Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story

by Robin Bowles

Don't fool yourself that the innocent never go to jail. When Bob Chappell disappeared from his yacht, moored in the Derwent Estuary near the Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania's marina, on the night of 26 January 2009, he left behind his pipe and tobacco ― something that his partner of 18 years, Sue Neill-Fraser, knew he would never willingly do. What she didn't know was that despite no body, no weapon, no cause of death, and no witnesses, she would soon become the only suspect in Chappell’s disappearance. In their haste to wrap up the case, the police charged Neill-Fraser with murder. In her eagerness to assist police, she virtually talked her way into their hands. And after a lengthy trial that resulted in a guilty verdict, the judge delivered Neill-Fraser a crushing 26-year sentence. But was the verdict unsafe? Many of Australia’s leading legal minds think so, and other reasonable hypotheses have been mooted about what might have happened on the Derwent that night. The Tasmanian government has changed its laws to give Neill-Fraser one last crack at proving her innocence, because that is what it's come to now ― proving her innocence. The result of years of investigation, and based on extensive interviews with all the key players ― including Sue Neill-Fraser and her family, local underworld figures, and legal luminaries ― Death on the Derwent is a riveting story of justice not served.

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction, Audiobook, Crime, Law, Australia, Mystery

384 pages, Paperback

First published February 19, 2019

Reviews

[Amanda - Mrs B's Book Reviews · Rating 3 out of 5]

*https://mrsbbookreviews.wordpress.com

3.5 stars

Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story is the thirteenth true crime title from Robin Bowles, an Australian author with over twenty years experience in investigative journalism. In her latest true crime novel, Bowles presents the reader with a wealth of information and facts pertaining to the baffling murder mystery of Bob Chappell. When Bob disappeared from his yacht, his partner Sue was the only suspect in this perplexing case. Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story attempts to expand upon this long standing Australian murder mystery.

For those who are not aware of the details of the case that defines Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story, it relates to the unexplained death of Bob Chappell, a man who vanished from his yacht in the Derwent Estuary. This crime, which happened on the night of 26th January in the year 2009, has remained largely unexplained since it occurred. With very personal items belonging to the victim remaining on the scene despite Bob’s disappearance, there are many inconsistencies and odd aspects to this case. With a lack of clear evidence in the police investigation, including no body or weapons, the only option was to charge Bob’s partner Sue for the crime. Police were pressed to find a culprit for this crime and as a result, Sue was charged. The subsequent trial resulted in Sue’s incarceration for the length of twenty six years for Bob’s murder. However, there is a cast of doubt over Sue’s case and her involvement in Bob’s death. As this book details, there is an opportunity for Sue to prove her innocence and to be exonerated from this crime. Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story is a thorough and informative text, that delves deep into in the heart of this investigation, the trial and key figures in the case. In addition this text offers a critical examination into possible injustice.

Australian true crime stories always gain my full and undivided attention. In the case of Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story, this Tasmanian based true crime story pulled me in from the start. From the beginning I wasn’t sure at all about this case and despite my careful and objective read of this title, I still feel very unsure about the Bob Chappell murder. This isn’t a clear cut case, which is revealed as the book progresses.

Over the course of three parts, ‘The Disappearance’, ‘Trial by Jury’ and ‘The Unravelling’, Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story covers a lot of ground in thirty chapters. An Introduction, Prologue, Acknowledgements and a Cast of Main Characters rounds off this true crime text. Bowles includes personal statements, professional opinions on the case, diary excerpts of the accused, detective notes, judge rulings, court decisions, appeal bench statements, law judgements, high court decisions, newspaper article extracts, court acts, play reviews, transcript recordings, case notes and personal letters. These all help build the case, providing a comprehensive insight into this problematic true crime case. An accompanying mid book spread of eight pages of photographs, gives the reader a visual sense of the case at hand. At times I felt the book was very heavy and there was an information overload.

There is no doubt that Robin Bowles is a skilled and highly passionate true crime writer. I have read her work before and I was impressed by her dedication and fieldwork. Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story is no exception, Bowles approaches this case with relentless and determined manner. Bowles is aware of the setbacks of this particular case and the sense of injustice that pervades Sue Neill’s conviction. Bowles dogged quest for the truth and her hope that Sue’s case will be reviewed and eventually overturned is what drives this text forward. I really do hope that this book will work to remind the general public of difficult cases such as Bob Chappell’s disappearance and subsequent murder, where a miscarriage of justice has most probably occurred.

Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story is an impassioned and informative presentation of a tragic crime that has continued to perplex many Australians, including those in the law system and those who are not. Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story is a staple read for true crime enthusiasts.

*Thanks extended to Scribe for providing a free copy of this book for review purposes.

Death on the Derwent: Sue Neill-Fraser’s story is book #82 of the 2020 Australian Women Writers Challenge

[Tracey Allen at Carpe Librum · Rating 3 out of 5]

On 26 January 2009, Bob Chappell went missing from his yacht Four Winds and was never seen again. Bob Chappell had been with his partner Sue Neill-Fraser for 18 years at the time of his disappearance and their yacht was moored near the Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania marina in Hobart. Neill-Fraser was eager to help Police and gave several statements, each varying a little on the details. With nothing else to go on, Police became convinced she had harmed Bob and charged her with murder.

The trial was held in 2010 after which Neill-Fraser was found guilty and sentenced to 26 years with a non-parole period of 18 years. (As an aside, I can't understand how Borce Ristevski can receive a sentence of 9 years with a minimum of 6 - since increased to 13 years with a minimum of 10 - after pleading guilty to his wife's murder while Neill-Fraser is sentenced to 26 years!)

The court case was widely reported at the time and many - including the defendant's family and friends - believed she was not guilty of the crime.

Australian author Robin Bowles draws on her experience and connections in Tasmania to give the reader an in depth look at all the ins and outs of the crime, the investigation, the court case and more in Death on the Derwent - Sue Neill-Fraser's story. Since reading and reviewing Into the Darkness: The Mysterious Death of Phoebe Handsjuk in March 2017 Bowles' writing style has improved in that she no longer inserts herself into the content presented.

Before picking up Death on the Derwent I believed Sue Neill-Fraser was innocent. My opinion hasn't changed but at least now I'm more informed. I was very moved by a 60 Minutes interview with Meaghan Vass in March 2019 which has significant bearing on this case. Vass was one of the witnesses in the court case and she told 60 Minutes her friends murdered Bob aboard the Four Winds in January 2009 and disposed of his body.

This recorded admission essentially exonerates Neill-Fraser but Police decided not to take any further action. Whaaat? Furthermore, it's a shame this interview was aired after the publication of Death on the Derwent as I'm almost certain Bowles would like to have included this key information.

However the bigger question is, how is Neill-Fraser still in jail after this 'confession' from Vass? It's astounding. And if we believe Vass, it follows that the killer is still walking around! Bowles attempts to explain the injustice and the inner workings of Tasmanian legal politics however it only served to make my blood boil.

Overall, there was an abundance of information presented here that exceeded my level of interest in the case, but the end result is a comprehensive account. I hope Neill-Fraser receives justice some day soon.

Recommended for readers of true crime and those interested in the law.

* Won in a Scribe Publications giveaway hosted by Australian Writers' Centre *

[Sharah McConville · Rating 4 out of 5]

Death on the Derwent is an investigation into the disappearance of Bob Chappell on Australia Day 2009. He was last seen on his yacht, Four Winds, moored in the marina at Hobart's Royal Yacht Club. His partner of 18 years, Sue Neill-Fraser, is currently serving a 23 year jail sentence for his murder, even though she may be innocent. I don't remember ever hearing about this crime so I found the details interesting, however some of the legal information got a bit repetitive. At this stage there is still no conclusion to this case. Thanks to Scribe for my paperback copy.

[Cesare Borgia · Rating 1 out of 5]

I make a strong recommendation to any prospective readers of Death on the Derwent to read Murder by the Prosecution by Andrew Urban instead (9781925642537). Andrew Urban has the courtesy to acknowledge his story is repetitive, he has wider canvas and most importantly he arrives at a justified supported meaningful conclusion.

No one has acknowledged seeing Robert Chappell and his body has not been recovered since he was last seen by his partner, Susan Neill-Fraser, on 26 January 2009. Robin Bowles alleges in Chapter 30 that what probably happened on that night is that three young people approached the yacht Four Winds in a dingy and that once onboard two males had an altercation with Bob Chappell forcing him into the cabin.

Coincidentally at the time I write this comment, although the only knowledge I have of this case is what I have read in two books and in the ABC News last week, a judge has granted leave to appeal the murder conviction on the basis of this scenario. However Robin Bowles’ narrative is so interminably long, rambling and incoherent that it is fortunate that Sue Neill-Fraser has a large support group actively advocating for her acquittal and release from incarceration since 15 October 2010. From my perspective this case appears to have sailed under the radar of the Australian media in comparison to Lindy Chamberlain but Sue has already been in jail three times as long as Lindy was.

Investigating officers formed a poor impression of Sue, apparently the sort of person who abhors silence and talks whether she has the first clue or not, who initially lied about her movements on that Australia Day afternoon in an attempt to protect a vulnerable relative from interrogation. The Tasmanian Police, despite the fact that they knew that theft and sale of property from yachts on Derwent River was commonplace at that time, appear to have taken the statistically probable convenient option.

This is not surprising as Hobart, which had a population in 2010 of approximately 200000, is the sort of backwater where you would not expect to find the brightest candles on the cake. Further Hobart has an incestuous cabal of Establishment families who have a long precedent of dictating business, political and legal career advancement. Sue’s barrister in the original trial, David Gunson SC, was very good friends with the prosecution, Tim Ellis QC, and may not have defended her as vigorously as he should have despite the prosecution’s very weak case.

Sue Neill Fraser, who has already had multiple appeals, still has a tortuous legal process ahead which might culminate in a retrial. This tortuous legal process is heavily dependent on whether the testimony of the third person in the dinghy constitutes fresh and compelling evidence. Sue may ultimately remain in jail for another decade because the police, Tom Percy, Daryl Coates SC, Judge Blow and Judge Michael Brett were either too lazy, inept, invested in their own self-interest or insensitive in previous questioning of this witness, who is either a pathological liar or feels vulnerable to retaliation.

I do not feel grateful to Robin Bowles for diverting my attention and holding me in suspense whilst I skim read in pursuit of the truth through the tribulations of this travesty of justice. Even if you intended your rambling and incoherent narrative as a metaphor for the antiquated procedures of Australia’s adversarial legal system I still do not feel grateful.

The Australian legal system and Tasmanian Police are estimated to have spent $120 million to date on this persecution of an innocent grandmother because to concede defeat would unravel a litany of investigative failings, misconduct issues and police interference with defence witnesses. To acquit Sue would require the Tasmanian Government to make an abject apology and to pay compensation. The Australian community is already suffering from fatigue from seven Royal Commissions in recent years. But I do not believe that this travesty of justice or even the other seventy known wrongful convictions in Australia since 1922 will be sufficient to force the Australian legal system to conduct a Royal Commission into the legal system itself with the risk that the legal profession may be forced to relinquish the sanctity of their focus on maximising their incomes.

I appeal to the author and publisher if you insist on profiteering from and wasting trees on a revised edition of this book updated after the retrial please advance the material in Chapter 30, particularly if it is confirmed as the actual events in the retrial, and insert it after the opening act ends in Chapter 2. With this small effort you may go some way towards salvaging what little value this book has so that future readers understand the actual events whether they persevere to the end or give up on your rambling incoherent narrative.

[Amanda Rose · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don't mind reading true crime books with an agenda, I’m quite fond of it in fact. “In Hoffa’s Shadow” by Jack Goldsmith which I just finished last week and, say, “Adnan’s Story” by Rabia Chaudry are books which have a mission to redress an injustice and I thought both were excellent. I am very happy to join your righteous crusade! But even in books like this there is a contract between the author and reader that we will deal fairly with each other. I was really looking forward to this book, a nice new chunky Australian true crime about a case I was unfamiliar with (world-famous in Tasmania) but I got into an adversarial state with it early on because of the feeling of being too aggressively shoved in a direction regarding the evidence. There is no initial overarching story of the crime, it is told in bits punctuated in the middle of the telling by the author’s best possible (for the defence) spin on everything. It therefore has a scattershot, almost claustrophobic quality where the text never allows you your own thoughts. It’s the difference between being lead by the hand (fine!) and ‘lead’ by someone with a gun in their pocket shoving it in your ribs. It is acknowledged by all that Sue told at least one lie in her first version of events and various misrememberings (the Crown would say also lies, but might not be deliberate) - it is actually OK even in a crusading book to allow bad or neutral information to exist for a page or two for the reader to consider it before giving the other side. Before telling us about the DNA evidence (which honestly does seem very dodgy, I do agree this woman probably shouldn’t have been convicted), we are primed by a page and a half of a potted history of some times forensics have been wrong. PLEASE JUST TELL ME WHAT IT IS, and then by all means circle back around to its problems, or do it later or whatever. But I really bristled against this style of telling me what to think before even telling me the bare facts.

So by page 150, I was grumpy about the book but what really broke it (and the author and the entire Scribe publishing house if I’m in a bad mood) for me was the treatment of Sue’s time on the stand in her trial. Firstly, there is no discussion of this decision for her to testify. She doesn’t have to of course and I doubt I’ve read a true crime book where there wasn’t a discussion of the pros and cons of the defendant testifying. It’s a momentous decision! But there’s nothing about that process, she just pops up on the stand. Previously witnesses have been dealt with at length in verbatim trial transcript excerpts. Sue apparently did very poorly, not only under cross examination by the Crown but in being questioned by her own defence barrister. A few pages later it is mentioned she was on the stand for four days. FOUR DAYS - all dispensed with in A FEW PARAGRAPHS of hand wringing about how much stress she was under. I’m sure she was, but what’s the author’s excuse? This to me is not the ordinary complaint one might have about the genre - a bit of purple prose or a narrative choice that didn’t land or a thumb on the scale here and there. This is a fundamental breach of faith between the author and the reader and you can’t come back from that. You just cannot write a 350 page book on the topic of a wrongful conviction and just wave away the trial testimony of the defendant like that as irrelevant, no matter how uncomfortable for you or her. Not even dismissing it as irrelevant after the fact, not even telling us what it was!!!!!!!! There is just about as much space devoted, as an aside, to the history of the house that MONA is in as there is to the actual murder defendant’s actual court testimony (FOUR DAYS)!

That's as I said a breach with the reader and is a dealbreaker for me and, while I finished the book, I can't recommend it except for the Tassie true crime completist, you will probably find a lot to enjoy in her constant snarky asides about the Hobart Establishment.

[Scribe Publications]

Describes the greatest miscarriage of justice in this country since Chamberlain — and there’s no matinee jacket in sight.
Robert Richter QC

[An] excellently crafted and deeply disturbing new book … Bowles is at her best when interpreting court transcripts and “reading” people and legal actors as they give and extract evidence. In particular, she’s excellent at evoking the atmospherics of courtrooms and of interviews. She was in court for key parts of the trial process, and conducted many interviews with starring actors after their moment of fame.
Bill Rowlings, Civil Liberties Australia

Death on the Derwent is an in-depth, well-researched history of a case which has polarised Tasmania.
Mitch Mott, Adelaide Advertiser

Robin Bowles presents another riveting true crime read.
Readings

[Vireya · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didn't know anything about this case. Now I feel that I have too much information, while at the same time being none the wiser.

[James · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars. It’s been 13 years since Bob disappeared from his Yacht in Sandy Bay. Only a few weeks ago I saw protesters on the Hobart waterfront near Mures waving signs in support of his widow Su who was convicted of killing him. I knew little about the case and saw the book at a St. Kilda op shop not long after and wanted to learn more.

I didn’t particularly like the voice of the author - to me she came across slightly snobbish and prejudiced to Tasmania and it’s people (“must be a Tasmanian thing”). But she was thorough and obviously worked hard to uncover and document the details.

There was essentially no body, no weapon and no concrete evidence to convict Su. It appears they decided she was guilty and then worked to find evidence to prove it. Sure it would have been a more interesting story if she was guilty and that adept at lying but I don’t think that was the case.

The investigation seems to have been rushed and shallow and like they didn’t explore many avenues (I know it’s easy to say from the outside). There aren’t many mysterious murder cases in Tasmania that we hear of in the media so it could be a lack of experience investigating these types of crimes.

I have a better understanding of the importance of Miranda rights now - even if you are innocent it can be harmful to talk to the police, especially if you don’t have the best memory. I never imagined they actually could use an innocent person’s confused or misremembered words to send them to prison.

If Su is ever released it would be very expensive for the state to compensate a wrongful conviction, not to mention embarrassing. There is an element of corruption to save face working against Su I think. The subsequent trials and appeals ended up costing a lot more police and government time and money than if the investigation had been more thorough in the first place.

From the evidence presented in this book it seems as if some local vagrants went aboard to burgle the yacht but weren’t expecting to find Bob on board. They’ve obviously been reluctant to talk, but that much has been painstakingly pieced together.

I think the takeaway is if you’re ever seriously questioned by the police, get a lawyer before talking. My naive outsider opinion is that the justice system appears to be a flawed circle jerk that could do with an overhaul. I hope there is eventually justice for Su and her family, whatever that might be.

[Nez · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

This is an important story to tell : you can’t trust the police or the legal system to function properly, especially in Tasmania where an elite group have control.

I found the structure of this book a bit frustrating, plus there were several issues and information not addressed, but the importance of this story, the injustice, the incompetence, and deliberate perverting justice is a disgrace. It’s scary to see how the system in Tasmania operates!

[Jennifer (JC-S) · Rating 3 out of 5]

‘The facts and rumours surrounding the event have polarised the close-knit Hobart community.’

On the night of 26 January 2009, Bob Chappell went missing from his yacht Four Winds and was never seen again. The yacht had been moored near the Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania’s marina in the Derwent River. Bob Chappell had intended to spend the night on the yacht and was found to be missing the next morning.

Bob Chappell’s body has never been found.

‘The police were investigating a murder with no body, no weapon, no witnesses and no confession.’

In 2010, Sue Neill-Fraser, his life partner of 18 years was found guilty of his murder and sentenced to 26 years imprisonment. There have been several appeals, and in March 2020 Ms Neill-Fraser gained leave for a second appeal against her conviction. This appeal has not yet been scheduled (as of 25 July 2020) because of COVID-19 restrictions.

Ms Bowles sets out the story in three parts: the disappearance of Bob Chappell; a summary of the way the case was dealt with by the legal system; and the ongoing challenging of the legal system in this case.

Before reading this book, I knew little about the Sue Neill-Fraser case. While I appreciate the amount of detail and background information that Ms Bowles has included, it took me a while to adjust to her writing style. For example, initially Ms Bowles’s referring to her connections to Tasmania, of knowing ‘who’s who in the zoo’ seemed irrelevant but I soon realised that it was part of her scene-setting, of describing the environment in which events took place. I do not necessarily share all of her conclusions (I am an expatriate Tasmanian with no establishment ties), but I think her observations are relevant.

We may never know what happened to Bob Chappell, but I am gobsmacked that Ms Neill-Fraser was convicted of murder on the case made by the prosecution. While I do not necessarily agree that:

‘When you go into court, you are putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who weren’t smart enough to get out of jury duty.’

I do have concerns about the way the case was presented and can only hope that the most recent appeal is successful. Usually, when reading books about true crimes, there is an outcome. In this case there is not. Yet. Ms Neill-Fraser is still in gaol, is still awaiting a determination of her appeal. Ms Bowles started her investigations in 2015, and when this book was published wrote:

‘So that’s it, really. My job is done. I never expected this story to cover this many years and still not have an ending.’

I finished this book dissatisfied, not with the book, but with the process surrounding Ms Neill-Fraser’s conviction. I will be extremely interested in following the appeal which hopefully will be heard later this year. The appeal hearing has been delayed by COVID-19 restrictions: Ms Neill-Fraser’s legal team are based in Melbourne.

Note: My thanks to Sisters in Crime for the opportunity to read and review this book.

Jennifer Cameron-Smith

[Thomas · Rating 1 out of 5]

Quite a good account of a possible miscarriage of justice in Hobart. I say "possible" because nothing that I have seen on TV or read persuades me that the convicted lady is innocent.
The book itself seems to suffer from a rush to print. Thus, the suburb Berriedale is always incorrectly spelt, and this from an author who lived in Tasmania. A witness, Maddock, is sometimes referred to as Maddox, and at one stage, after he has given his evidence, and is succeeded by the next witness, the author has Maddock stepping down again.
The author makes no mention of the fact that her name Bowles is the same as the married name of one of the daughters in the book; in a small place like Tasmania, this should have been clarified, one way or another.
To its credit, the author does not dwell on the alleged diaries of a homeless girl whose DNA was found aboard the ill-fated boat. The Eve Aish film on the other hand, seems spell bound by these diaries. How likely is it that a homeless girl, with an apparent drug problem, would keep a diary? Of course the diary is missing, surprise surprise.
The author goes through the first part of the trial well, detailing the evidence of a number of witnesses. Unfortunately she does not go through the evidence of the accused. This evidence, and the way it was delivered, was, apparently, a source of frustration to the accused's own defence team. It would have been illuminating to have that detailed in the book.
The book then loses its way, much as the Ash film did. Much space is devoted to potential players in the murder, and you are left none the wiser. The author attempts to find the homeless girl but fails. Unfortunately it takes quite some pages in the book for this to be related.
She does cover some errors in police procedures and failure to keep crime sites safe. There is also a fair bit about the lack of separation between members of the legal fraternity in a small place like Tasmania. The insinuation is that the accused did not, therefore, get a fair trial. I'm not sure that that is a logical conclusion.
Perhaps the best bet is to look at the evidence of one of the first witnesses in the trial who says that the accused told him the relationship with her partner and the 'murder victim' was over and that she would have to pay a substantial sum to buy him out. (The author does point out that the accused is quite wealthy in her own right.)

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tasmania is an incestuous nespotic hellhole, who knew?!

Turned me off ever going there. What a royal fuckup this case was.

Release Sue Neill-Fraser ya dumbfucks.

[Caroline Poole · Rating 5 out of 5]

True life can really terrify you!
Why does the legal system want to spend unlimited funds and time on stopping the truth coming out when so little time and money was spent on the initial investigation.....maybe because they know they got it so wrong?
Well done to all those helping Sue, let's hope the real and obvious truth is out soon and that Sue can enjoy some freedom.
A compelling read.
P.S. If you are ever arrested don't speak till you have legal representation with you!

[Adrian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Local True-Crime.

I read this because I wanted to know more about the case. I still don't think I could judge Neill-Fraser's guilt in what she was convicted of, but based upon what is discussed in this book, the validity of her conviction based upon the provided evidence is very dubious. It also is a good example of why if people are being questioned by police in anything serious that they should shut the fuck up and ask for a lawyer straight away, regardless of their level of guilt.

[Lesley Thomson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aside from analysing the progress of this case Bowles gives a great sense of stultifying culture in Tasmania and is a warm trustworthy person to 'walk' with.

I 1st spotted Bowles as sensible talking head on bad documentary about Peter Falconio the missing British tourist in Oz on channel 4

[kimm_ii · Rating 1 out of 5]

I struggled through this book to c. 50%. The miscarriage of justice that occurred was truly devastating but the story wasn't engaging & heavily repetitive. I couldn't finish it

[Margot · Rating 1 out of 5]

one of the most tedious books I have ever read, the narrative is self-indulgent, unnecessarily filled with trivial details and goes nowhere

[Booksnaps · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating insight into a true crime story.