The Snitch: Rapist Simon Monteiro’s bid to unmask secret witnesses
How did a court react to a rapist’s attempt to unmask the witnesses dobbing him in? Who’s involved in the intriguing Sydney crime being investigated by the Crime Commission? And what’s the latest in a defamation war between two leading lawyers? The Snitch is here.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Notorious rapist Simon Monteiro launched a bold legal bid to uncover the identities of people who had been secretly giving information to the authorities about him.
Monteiro, who served more than 10 years in jail for a horrific rape and became known as “The Playboy Rapist” thanks to his claimed links to high society, was slapped with an extended supervision order in an attempt to keep him on a tight leash when he was released.
Unsurprisingly, Monteiro has been fighting the imposition of the ESO in the NSW Supreme Court ever since.
In a recent skirmish, lawyers for the state provided documents to the court that included heavily redacted statements from secret informants who had given information about Monteiro’s behaviour, in support of why he needs to be continually monitored.
For their protection, the identities and nature of the statements were largely redacted.
Monteiro launched an argument in his case that he should be given access to the unredacted versions of the statements.
Common sense prevailed on Friday when Justice Peter Garling denied the access.
“The revelation of this material would be likely to diminish co-operation by individuals, including members of the public, with Community Corrections,” Justice Garling told the court.
CRIME COMMISSION
If it wasn’t going to blow up a legal landmine, we would tell you so much more about how the NSW Crime Commission has been called in to investigate one of the state’s most intriguing mysteries.
It is illegal to reveal the goings on at the mysterious Kent St crime-fighting agency, so we can’t tell you the finer details about the investigation that revolves around one famous person, at least one law firm, several other intriguing locations and a genius level of deception.
According to our sources, a major financial services organisation has been called in to the Crime Commission to explain why their firm was used in the transactions.
There have been no criminal charges and we’re told the Crime Commission has been called in to use its powers (it is illegal to lie to their investigators) to force people to talk.
Can you guess who, or what, we’re talking about?
HOUDA VS BURROWS
Warring high-profile lawyers Zali Burrows and Adam Houda were given the hurry-up this week as their defamation battle lurched into its fifth year.
Ms Burrows is suing Mr Houda over a series of social media posts that happened so long ago that the platform was still known as Twitter.
But try as the District Court might, not much has happened since the case was launched in 2020.
This week, the court heard Ms Burrows had been delayed in certain aspects of the case because her barrister had died and other health issues had gotten in the way.
Judge Gibson also dismissed her application to move the case to a different court, and deferred Ms Houda’s application to have the matter struck out.
She also ordered Mr Houda to file his amended defence by April 24, but only after Ms Burrows filed certain documents and evidence in support of her case.
The matter is back in the District Court on July 31.
PAW AND ORDER
An emotional support dog took its job to the next level in Bankstown Local Court this week, we’re told.
The labrador was being used to help a witness in an assault case as she was being cross-examined by a defence lawyer.
Clearly identifying the lawyer as the enemy of the witness he was duty-bound to protect, our labrador barked at the defence lawyer every time they asked a question.
“It went on for about 90 minutes,” the lawyer told us.
Good boy.
Got a Snitch? Email brenden.hills@news.com