworn affidavit that these notes were fabricated two months later. Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
(1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit.
(1) Peter Mickelberg’s claim that he complained to then Detective Sergeant Kucera that he had been beaten but was ignored? (2) The apparent discrepancy between Assistant Commissioner Kucera’s evidence in 1998 that he saw notes being taken in the interview, and Lewandowski’s sworn affidavit that these notes were fabricated two months later. Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
(2) The apparent discrepancy between Assistant Commissioner Kucera’s evidence in 1998 that he saw notes being taken in the interview, and Lewandowski’s sworn affidavit that these notes were fabricated two months later. Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
Mr McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
(1)-(2) I was made aware of the affidavit on Thursday of last week and saw it for the first time that night when I returned from a visit to the Manjimup-Bridgetown region. My immediate response was that it needed to be put into the hands of the police royal commission, which was done on Friday. The matter was referred to the royal commission at the earliest available opportunity. I also sought advice from the Solicitor General about the terms of reference of the royal commission. His advice to me, which I put into the letter that I sent with the affidavit to the royal commission on Friday, was that given that a former police officer had perjured himself during the period covered by the terms of reference of the royal commission - post 1985 - that would enable the royal commission to investigate all matters that were related to but preceded that act of perjury, which is an act of corruption by a police officer in this State. The advice that I received from the Solicitor General and relayed to the royal commission is that the royal commission can consider matters related to the Mickelberg stitch or the Perth Mint swindle. That would include - unless the royal commission comes to a different conclusion - all matters related to those events in 1982. If the royal commissioner, Geoffrey Kennedy, has a different view or reservations about the terms of reference, I would recommend to Cabinet that the terms of reference be extended to ensure that no impediment is placed in the way of a proper investigation of these matters by the royal commission. To put all of this in context, the one person in Western Australia who is arguably closer to the Mickelbergs than anyone else is Mr Avon Lovell. I will quote from today’s transcript of the John McNamara program on ABC radio at 9.39 am when Mr Lovell said the following - I find it very unfair to Bob Kucera. Bob’s involvement, if any, was so peripheral as to be, you know, uninteresting. He was at Belmont when Hancock and Lewandowski turned up there. He said a few words about some other case, a bit about the men, then he went off. He came back about two-and-a-half hours later. He basically saw Peter there, he basically said can I go get you a hamburger and then he went out. Now that is the extent. Already we have someone very close to the Mickelbergs saying that Bob Kucera’s account, where it is at odds with Peter Mickelberg’s about whether Bob Kucera ever went into the room in the first place, is to be preferred over that of Peter Mickelberg in respect of one of the two inconsistencies that I spoke about before. This is Avon Lovell, the author of The Mickelberg Stitch and a close ally the Mickelbergs. It continues - . Now to try and blow this into some political thing that Bob Kucera’s future and career is . . .(inaudible). . . I mean, it really . . . I’m quite appalled by that. My knowledge of Bob Kucera, he’s one of the best police officers out of a lot where I didn’t have respect for a lot of others. I recall that he was, I think, one of the first trained negotiators for hostage situations, and I think he was pivotal in quietening down the Fremantle Prison riot. And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit. Mr Lovell then went on and concluded on this following note - Every piece of conduct that he’s been involved in, to my knowledge, has been honourable. Every piece of conduct of Hancock was corrupt and dishonourable. I think that says it all.
And I just . . . I’m not an anti-police person going out for every coppa that’s there, Kucera is one of the good ones. I mean, leave him alone. I mean, go after who leaked this document because they’re putting people’s lives at risk. Go out for other cases around town, you know, the . . . (inaudible) . . . but Kucera, I mean, that’s just political bullshit.
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.