❓ Question on Notice regarding Solicitor General's advice related to the Hancock/Rinehart family, a Royal Commission, and a police investigation into Mr. Hancock's death. The Attorney General declines to provide information, citing privilege, confidentiality, and the purview of the Coroner.
AnsweredQoN 1713Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(ii) if so, why was that recommendation not made available to the Hancock/Rinehart Family lawyers; (iii) has a copy of the Solicitor General’s advice been provided to any other party (other than Government parties, such as the Coroner) and/or to any legal firm, and in particular to - (A) Slater & Gordon, the Porteous lawyers and, if not, why not; (B) the Rinehart lawyers and, if not, why not; and (C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(iii) has a copy of the Solicitor General’s advice been provided to any other party (other than Government parties, such as the Coroner) and/or to any legal firm, and in particular to - (A) Slater & Gordon, the Porteous lawyers and, if not, why not; (B) the Rinehart lawyers and, if not, why not; and (C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(B) the Rinehart lawyers and, if not, why not; and (C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(ii) that L1 purported to be acting at the behest of a woman described by The West Australian as a ‘well-known Perth identity’; (iii) of any reason why references to this woman should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason; and (iv) of any reason why references to Mr Hancock’s death and the police report into Mr Hancock's death should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason;
(iii) of any reason why references to this woman should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason; and (iv) of any reason why references to Mr Hancock’s death and the police report into Mr Hancock's death should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason;
(iv) of any reason why references to Mr Hancock’s death and the police report into Mr Hancock's death should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason;
(d) in light of this new evidence provided to the Royal Commission, would the Attorney General agree that - (i) the details of the attempted bribe should have been included in the police report to the Coroner during his inquest into Mr Hancock's death; and (ii) given the significance of this bribery allegation, the police should have more thoroughly investigated allegations regarding the possible poisoning of Mr Hancock, including thorough testing of Mr Hancock's blood samples for the presence of harmful substances; and (e) will the Attorney General recommend to the Coroner that the nominated Trustees of the Estate of Mr Hancock be allowed to arrange thorough independent testing of Mr Hancock's blood samples for any harmful substances that may be present and, if not, why not?
(ii) given the significance of this bribery allegation, the police should have more thoroughly investigated allegations regarding the possible poisoning of Mr Hancock, including thorough testing of Mr Hancock's blood samples for the presence of harmful substances; and
(b) No. The names of all witnesses who gave evidence to the Royal Commission on 26 May 2003 have been suppressed. The Honourable member’s question involves a clear breach of section 12 of the Royal Commission (Police) Act 2002 . (c) See answer to question (b). (d) See answer to question (b) (e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(c) See answer to question (b). (d) See answer to question (b) (e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(d) See answer to question (b) (e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(iii) has a copy of the Solicitor General’s advice been provided to any other party (other than Government parties, such as the Coroner) and/or to any legal firm, and in particular to - (A) Slater & Gordon, the Porteous lawyers and, if not, why not; (B) the Rinehart lawyers and, if not, why not; and (C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(B) the Rinehart lawyers and, if not, why not; and (C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(C) the Shadow Attorney General and, if not, why not;
(ii) that L1 purported to be acting at the behest of a woman described by The West Australian as a ‘well-known Perth identity’; (iii) of any reason why references to this woman should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason; and (iv) of any reason why references to Mr Hancock’s death and the police report into Mr Hancock's death should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason;
(iii) of any reason why references to this woman should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason; and (iv) of any reason why references to Mr Hancock’s death and the police report into Mr Hancock's death should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason;
(iv) of any reason why references to Mr Hancock’s death and the police report into Mr Hancock's death should be suppressed by the Royal Commission, and if so, what is the reason;
(d) in light of this new evidence provided to the Royal Commission, would the Attorney General agree that - (i) the details of the attempted bribe should have been included in the police report to the Coroner during his inquest into Mr Hancock's death; and (ii) given the significance of this bribery allegation, the police should have more thoroughly investigated allegations regarding the possible poisoning of Mr Hancock, including thorough testing of Mr Hancock's blood samples for the presence of harmful substances; and (e) will the Attorney General recommend to the Coroner that the nominated Trustees of the Estate of Mr Hancock be allowed to arrange thorough independent testing of Mr Hancock's blood samples for any harmful substances that may be present and, if not, why not?
(ii) given the significance of this bribery allegation, the police should have more thoroughly investigated allegations regarding the possible poisoning of Mr Hancock, including thorough testing of Mr Hancock's blood samples for the presence of harmful substances; and
(b) No. The names of all witnesses who gave evidence to the Royal Commission on 26 May 2003 have been suppressed. The Honourable member’s question involves a clear breach of section 12 of the Royal Commission (Police) Act 2002 . (c) See answer to question (b). (d) See answer to question (b) (e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(c) See answer to question (b). (d) See answer to question (b) (e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(d) See answer to question (b) (e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
12 August 2003
Response time
54 days
(a) (i) No.
(ii) Not applicable.
(iii)) No. The advice is privileged and confidential.
(b) No. The names of all witnesses who gave evidence to the Royal Commission on 26 May 2003 have been suppressed. The Honourable member’s question involves a clear breach of section 12 of the
Royal Commission (Police) Act 2002
.
(c) See answer to question (b).
(d) See answer to question (b)
(e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
(ii) Not applicable.
(iii)) No. The advice is privileged and confidential.
(b) No. The names of all witnesses who gave evidence to the Royal Commission on 26 May 2003 have been suppressed. The Honourable member’s question involves a clear breach of section 12 of the
Royal Commission (Police) Act 2002
.
(c) See answer to question (b).
(d) See answer to question (b)
(e) No. This is a matter for the Coroner to determine.
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.