SA police commissioner says it’s an ‘understatement’ to label Henry Keogh a ‘person of interest’ in investigation of death of Anna-Jane Cheney
IT’S an “understatement” to label wrongly convicted Henry Keogh a ‘person of interest’ in the investigation into the death of his fiancee Anna-Jane Cheney, Police Commissioner Grant Stevens has told a parliamentary committee.
- Wrongfully convicted of murder, Henry Keogh breaks silence
- State didn’t face any legal risk from Henry Keogh, former AG says
- Keogh’s lawyers want their $1.85m fees paid
- Auditor-General asked to investigate Keogh payout
IT’S an “understatement” to label wrongly-convicted Henry Keogh a ‘person of interest’ in the investigation into the death of his fiancee Anna-Jane Cheney, Police Commissioner Grant Stevens has told a parliamentary committee.
Mr Stevens told the hearing that the investigation into Ms Cheney’s 1994 death remained “open” — and that he had not been consulted before a $2.57 million compensation payment to Mr Keogh was made.
“To use the phrase ‘person of interest’ probably creates the wrong impression — that we’re looking for more material that would result in a charge,” he said.
“The fact is, Henry Keogh has been charged. From that point of view, it’s an understatement to describe him as a person of interest.”
Ms Cheney was found drowned in the bath in 1994. Mr Keogh was found guilty of the murder in 1995, but his conviction was overturned in 2014 after the Court of Criminal Appeal ruled the jury had been misled by forensic evidence.
Crown prosecutors opted not to retry Mr Keogh in November 2015.
Mr Stevens said police revived the investigation after Mr Keogh’s conviction was overturned, going over all the evidence, re-interviewing witnesses and examining new material.
He said three officers were assigned to the case, but had stopped work when the Director of Public Prosecutions decided against retrying Mr Keogh.
Mr Stevens also told the parliamentary inquiry the force wasn’t asked for and didn’t provide any advice or opinions in relation to the ex-gratia payment.
The state Opposition said evidence given to the committee by a range of bureaucrats including Department of Corrections chief executive David Brown and Crown Solicitor Michael Wait, raised “many more questions than it’s answered”.
Labor legal affairs spokesman Kyam Maher said the Government had yet to thoroughly explain why the payment was made to Mr Keogh.
“What was the proper basis for over $2.5 million of taxpayers’ money being paid to someone who police say remains the only person of interest in an open murder investigation,” he said.
“The Attorney-General has to come out and clarify what’s happened here, why was this money paid, who made the decision, why was it this amount, what was the risk to the taxpayers? There are many, many questions still to be answered.”
Mr Keogh’s partner Faye Hambour said he would have been retried if there was valid evidence that he had murdered Ms Cheney.
“If there had been (evidence), the DPP would have prosecuted Henry Keogh for the third time and clearly he and others made the decision not to do that,” she said.
“And now we’re back to cherry picking again and I think that’s sad.”
Asked how Mr Keogh was coping with the scrutiny, Ms Hambour said her partner was “incredibly resilient”.
“I think he’s had way too many years to practice being stoic and managing his expectations, managing his emotions. I think he does an amazing job of that,” she said.
— with AAP