The Cairns Post

RETRACTION - Advocate got it wrong

Glenn Morrison

09May08

THE front page story "Car thief organised to kill wife'', published by the Centralian Advocate on Friday April 11, contained several serious factual errors.

This newspaper apologises unreservedly for the mistakes, and any anguish the article may have caused. The Centralian Advocate retracts the story in full.

The mistakes were the result of mixing up statements from separate court proceedings. In particular:

No suggestion was made to Alice Springs Magistrate's Court that Mr Thai Tam Luu tried to assassinate his wife;
References to the attempted assassination of a person's wife were made in the context of the Prosecutor, Mr McMinn, informing the court about the facts of another unrelated case which contained principles of law relevant to determining Mr Luu's sentence. Mr McMinn told the Court about the other case (not Mr Luu's) involving an appeal against a sentence given to a person who pleaded guilty to soliciting to murder - in that case, the offender wanted to organise his wife's assassination. The facts of that case are very different from Mr Luu's; and
The court was not told that Mr Luu had stolen a car. Mr Luu pleaded guilty to the unlawful use of a motor vehicle, namely a Honda Accord. He did not plead guilty to stealing a Honda Accord.

The following inaccuracies were also present:

The headline is misleading and inaccurate.
A car thief did not organise to kill his wife.
No material was put before the Alice Springs Magistrates court to suggest that a car thief, or Mr Thai Tam Luu, had organised to kill his wife.
The court did not hear that a man's failed attempt to have his wife assassinated led him to steal a $40,000 car and test drive it across Australia.
There was no information put to the court that Mr Luu had a wife.
There was no information put to the court to suggest Mr Luu was involved in an attempted assassination or any other violent offence, or that there was any link between the unlawful use of the motor vehicle and some violent plan.
Mr McMinn did not tell the Court that ``this case (ie Mr Luu's case) was a case of a person in New South Wales having a severe falling out with his wife and wanting to organise her assassination'' or ``As it turned out, he was duped by people put on the case''. In fact, Mr McMinn was talking about another case altogether.

It was not the Centralian Advocate's intention to interfere with, or prejudice, a case before the courts, nor was it intended to cause anguish for Mr Thai Tam Luu.

Glenn Morrison, Editor, Centralian Advocate