Magistrate Bob Harrap faces Adelaide court on corruption charges alongside SA Police prosecutor and defence lawyer
Magistrate Bob Harrap has appeared in the court he once presided over to face corruption charges, along with co-accused including a defence lawyer and a serving SA Police prosecutor.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Adelaide magistrate charged following ICAC investigation
- How to get the most out of your Advertiser digital subscription
An SA Police prosecutor and a defence lawyer have faced court alongside Magistrate Bob Harrap, accused of participating in his allegedly corrupt conduct.
On Monday, Harrap sat in the front row of the Adelaide Magistrates Court’s public gallery, having been excused from sitting in the dock.
He has yet to plead to two basic counts of deceiving another to benefit himself – charges that have also been filed against two of his co-accused.
Sergeant Abigail Rebecca Foulkes, an SA Police prosecutor, and a second woman – whose identity has been suppressed – are each charged with one count of the same offence.
Court documents allege that, on May 19 at Christie Downs, Harrap and Foulkes deceived a Courts Administration Authority staff member.
It is alleged they misrepresented who was driving Harrap’s taxpayer-issued government car when it committed a traffic offence at 6.13pm on March 24.
It is further alleged Harrap and the other woman committed a similar offence on May 22 by misrepresenting who was driving Harrap’s car at 3.36pm on April 11.
In both charges, Harrap allegedly benefited by avoiding the loss of demerit points and “a subsequent period of disqualification from driving”.
Harrap is further charged with one count each of being a public officer who abused his public office and of attempting to obstruct or pervert the course of justice.
He is jointly charged, in those allegations, with a third co-accused – lawyer Catherine Jayne Moyse.
It is alleged that both offences happened between May 10 and May 29 and involved the court case of a person named Hamish Nicholas James.
Harrap, who faces between four and 10 years in prison if convicted, was charged after an ICAC investigation.
SA’s Chief Magistrate, Judge Mary-Louise Hribal, directed him to take leave after the charges were filed.
On Monday, Harrap – who is on bail – and Moyse – who is not – attended court in person.
Foulkes and the other woman, who are not on bail agreements, were excused from attending.
District Court Judge Stephen McEwen – who was specially appointed to hear the case – permitted them to sit in the public gallery rather than in the dock.
Peter Longson, prosecuting, asked the case be adjourned for “a quite limited period” as discussions continued between legal counsel.
David Edwardson QC, for Harrap, asked his client’s home address be suppressed from publication – counsel for his co-accused made the same request.
Claire O’Connor SC, for the third woman, asked any publication of details pertaining to her client’s identity be banned for 72 hours, pending a full suppression order hearing.
“My client is very unwell at the moment, and we have a medical certificate saying she’s not fit to attend court today,” she said.
She asked the woman also be excused from signing any form of bail agreement until the suppression is determined and her health is ascertained.
Judge McEwen suppressed the group’s addresses and remanded them to appear again in three weeks’ time.
He granted Ms O’Connor’s application for a 72-hour suppression, saying he would hear further argument on Wednesday.
Outside court, an SA Police spokeswoman declined to answer questions regarding Foulkes’ current status within the department.
“SAPOL are not the authority involved in this matter and as such cannot provide any further detail,” she said.
However, in a subsequent email statement, the department confirmed Foulkes was “a current serving police officer” facing “criminal charges that were not laid by SAPOL”.
“That police officer has been placed on restricted administrative duties. SAPOL cannot provide any further information on this matter,” it said.