Henry Keogh originally demanded $6.5m in compensation — but Crown Solicitor rejected claim

AFTER his murder conviction was overturned, Henry Keogh demanded far more than the $2.5 million he was ultimately awarded by the Marshall Government — but the Crown initially asserted he was not entitled to any payout.

• March 1994: Death of Anna-Jane Cheney results in murder charge
• December 2014: Keogh’s conviction overturned by Full Court
• November 2015: Plans for murder retrial abandoned by DPP
• July 2018: Keogh receives taxpayer-funded payout of $2.57m

HENRY Keogh initially sought $6.5 million in compensation from the State Government after his murder conviction was overturned but his claim was rejected, it has been revealed.

A letter of demand from Mr Keogh’s lawyers to former Attorney-General John Rau reveals the proposed ex gratia payment — finally agreed at $2.57 million by the new government after the state election — was to avoid court proceedings.

It can now be revealed the initial request, made via letter on May 31 last year, was rejected by the Crown Solicitor’s Office after its independent legal advice found the state was not at risk.

The letter from the CSO, written on December 1 last year, asks Mr Keogh’s lawyers to detail any “facts or circumstances’’ upon which they would rely to establish a claim.

Henry Keogh was eventually awarded $2.57 million in compensation from the State Government. Picture: Bianca De Marchi

It states Mr Rau had noted “your letter foreshadows possible litigation, but you have not identified the cause or causes of action, or the facts and circumstances, upon which Mr Keogh would rely to establish an enforceable claim’’.

“The lawyer has been unable to identify any cause of action to which your client might successfully resort, but in order to ensure that nothing has been overlooked, he has instructed me to invite you to provide details of the cause or causes of action under consideration by Mr Keogh and the associated facts and circumstances upon which he would rely to establish any claim.’’

KEOGH’S LETTER OF CLAIM

Despite the request, no further details of Mr Keogh’s claim were provided and in April, following the March election, negotiations recommenced to settle the claim.

On one ministerial minute to Treasurer Rob Lucas on the settlement approval, the matter is marked “urgent — a decision is required before 31/05/2018’’.

Mr Lucas has written on the minute “whose decision is this? Treasurer or AG?’’

The communications have been provided to a parliamentary inquiry scrutinising the $2.57 million payout to Mr Keogh.

Opposition government accountability spokesman Tom Koutsantonis said the revelations in the CSO letter were “stunning.’’

THE CROWN SOLICITOR’S RESPONSE

“It is now clear the state did not have to pay Mr Keogh, that it had no liability,’’ he said.

“The CSO had written to Mr Keogh’s lawyers, based on its legal advice, and asked them to outline the basis on which they feel the state is liable and there was no response.

“And yet in May negotiations that result in the $2.57 million payout suddenly occur without any explanation.’’

Mr Koutsantonis said as a result of the communications being revealed, it was likely several witnesses who gave evidence at a parliamentary inquiry into the payout last week may be recalled.

The inquiry last week heard the major crime investigation into Ms Cheney’s death remained open and that Keogh remained the only suspect in the case.

Lawyer Anna-Jane Cheney was found dead in her bath in 1994.

Henry Keogh served 21 years in jail for Ms Cheney’s murder but his conviction was overturned in 2014.

The inquiry was launched after revelations in The Advertiser the $2.57 million payout to Mr Keogh was made without a formulated claim from his lawyers and a government-commissioned legal opinion found taxpayers were not at serious risk from any civil action.

Mr Keogh was released from prison in December 2014 after serving two decades behind bars following his conviction for drowning Anna-Jane Cheney in her bath in 1994.

His conviction was quashed in 2014 because of flawed forensic evidence presented by pathologist Dr Colin Manock and a retrial ordered, but Director of Public Prosecutions Adam Kimber QC subsequently dropped the murder charge because Dr Manock was too ill to testify.

Mr Keogh’s six-page letter of demand details the steps taken by Mr Keogh’s legal team since his conviction for murdering Ms Cheney in 1994.

The letter, written by Mr Keogh’s current lawyer Frank Barbaro on May 31 last year, proposes the state make an ex-gratia payment to “acknowledge the hardship endured by Mr Keogh as a result of the state’s actions”.

The letter states it is “clearly’’ in the state’s interest to avoid further litigation which would raise a range of issues including Dr Manock’s limited formal qualifications and the state’s knowledge of criticism of his work prior to Mr Keogh’s 1995 trial, the presentation of evidence at his trial and the nondisclosure of a crucial report for almost a decade.

Attorney-General Vickie Chapman said the government made the ex-gratia payment to Mr Keogh after receiving independent legal advice.

“That advice was presented to the government after the March state election,’’ she said.

“If Mr Koutsantonis is so aggrieved that money was paid to Mr Keogh, why did he approve $250,000 ongoing legal and defence costs as Treasurer, and further funding in this matter when he could have simply advised Mr Keogh’s lawyers that they would get nothing?

“Mr Koutsantonis’s feigned outrage is disingenuous and does not accord with the facts.”