About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

8 Legal Service Bull. 64 (1983)
Unsatisfactory Inquest, An

handle is hein.journals/alterlj8 and id is 68 raw text is: LANFRANCHI AFFAIR office has received the unequivocal support of available will we generate informed discussion of Attorneys-General from both sides of Parliament, crime. who have firmly rejected the suggestion-still, unfor- tunately, made on occasion-that all these statistics REFERENCES are not really necessary. 1. Report of the Ombudsman, South Australia, for year ended 30 Only when detailed and reliable statistics are June 1982; Report of the RoyaI Commissioner in Relation to Prisons, South Australia, Clarkson, December 1981. The Lanfranchi affair An unsatisfactory inquest Vivian Altman In November 1981, a six person jury at the Glebe Coroner's Court in Sydney found that Warren Lan- franchi died as a result of a shot to the heart inflicted by Detective Sergeant Rogerson while endeavour- Ing to effect an arrest. They chose to omit 'in self-defence' and 'in the execution of his duty'. The jury made no specific recommendations. Several important points emerge from closer examination of this case suggesting that an inquest is a limited and inappropriate jurisdiction in which to investigate deaths Involving allegations against the police. The case remains a subject of controversy and there is continu- ing pressure on the State Government to hold a further inquiry. BACKGROUND TO THE CASE On the afternoon of 27 June 1981 Warren Lanfran- chi, who was 23 years old, was fatally injured by two shots fired by Detective Sergeant Rogerson of the Armed Hold-up Squad in Dangar Place, a narrow lane in Chippendale. Released from jail at the end of 1980, Lanfranchi became a heroin dealer. In early 1981, he met Sallie Ann Huckstepp and they started living together dur- ing February 1981 and stayed together until he was shot in June of that year. According to Huckstepp, Lanfranchi weaned her off heroin and she, Lanfran- chi and her daughter Sasha moved around Sydney spending most of their time in rented accommoda- tion and motels. Their plan was to make a large quantity of money and go overseas. During May 1981, Lanfrandhi was alleged by police to be implicated in a number of bank hold- ups. These allegations were curious in view of the fact that he was making considerable profits from heroin dealing. On 21 May 1981, Constable Ray Walker identified Lanfranchi from a photo shown to him by Detective Sergeant Graham William Frazer of the Armed Hold-up Squad as the man who had tried to murder him a week earlier in Drummoyne. Frazer asked the Observation Squad to find and watch Lanfranchi. lie was duly located and watched for two days, yet no attempt was made to arrest him. During the in- quest, the police said they made no arrest, hoping that he would lead them to accomplices. On 6 June 1981, Huckstepp said Lanfranchi was involved in a heroin rip-off from another dealer who, she said, worked for the police. The rip-off was said to be worth $37 000. On the same day the Armed Hold-up Squad asked the Criminal Intelligence Unit through Detective Denis Martin Gilligan (a member of CIU) to locate Lanfranchi. According to Huckstepp, some time after the rip- off occurred, Lanfranchi received a phone-call from a woman who convinced him that the police were after him in relation to the rip-off. He was, according to Huckstepp, very worried and they went to live quietly in a house in Neutral Bay. On 23 June, Lanfranchi approached Mr G (witness in the inquest) and, according to G, Lanfranchi told him that Det. Sgt Rogerson wanted to arrest him for ripping-off some drug offenders but that he was prepared to pay $50 000 to have the investigation dropped. If negotiations were successful, Lanfranchi woud pay G the sum of $5000. Lanfranchi asked G to contact Rogerson and to set up a meeting between himself and Rogerson. Mr G contacted Rogerson and said he was told by Rogerson that Lanfranchi was wanted for an attemp- ted murder and for some bank hold-ups, not drug crimes, but that Rogerson agreed to go along with the plan in order to arrest Lanfranchi. Mr G said Roger- son laughed at the suggestion that business could be done. It was at this meeting arranged by G that Lanfran- chi was shot dead. SOME ODD EVIDENCE Crucial parts of the evidence presented at the inquest leave difficult questions unanswered. For example, Warren Lanfranchi was shot twie. All four police present at the time agreed that tl~e timing bet-:,cen shots was no more than three seconds. Evidence given by people in the neighbourhood who hear the shots was in certain respects contrary to evidence given by the police. Four witnesses gave evidence of the timing of the shots. Two said the shots were about 11 to 12 seconds apart. A third said they were bctween five and thirty seconds apart. A fourth said two to three seconds apart in his statement, but in evidence he extended to possibly five seconds. Secondly, photos tendered in evidence showed both hands in front of Lanfranchi's head in T'he Legal Service Bulletin

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most