Great read:
Immunity must serve justice in the Matthew Leveson case
by Nicholas Cowdery, a former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions
'The inquest into the disappearance of Matthew Leveson is occupying the attention of the media and the community. It has raised some important issues for the justice system in NSW as well.
We know Leveson disappeared in September 2007 having last been recorded in the company of his lover, Michael Atkins. Atkins has been tried and acquitted of his murder or manslaughter.
Atkins could be retried only if "fresh and compelling" evidence came to light and both the Director of Public Prosecutions (or the Attorney-General) and the Court of Criminal Appeal considered it appropriate for a retrial to occur.'
'At the inquest Atkins denied any knowledge of Leveson's whereabouts or involvement in his disappearance. The coroner, under section 61 of the Coroners Act, required Atkins to answer questions and granted a certificate that any answers could not be given in evidence in proceedings against him (except for perjury if the answers so given proved to be false). It is reported that Atkins has given evidence of Matthew's burial site in the Royal National Park and police are searching.
It is reported also that Attorney-General Gabrielle Upton has given a further conditional immunity to Atkins over prosecution for perjury in relation to any previous false evidence that he has given to the inquest (presumably his denials).'
'The conditions apparently include directing police to the body and the body being found. This is unprecedented and connects in some ways with recent suggestions that any convicted killer who has not disclosed the whereabouts of the body (even if he or she has denied involvement in the death) should not be eligible for release on parole. [...]'
