Casefile True Crime - Case 203: Bob Chappell

Episode Date: March 19, 2022

On January 26 2009, defacto couple Bob Chappell and Sue Neill-Fraser spent the public holiday working on their yacht, The Four Winds, in Tasmania’s Sandy Bay. --- Narration – Anonymous Host Research – Jessica Forsayeth Writing – Elsha McGill Creative direction – Milly Raso Production and music – Mike Migas Music – Andrew D.B. Joslyn This episode's sponsors: Allbirds – Discover your perfect pair of sneakers Peloton – Learn more about Peloton ZipRecruiter – Post your jobs for FREE DoorDash – Get 25% off and FREE delivery for your first order of $15 or more with promo code ‘CASEFILE’ Truebill – Take control of your finances and save money Catalina Crunch – Get 15% off your first order of keto cereals + free shipping The Detective's Dilemma – New podcast from Casefile Presents For all credits and sources please visit casefilepodcast.com/case-203-bob-chappell

Our episodes deal with serious and often distressing incidents. If you feel at any time you need support, please contact your local Crisis Centre. For suggested phone numbers for confidential support, please see the show notes for this episode on your app or on our website. The sun was just beginning to rise on Tuesday, January 27, 2009, when Timothy arrived at the Sandy Bay Rowing Club to drop his daughter off for her early morning rowing training. Located immediately south of Hobart's Central Business District, the affluent Waterfront Suburb was home to some of Tasmania's most expensive real estate

and was a hotspot for sailing. Timothy parked his car and stepped outside to admire the views of the city and nearby Mount Wellington. As he looked outwards towards the rowing shed, he noticed something bobbing in the water against the rocks. He moved closer and realised it was an inflatable dinghy. The blue and white vessel had the brand name Quicksilver printed on it. Assuming the dinghy must have come undone from its mooring point, Timothy peered inside and noticed that the dinghy's rope was sitting within. This was odd. Had the rope accidentally come undone, he expected it would be trailing in the water. Regardless, Timothy used the rope to

secure the vessel to a rock. He pointed it out to his daughter's rowing coach Darryl, but they didn't give it much more thought. Timothy joined Darryl in his aluminium speedboat and followed the rowers out for their training session. Just before 7am, the two men were approximately 200 metres from shore when they passed the 53-foot double-mastered yacht named The Four Winds. It was sitting unusually low in the water, especially at its bow. Worried that the yacht might be sinking, the men called the police. Two officers arrived at the shore 15 minutes later to assess the situation. Darryl took one of them out on his speedboat and pulled up alongside the Four Winds.

The officer stepped aboard the upper deck. Leading out from the wheelhouse, the small enclosure that housed the boat's steering wheel, he noticed small splatters of blood. There were also drops of blood on the wheelhouse floor and a small carving knife and blood stained torch near the door. The officer entered the cabin and found it flooded with shin-deep water. The yacht was fitted with water pumps that should have kicked in automatically, but nothing was happening to drain the rapidly filling water. At this rate, it was inevitable that the Four Winds would sink. The police, marine and rescue services were called. By the time they arrived,

the wheelhouse was significantly flooded and the bow was only one foot above water. The Tasmanian fire service and a salvage agent were called in to try to pump some of the water out to stop the Four Winds from sinking. Authorities phoned the yacht's owners. 55-year-old Sunil Fraser was at home when she received the call about the situation unfolding in Sandy Bay. She was shocked. Her de facto partner, 65-year-old Bob Chappell, had spent the night on their beloved yacht and Sue hadn't heard from him since. The Four Winds had been nothing but trouble for Sue and Bob since they purchased it two months prior. Both experienced sailors, they intended to use it to go traveling when Bob retired in about a

year's time. He was the chief physicist of radiology at the W.P. Holman Clinic in the Royal Hobart Hospital, a career he'd proudly spent decades building. While Bob loved his job, he was looking forward to his golden years and the many trips he and Sue planned to take at sea. At the recommendation of their yacht broker, the couple had travelled to Queensland in December to take a look at the Four Winds. They'd immediately fallen in love. Priced at $203,000, it was a bargain for a yacht of its type. A dignified and majestic vessel, it featured a double-mastered catch construction that was perfectly suited to Tasmania's varied weather conditions. It had a white hull with dark timber accents, navy blue sails,

and the name Four Winds written along the rear and left-hand side in navy cursive font. At 53 feet long, with approximately 50 square metres of walking space above deck, the yacht was much larger than Bob and Sue were used to sailing. The interior cabin was split into two levels. Four steps below deck led to the wheelhouse, which held the steering wheel and control panels. Three further steps led to the lower saloon level, complete with three bedrooms, a bathroom, kitchen, laundry, and engine room. The bargain price reflected the fact that restorations were needed, but Sue and Bob were ready for the challenge. They hired two crew members to help them sail

it down from Queensland to Hobart. This allowed them to familiarise themselves with the boat and test its performance while having professional guidance along the way. However, the voyage was tainted from the start. The day after they set sail, the engine failed as they neared the Gold Coast and they had to be towed to a nearby marina. It turned out that an oyster fungus known as black death had clogged the engine's filters. While repairs were underway, Bob was plagued by increasingly severe nosebleeds. He was admitted to a local hospital, where doctors determined the nosebleeds were caused by Bob's regular consumption of aspirin, which acts as a blood thinner. After some deliberation, it was decided that Sue would

continue on with the hired crew members while Bob flew back to Hobart. Once the engine was fixed, Sue and the crew recommenced their journey. Numerous other mechanical problems forced them to stop at various ports for repairs along the way. After 16 days at sea, the four winds finally arrived in Hobart. Bob met the crew at Sandy Bay, where the yacht would be permanently moored. Despite the complicated journey, Sue was excited by the trip and looked forward to many more in the future. Over the following weeks, the couple continued to work on the yacht in their spare time. Bob was somewhat jealous of how well Sue had gotten to know the four winds during the trip from Queensland and was eager to spend more time on board to gain a better understanding of

how it worked. Monday, January 26 was the Australia Day public holiday and the couple spent the morning on the yacht. Bob tinkered about in the engine room while Sue tidied up. At around midday, she used their blue and white Quicksilver dinghy to travel back to shore to have lunch with Bob's sister Anne, who was visiting from Sydney. When Sue returned to the yacht at around 230, Bob was in a bad mood. He had isolated an engine leak and wanted to stay on board overnight to continue working on it. Sue didn't think this was a good idea. It was a windy, overcast afternoon and the water was choppy. Furthermore, she would have to take their dinghy to get back to shore, meaning Bob wouldn't have access to it overnight. She urged Bob to reconsider,

but he checked the charts and was confident that the wind would subside. Sue eventually agreed. After all, the yacht was stocked with food and emergency supplies, so surely Bob would be okay if something unforeseen arose. He was also a strong swimmer who would have no trouble swimming to safety in case of an emergency. Bob didn't have a mobile phone, so Sue gave him hers in case he needed to contact her on their landline throughout the evening. She then took the dinghy back to shore, tying it to a ladder at the Royal Yacht Club. Just after 7 the following morning, Sue called her mobile to check on Bob. There was no answer. Moments later, she received a call from police to inform her that the four winds

was sinking. Sue immediately drove down to Meraville Esplanade, which overlooked Sandy Bay and met the police on the shore. She was soon joined by her two daughters and Bob's son. They watched on as emergency crews worked for over an hour to determine the source of the yacht's leak. It turned out that a 75mm pipe near the toilet had been cut, allowing water to flow freely into the vessel. The Seacock was also open. This is a valve that permits water to flow in and out of the boat. It's typically left closed when not in use. Whoever had cut the pipe and opened the Seacock likely had intimate knowledge of the yacht, as these items were hidden away and their function wouldn't be clear to a novice. With these problems finally identified, the four winds

was successfully salvaged. The question remained, where was Bob Chapel? Police conducted a full search of the yacht and quickly determined Bob was not on board. A grid search of the surrounding waters also failed to uncover any signs of the 65-year-old. While examining the four winds, police noticed more blood splatters on the lounge suite in the saloon. At the lowest point of the hull, the automatic bilge pump had also been deactivated. This pump is designed to empty any excess water into the ocean to prevent a vessel from sinking. The four winds bilge pump was fitted with an alarm, which was supposed to sound if water reached a certain level. This too had been deactivated.

With all these factors combined, it was clear that the yacht had been deliberately tampered with. A local man was walking his dog along Maryville Esplanade when he noticed a red yachting jacket with grey trim. It was hanging on a low brick fence outside a residential property on the corner of Margaret Street. Aware of the chaos on the waterfront, he left the jacket untouched and walked to the beach to inform the police. An officer went to question the occupants of the property, who said the red jacket wasn't theirs. They'd arrived home at around six the previous evening and hadn't noticed the jacket then, so it must have been placed there recently. When Sue returned to the scene, she was shown

the jacket and asked whether it belonged to her. She said she'd never seen it before, stating, it wasn't from the yacht. Officers began door-knocking homes along Maryville Esplanade for information. They also checked records of nearby pay phones and contacted local bus and taxi companies, but no useful leads emerged. Bob's whereabouts remained unknown. Just before midday, an officer visited Sue at home to take an official statement. Sue described her relationship with Bob as healthy with no major problems. The couple had met in 1989 through mutual friends and had immediately hit it off.

They had a lot in common. Both had migrated to Australia from the UK and grown up in Victoria. Eventually moving to Tasmania. They were both divorced with adult children from their previous marriages. Both intellectuals, they shared a love of books, gourmet food and the outdoors, as well as an interest in current affairs. They enjoyed having deep conversations and liked to debate their differing opinions. Although they had contrasting personalities, Sue's extraversion complemented Bob's reserved nature. Sue told the officer about Bob's recent ill health and recurring nosebleeds. She explained that Bob didn't have access to their dinghy if he needed it to leave the yacht in

the night, but due to his age he was unable to get in and out of the dinghy on his own anyway. As for the Seacock and Bilge pump, Sue wasn't aware of any problems. She and Bob checked them both often to ensure everything was in working order. If anyone had deliberately tampered with them in an effort to harm Bob, Sue couldn't think of any likely culprits. Bob had no known enemies and there was no one who would want to hurt him. When asked about her movements the previous afternoon, Sue said she arrived back to shore sometime between 3 and 3.30. She then drove to the local Bunnings Warehouse hardware store, where she browsed the aisles for several hours before leaving without buying anything.

By the time she got home it was already dark. It was a relatively uneventful evening until just after 10 when the phone rang. On the other line was Richard King, a friend of one of Bob's daughters. For the sake of clarity, case file will refer to her as Lisa. Richard was worried. Lisa suffered from mental health issues that included paranoia and delusions. Although she hadn't seen her father in a year, she had recently become increasingly concerned about his health as well as the safety of his yacht. Richard told Sue that Lisa was convinced something bad was going to happen to Bob. She wanted to go down to the Bay to check that his yacht was safe. Lisa had also threatened to take her own life and Richard was

worried she would go through with it. Although Sue took his concerns seriously, she remained calm. Lisa had threatened suicide in the past but had never acted on it. She also didn't know the name of the four wins or where it was moored, so it was unlikely she would go out on her own to try and find it. After speaking for around half an hour, Richard and Sue were satisfied that Lisa would be okay. Still, Sue later wake that night worried about what Richard had told her. She eventually dozed off and when she woke up, she discovered that Lisa's concerns about Bob were right. Detectives took Sue on board the four wins which had been towed to a dock in Hobart to see if she could identify anything out of the ordinary. She started noticing things right away.

The switches on the fuse board were in the incorrect position. A green rope on the deck was in disarray and not in its usual spot. Significant lengths of rope were also missing, especially from the main mast. A red winch handle which is used to adjust rope tension and was usually stored in a locker at the back of the boat had been inserted into the winch on the main mast. A rope around the winch had also been cut and another was lying out of place in a pile on the deck. The wood around the yacht's rear entry hatch was marked with rope burn. There were also some loose carpet panels in the main saloon. Sue explained these couldn't come loose by accident, they could only be lifted by removing mini screws.

Entering the main cabin, Sue saw that a heavy fire extinguisher was missing from its bracket. Outside the wheelhouse, the emergency position indicating radio beacon, known as an E-PURB, was also missing. Part of its bracket had been snapped off and fallen to the ground. Bob knew the E-PURB was easily removed from the bracket by simply pulling it up, so it was unlikely he was the one who broke it. The device was found hours later by a passerby walking along the beach. Several latent fingerprints were identified on it and ran through the national database, but there was no match and the item revealed nothing else of significance.

Although Sue had been advised not to touch anything, she began playing with switches on the electrical panel until the bilge pump alarm sounded. She pointed out that the alarm was so loud, residents of the neighboring suburb would have woken up if it had gone off the previous evening. She also pointed out a torch and empty juice container which didn't belong on the yacht. But these were confirmed to have been absentmindedly left behind by police. Police divers searched Sandy Bay where the yacht was initially moored, covering a circular space approximately 100 meters in diameter. Although visibility was good, they still didn't find any sign of Bob Chappell.

The search continued the following day, January 28. Police divers re-entered the waters, but they lost visibility upon reaching a depth of 23 meters. Unable to see the ocean floor, they abandoned the search. Tests confirmed the blood on the wheelhouse floor, steps, torch and lounge suite had come from Bob. Although it couldn't be determined how long the blood had been there, the two crew members who had helped sail the yacht from Queensland had cleaned the boat thoroughly upon their arrival to Hobart. They didn't recall seeing any blood stains at the time, deeming it unlikely that the blood was left over from Bob's nosebleeds. Fingerprints were also uncovered throughout the

yacht. Most belonged to recent passengers, including the two crewmates who travelled with Sue down from Queensland and Bob's son, Timothy. There were also several other unidentified fingerprints. A strand of female hair was found near the skylight hatch and another at the bottom of the wheelhouse steps. Then, there was a dinner plate-sized stain found on the yacht, believed to have been vomited, urine or saliva. It tested positive for female DNA. Neither the stain nor the hairs were found to have originated from Sue or her daughters. Whoever the source was, she was unknown to police. A small blue face washer and two wet rags covered in brown stains that appeared to be vomit, were also recovered and taken for further analysis.

The possibility that Bob took his own life was ultimately ruled out. He had no idea his own life was ultimately ruled out. He hadn't undergone any behavioural changes recently, including showing signs of depression. It was the opposite. He'd been overseeing a major project at work that he wanted to complete and was excited about his plans for the future. Based on the evidence so far uncovered, it was much more likely that Bob had met with foul play. The most likely scenario was that the assailant had used the quick silver dinghy Sue had tied up at the Royal Yacht Club to get to and from the Four Winds. Once on board, they might have torn the heavy fire extinguisher from its bracket and used it to bludgeon Bob to death in the saloon.

Several carpet squares were missing and it was possible these had been removed from the boat to destroy evidence. Bob's body, which weighed 64 kilograms, might have then been tied with rope and dragged up the stairs using the winch before being dumped overboard. The killer then used the dinghy to return to shore, dumping it on the beach without tying it up. Investigators conducted various experiments to test their theory. Although their approach wasn't very scientific, they confirmed that the winch was capable of hoisting a man of Bob's weight from the side of the missing carpet squares. Based on the yacht's specifications and the volume of water flowing in when it was discovered sinking, a naval engineer determined it would

take approximately 9 to 12 hours for the boat to sink had both the pipe and seacock been cut at the same time. Given that the yacht was at its lowest point in the water at around 8 o'clock on the morning of January 27, it was estimated that the Four Winds had likely been sabotaged around midnight. Investigators were left to determine who would want to hurt Bob Chapel and why. Outside of work, Bob mostly kept to himself. A typical evening for Bob involved a relaxing drink, cooking a nice meal and settling in with a good book. This was not the routine of a man who sought trouble. Sue was of the opinion that trouble had instead found Bob. Just 13 days before Bob went missing, Sue believed someone had tried to break into the Four Winds.

She had boarded the yacht to find that the electrical switchboard and freshwater pump cover were open and the chart table had been accessed. It wasn't the first time. While the Four Winds was being repaired in Queensland, the mechanic had advised Sue that the yacht had been broken into and several panels had been opened and moved about. Sue had noted that a similar looking yacht had recently been used to smuggle drugs into Australia. Consequently, she wondered whether someone might have planted drugs in the Four Winds during the journey down from Queensland. When the smuggler or their cohorts went to collect the goods in Tasmania, they would have unexpectedly found Bob on board and could have killed him to

cover their tracks. Sue seemed convinced this was the likely outcome and had been urging police to follow up on this line of investigation from the very beginning. Within minutes of arriving on the scene to find the yacht sinking, she'd mentioned this possibility to a constable. She told police that several other boats in the Sandy Bay area had recently been broken into or tampered with. Prior to Bob's disappearance, she noticed a vessel on the water with the license plate beginning with PV. Sue immediately noted this as suspicious. She believed this indicated that the boat was from Port Villa, a harbourside city in Vanuatu that was a known hotspot for drug smuggling. Sniffer dogs taken on board the Four Winds were unable to detect traces of drugs

due to severe water damage to the yacht's interior. Police were also unable to confirm whether a boat from Port Villa had recently been in the Sandy Bay area. Weeks passed without any sign of Bob Chapel. He didn't access his bank accounts or make contact with any of his loved ones, leading to the conclusion he was likely deceased. The limited forensic evidence recovered on board the Four Winds had led nowhere. The red yachting jacket found on the corner of Margaret Street and Maryville Esplanade wasn't thought to be relevant to Bob's case, as Sue said she had never seen it before. Investigators had it tested anyway. If anything, they hoped forensics might point towards its owner and give them a solid lead as to who might have been in the area on the night

Bob went missing. Swabs taken from the inner surfaces of the cuffs and collar were tested for DNA and returned a match. The jacket had been worn by none other than Sue Neil Fraser. This wasn't the only lie that Sue had been caught in. As investigators spoke with people who had been at Sandy Bay on January 26, it became clear that something wasn't adding up. Just before four that afternoon, a group of men arrived at the Royal Yacht Club marina. They noticed the Four Winds offshore and recalled a grey mid-sized dinghy tied to the vessel. It was bobbing up and down in the choppy sea, taking in some water. They recalled the dinghy as worn and faded, with scuff marks and

a grey leecloth, a piece of fabric that acts as a safety net. Another witness who had been sitting on a nearby jetty at around 5pm also recalled the dinghy alongside the Four Winds. They saw an elderly man pottering about on the yacht, which struck them as odd. They wondered why someone would choose to be on a moored boat in such turbulent waters. These recollections contradicted the statement provided by Sue Neil Fraser. She had told police that she had travelled from the Four Winds to the beach, arriving at the shore between 3 and 3.30pm. According to witnesses, the dinghy was still floating alongside the Four Winds between 4 and 5pm. Furthermore, according to his son, Bob was very safety conscious. It was therefore strange that he would choose to stay on the

yacht without the dinghy in case of an emergency. Sue had told police that Bob was unable to get in and out of the dinghy without assistance anyway, so there was no issue in leaving him without access to it. Bob's son disputed this. He'd seen his father operate the dinghy before without any problems. Following up on Sue's claims that she'd visited Bunnings Warehouse after reaching land, police checked the store's CCTV footage. At no point was Sue or her car captured on the premises. Sue claimed to have arrived at Bunnings around 4.40pm and spent several hours browsing the aisles, but this wasn't possible. Given that January 26 had been the Australia Day public holiday, the store had shut early at 6pm, rather than its usual closing time of 9pm.

Sue maintained she'd been home all night. Police checked her phone records and confirmed she had received a call from Richard, the man who voiced his concerns about Bob's daughter Lisa, at 10.05pm, as stated. Richard told police that Sue sounded relaxed and normal during their phone conversation, not like she had anything to hide. Sue said she went to bed after her call with Richard. At 11.30pm, a man was observing the ocean from his parked car near the Sandy Bay Royal Yacht Club Sheds. He'd stopped by the bay to unwind and found the area completely deserted. All of a sudden, his attention was drawn to the sound of an outboard motor. Out on the water was an inflatable dinghy. It was too dark to confirm the colour,

but the man could make the outline of a person piloting the vessel. Based on their silhouette, it looked to be a woman. The dinghy was heading in the direction of the four winds, and the man soon lost sight of it. Almost an hour later, at 12.15am, CCTV footage from an ATM surveillance camera 800m from the Royal Yacht Club captured a grey Ford Falcon station wagon driving past the area. This was the same kind of car that Sue Neil Fraser drove. When shown the footage, even Sue's daughters conceded that it looked like their mother's car. The vehicle's number plate wasn't captured in the footage, so it couldn't be said with certainty

who the car belonged to. Then, at 3.08am, another call appeared on Sue's home phone records. It had been placed to Star 10 Hash, an automated service that identifies the last unanswered call received by a landline. Not only had Sue lied about not making any further phone calls after speaking to Richard, the Star 10 Hash call raised a more important question. Why was Sue wanting to know if anyone had called her in the middle of the night? Was it because she had left the house and wanted to make sure that nobody had called and discovered she was out during this time frame? At 7.04am, on the morning of January 27, Sue had called her mobile phone, which she had left on board with Bob.

When questioned, Sue said she was calling the yacht to check in on Bob. As for the Star 10 Hash, she had no recollection of ever placing the call. Sue had been very quick to push the drug smuggling theory, claiming that several boats in the area had recently been broken into. Police checked their records from the previous three months and couldn't find any evidence to support this. No other break-ins had been reported, including the one that allegedly took place on board the four wins. Furthermore, when an officer had first gone to Sue's house to take down an official statement on the day Bob was discovered missing, they noticed something odd.

Sue's left wrist was strapped up and there was a band-aid on her thumb. Sue explained the wrist injury was from an old boating incident which flared up occasionally. The officer asked Sue to remove her band-aid. She complied, revealing a laceration approximately one to two centimetres long. Sue claimed she'd accidentally cut herself, but didn't elaborate further. At the time, the interviewing officer hadn't thought too much of it. That was until several weeks later when he happened to catch a glimpse of something that stirred his memory. On January 26, Sue had left the four wins around midday to have lunch with Bob's sister, Ann. During the meal, Ann had taken some photos. The officer chanced upon them.

He took a closer look at Sue's wrist. There was no bandage, nor was there any sign of a cut or band-aid on her thumb. This meant Sue had sustained the injuries sometime between having lunch with Ann and when the officer interviewed her in the wake of Bob's disappearance less than 24 hours later. Could it have been during the course of an attack or an attempt to dispose of Bob's body? The truth was, police had been viewing Sue with suspicion from the outset of the investigation. When she first arrived at Sandy Bay on January 27 after being informed that her yacht was sinking, she didn't appear overly distressed about the situation. At no point did she ask about Bob's well-being. When speaking about Bob in subsequent police

interviews, she kept referring to him in the past tense, as though she already knew he was no longer alive. Sue apologised for this, explaining she'd already come to terms with the fact that Bob was most likely deceased. Investigators weren't convinced. With all this in mind, they pieced together a possible scenario based on Sue's guilt. After her call with Richard, Sue drove her forward to Sandy Bay, donned the red yachting jacket, and took the quick silver dinghy out to the yacht. She either bludgeoned or starved Bob to death before using ropes and a winch to transport his body out of the saloon onto the deck and into the dinghy. From there, she used a heavy object, most likely the yacht's fire extinguisher,

to weigh Bob's body down and throw him overboard. It was some time during this process that she injured her wrist and cut her thumb. Using her knowledge of the four winds inner workings, Sue then cut the pipe, turned on the seacock, and deactivated the bilge pump and alarms in a bid to sink the yacht and destroy evidence. A mechanic who had worked on the boat in early January confirmed that he and Sue had specifically discussed the seacock's pipes and valves on board, so there was no doubt she was aware of their functions. Upon returning home, Sue called Star 10 Hash to make sure there hadn't been any unanswered calls that could discredit her alibi. At 7.04am, she called her mobile phone,

which she'd intentionally left on board the four winds. If the phone failed to ring, it would tell her that the yacht was submerged. Although this was all circumstantial, the pieces began to fit together. All that was missing was a motive. A little over two weeks before Bob Chappell went missing, Sue Neil Fraser spoke with the yacht broker who sold them the four winds and said that she and Bob had separated. When he expressed his sympathy, Sue said something along the lines of being, quote, tired of having to do everything. The two hired crew members who escorted Bob and Sue to Tasmania noticed there was no affection between the couple. At one point, Sue remarked

that her relationship with Bob had been strained for some time and was coming to an end. She was thinking about borrowing $100,000 from her mother to pay for Bob's share of their yacht. When the couple were reunited in Hobart, Sue stood back and ignored Bob when he tried to approach her. When he went missing, Sue told one of her yacht mechanics that she and Bob had broken up. Bob's children weren't aware that the couple had intentions of splitting, but his son Timothy had noticed some obvious tension between them in the weeks leading up to his father's disappearance. He attributed it to them wanting different things from the yacht. Sue hoped to go on long overseas voyages while Bob wanted to set sail on smaller trips.

It was clear that purchasing the four winds had introduced some conflict into the couple's relationship, but this didn't explain why Sue would want to kill her partner of 20 years. Five years before he disappeared, Bob amended his will to ensure that Sue would be well taken care of in the event of his death. She was set to inherit his West Hobart home, car, personal possessions, and 50% of the residue of his $1.3 million estate. Sue hadn't been present when Bob made these changes, and his lawyer couldn't confirm whether Sue knew what she stood to inherit. Yet, Sue had spoken to one of Bob's daughters about the will previously, remarking that Bob had designated a fair amount to everyone.

Sue had since visited Bob's lawyer to discuss what needed to happen to release Bob's estate. If the couple were on the brink of separation as several witnesses had described, it stood to reason that Sue would lose what she was owed from Bob's will. In addition to the generous inheritance, Bob's death also meant Sue would acquire his half of the four winds without having to buy him out. Philip Trifford had helped work on Sue Neil Fraser's previous yacht during the 1990s. Philip claimed that Sue had once mentioned she was feuding with her mother. She was worried that her brother Patrick would therefore inherit all of her mother's money

when she passed away. According to Philip, Sue said she wanted to get rid of Patrick by throwing him overboard and had asked for Philip's assistance in doing so. Her plan was to weigh Patrick down with a toolbox and then sink the yacht by tampering with the bilge pump. Later, Sue told Philip about some problems she was having in her relationship with Bob Chapel. She claimed that Bob was unkind with money and had been exhibiting some troubling behaviour. After drinking one night, Bob apparently became convinced there was an intruder in their house and started running around with a knife. This worried Sue. She was concerned that Bob was dangerous and wanted him gone.

She suggested to Philip that they do to Bob what she had earlier proposed they do to her brother. Only this time, they would also wrap a Bob in chicken wire before throwing him overboard. Philip had been taken aback by Sue's plan and tried to alert Bob, but Sue denied his allegations. Consequently, it marked the end of their friendship. Although investigators had been suspicious of Sue from the get-go, they withheld this information from her. They wanted to rule out other possibilities. When no other suspects immediately came to light, they narrowed in on Sue. And with the circumstantial evidence mounting against her, it was time to act. Just over a month after Bob

vanished, covert listening devices were planted in Sue's home and on her phone. Investigators discovered that she had hired a lawyer who advised her not to speak to the police. Regardless, the next day, Sue voluntarily agreed to her first video interview. At this point, the police were still gathering information for their investigation and didn't caution Sue that she was considered a suspect. Therefore, she didn't ask to bring her lawyer. Therefore, she didn't ask to bring her lawyer. They asked Sue how things had been between her and Bob when she left him on the yacht. She said they'd been squabbling.

Bob was frustrated about the ongoing work that needed to be done to the boat. He'd given Sue a lecture about how awful it was to work full time while dedicating his spare time to the repairs. Sue repeated her story about visiting Bunnings after she got back to shore, adding that she had felt guilty at the time because Bob wouldn't be able to reach her if he called their landline. This was the big chance for investigators to catch Sue in her own lie. They made the big reveal. Sue hadn't been caught on any CCTV footage and the store's opening hours that day didn't align with her timeline.

Sue replied that she was pretty sure she had been at Bunnings on the afternoon in question. She maintained that she didn't leave the house again after returning home. When asked why she didn't report the alleged break-ins on the four wins, Sue said Bob was reluctant to do so because he didn't want to give their boat a bad reputation. She claimed to have called the drug squad at the time to inquire about having sniffer dogs search the vessel, but Bob had requested she didn't pursue the matter. After the interview, detectives called every drug investigation unit in Tasmania. No one recalled receiving an inquiry of this nature.

Over a month after Bob vanished, Sue sat down with radio journalist Felicity Ogilvy having agreed to be interviewed about the case. As they chatted prior to the interview officially starting, Sue made a revelation. She spoke about the phone call she'd received from Richard on the night of January 26 regarding Bob's estranged daughter, Lisa. As Lisa had expressed concerns for Bob and his yacht, Sue wanted to check on them both to see if all was okay. Sue then admitted to Felicity that she didn't stay home the entire night of January 26. She drove to Maryville Esplanade. There were a few homeless people gathered around a fire on the

beach, but there didn't appear to be anything suspicious going on on the four wins out at sea. Having put her mind at ease, Sue returned home. Assuming this was a detailed police were already aware of, Felicity Ogilvy mentioned it in passing during a subsequent interview with detectives. It was the first they'd heard of it. Given that Sue had staunchly maintained to them that she'd never left their house on the night of January 26, her comments placing her at the scene were huge. Investigators would soon discover that Felicity wasn't the only person Sue had made this admission to. In a phone call with Bob's sister, Anne, over two months after he disappeared,

Sue once again spoke of having driven down to Maryville Esplanade. In this account, she added that she had left her car there so she could walk home for exercise. By mid-April, almost three months had passed with no sign of Bob Chapel. Police divers once again entered the waters of Sandy Bay. Using advanced sonar equipment, they searched an area measuring one nautical mile long and half a nautical mile wide from where the four winds had been moored. They found various items, including old dinghies, moorings, discarded wheelie bins, and concrete blocks, but nothing relevant to the chapel case. Investigators remained certain that Bob's body had been dumped in the bay and was

hidden in the murky depths or had since drifted outside of their search zone. On May 5, 2009, Sue Neil Fraser once again participated in a video interview with police. This time, she was cautioned that she was officially being treated as a suspect in Bob's disappearance. Sue admitted she must have been mistaken when she initially said she'd been at Bunnings on the afternoon of January 26. She explained she must have gotten her days mixed up due to being in a state of shock after Bob went missing. Sue and Bob visited Bunnings frequently to buy items for the boat, and she simply had trouble differentiating one day from the next. When told about the witness reports that placed a dinghy at the four winds between four and five

p.m., Sue completely changed her story. She claimed she must have stayed aboard the yacht later than she initially thought. After returning to shore and tying the dinghy up at the Royal Yacht Club, she left her car at either Maryville Esplanade or around the corner on Margaret Street. She couldn't be sure exactly. She then walked the 2.7km route home, which took about 40 minutes. Later that night, after receiving the call from Richard about Lisa, she became concerned. She didn't want to call Bob in case she woke him. Instead, Sue decided to walk down to collect her car in case Bob later called her from the yacht wanting to be picked up. When Sue reached her car, she realized she'd brought the wrong set of keys. She walked home, got the right set, and walked back.

Once she returned to her vehicle, she drove along the rowing sheds on Maryville Esplanade, parked the car, and walked onto the beach. It was pitch black and too dark to see the four winds in the distance, but she noticed there were some homeless people sitting around a fire. This made her feel better, so she drove home. Sue said she'd initially lied about going to the Esplanade because she didn't want to upset Bob's other children if they found out about the phone call concerning their sister's welfare. The police told Sue that the red yachting jacket she denied owning had tested positive for her DNA. She conceded that the jacket belonged to her. It was a spare kept on board for

guests. However, she had no idea how it ended up on the street. For investigators, Sue was only digging herself into a deeper hole. They believed she had a conveniently selective memory wherein she changed her story whenever she was presented with evidence that disproved her previous statements. She had denied the jacket was hers until DNA testing proved otherwise. She'd stuck with her story about being at Bunnings until security footage showed she was never there. She was adamant she had never left her house on the night of January 26th, until a car matching the description of the one she drove was captured on CCTV,

and after she'd slipped up by telling the radio journalist that she'd driven to the beach. In early August 2009, Sue wrote an official letter to the Commissioner of Police and the Officer in Charge of Internal Affairs to complain about the way she was being treated. Concerned that the police were targeting her and not considering other possibilities, she requested that an independent review be conducted into Bob's disappearance. Her request was denied. Instead, investigators were confident they had enough circumstantial evidence to warrant an arrest. On August 20, Sunil Fraser was charged with the murder of Bob Chapel.

Seven months later in March 2010, a 15-year-old homeless girl named Megan Vass was arrested in Tasmania. As per standard procedure, her DNA was run through the police database. It returned a match that nobody was expecting. Megan's DNA had been detected at another unrelated crime scene. On board the four wins. A forensic examination of the yacht had uncovered a dinner plate-sized DNA profile thought to have come from such bodily fluid as vomit, urine, or saliva. Testing confirmed it didn't belong to Sunil Fraser and its source had remained unknown, until now. Megan Vass had no known connection to Bob Chapel, Sunil Fraser, or the four wins, so there was no reasonable explanation for the presence of her DNA on the yacht.

Her fingerprints were compared to those found on board, but none were a match. Police searched for any other evidence that placed the teen on the four wins at any time, but found nothing. Police set up an interview with Megan Vass so they could question her about her whereabouts on January 26, the previous year. She never showed up. They scheduled a second interview, but she didn't attend that one either. As she was a minor with no adult guardian, they couldn't force her to speak. Megan was free to go about her life while Sunil Fraser's legal team scrambled to prove her innocence. They believed that police had tunnel vision on Sue, which led them to carry out an inadequate investigation.

The dinghy sided roped up to the four wins on the afternoon Bob vanished was described as charcoal gray. Bob and Sue's Quicksilver Dinghy was blue and white. One witness saw a lone, seemingly female figure traveling on a dinghy towards Bob's yacht at 11.30pm. Police were quick to conclude that this person was Sue, yet it could have been Megan Vass or it might not have been a woman at all. A man named Grant had also been moored in the same area as the four wins on the night of January 26, 2009. He was described as slim with delicate features and wavy shoulder length hair. It was possible that the witness had seen Grant and confused his silhouette for that of a female. Then there was the assertion that Sue had lifted Bob's body using a winch before placing it in

the dinghy and dumping it at sea. Several witnesses confirmed Sue couldn't use the winch without assistance due to a back injury. The Quicksilver Dinghy was tested with luminol, a chemical used to detect blood, and several areas had reacted positively. However, as luminol cannot be 100% relied on, another screening agent and microscopic examination were also used. This time, they returned negative results. There was no forensic evidence to conclusively prove there was or had been any blood in the dinghy at all. No other witnesses who had contact with Sue the morning after Bob's disappearance recalled seeing a bandage on her wrist or bandaid on her thumb. The interviewing officer who noticed

the injury said he told the detective in charge of the investigation about what he saw. But he didn't take any photographs or notes about the injury at the time, nor did he request it to be examined. An inverted latex glove uncovered on the four wins led investigators to assume that Sue had endeavored to clean the yacht prior to sabotaging it. The glove contained fingerprints, but they matched Bob's son, Timothy, who said he'd recently been on the yacht as a guest. Although financial gain was a common motive for murder, Sue was not desperate for money. While she no longer worked full-time, she owned three investment properties, and Bob had been providing her an allowance of $500 a fortnight for living expenses. If she hoped to inherit

Bob's half of the four wins, it didn't make sense that she would then attempt to sink the vessel in the process. Although her story changed, Sue willingly spoke with police and aided in their investigations. She even pointed out the things that were missing or out of place on the yacht. Were these the actions of someone who had something to hide? Sue's trial commenced in Tasmania's Supreme Court in September 2010. With no body, no weapon, no witnesses, and nothing to conclusively prove that Bob Chapel was deceased, the case against her was built entirely on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution called 60 witnesses to the stand. Among them was Peter, one of the crew

members who helped sail the four wins from Queensland to Tasmania. He was one of several people who claimed that Sue told him her relationship with Bob was over. In earlier police interviews, Sue claimed that Peter drank heavily during the voyage, implying that he might have gotten things mixed up. On the stand, Peter took offense to this. He stated that the most he ever drank was one or two glasses of wine during dinner, and he was nowhere near intoxicated at any time on the journey. Under cross-examination, Sue's lawyer put it to Peter that someone with intimate knowledge of the four wins would know there were easier ways to sink it than by cutting the 75mm pipe near the toilet. Peter agreed. It would be quicker to sink the boat by opening the main

engine inlet valve. However, Peter also noted that the slower method might be the best option if the person responsible wanted to get off the yacht and out of sight before anyone noticed it was sinking. Sue's former friend Philip Triffett took the stand to repeat his story about Sue saying she wanted to kill both her brother and Bob and throw them overboard. This had allegedly happened in the 90s. When the defence asked Philip why he didn't report either of these conversations to police at the time, he claimed he didn't think the threats would ever eventuate. The defence wasn't buying it. They argued that if Philip's claims were true, it was absurd to think that Sue would have carried out the plan a decade after first mentioning it. As the defence pointed out,

Philip had passed convictions for physical assault, traffic infringement and unlawful possession of a firearm. At the time Bob Chappell went missing, Philip was on bail and had asked police whether providing information about Bob and Sue's history would help with his current charges. The defence urged the jury to reject these claims on the basis that Philip Triffett was a dishonest man who was hoping to gain a personal advantage from giving false evidence. Instead, they criticised police for not seriously investigating Sue's concerns that someone might have used the four wins to smuggle drugs. James, a marine mechanic who had conducted repairs on the yacht while it was birthed in Queensland, gave evidence that while working on the yacht, he raised concerns of a

break-in. James had noticed that on two or three occasions, the boom cover, which is a tarpaulin that covers the cockpit to protect it from the elements, was tied down differently to the way he had left it. Several items on board had also been moved around. As the four wins was kept on a locked pier overnight, James suspected someone was accessing the yacht from the sea. Rattled, he had phoned Sue to voice his concerns, including that he felt like someone was watching him. However, during cross-examination, James revealed he later found out that an electrician had been working on the boat after hours, which accounted for this suspicious activity. He had informed Sue of this. This implied she knew the boat hadn't been broken into,

yet had still used these incidents to bolster her drug-smuggling theory. While there were compelling arguments both for and against Sue's innocence, one giant question loomed. How had Megan Vass's DNA got on board the four wins? The case's DNA profiler confirmed that the dinner plate-sized DNA profile belonged to Megan Vass at a probability of 1 in 100 million. Although rare, he said it was entirely possible that Megan's DNA ended up on the four wins through secondary transfer, without her ever having been on board. Speculatively speaking, it was possible that the DNA had been walked onto the yacht from someone's shoe, although he didn't recall an instance in his career where such an

incident had occurred. There had actually been some other items found on board that also appeared to have been covered in vomit, a small blue face washer and two wet rags. These had been bagged as evidence and appeared on the forensic report tended in court, but they were never forensically tested, nor mentioned during the trial. By this point, Megan Vass had been tracked down and was called to testify. She told the jury that in late January of 2009, she was living in a complex in Lana Valley, a suburb six and a half kilometers north of Sandy Bay. She had never been on board the four wins and couldn't recall whether she was anywhere near Sandy Bay at the time of Bob Chapel's disappearance, explaining why she refused to be interviewed by the police when her DNA was

first linked to the case. Megan said she was intimidated by law enforcement and by the magnitude of the situation. After giving her testimony, Megan was free to leave. However, something she said raised a red flag. Before the jury had been summoned in, Megan told the court that she'd been living in a women's refuge in Montrose at the time of Bob Chapel's disappearance, not Lana Valley, like she told the jury. The two suburbs were roughly six kilometers apart and not easily confused. Furthermore, one of the detectives who had looked into Megan after her DNA was identified told a completely different story. During his inquiries, he discovered that in late January 2009, Megan was living at a woman's shelter called Mara House in the inner northern

suburb of Newtown. Shelter policy required anyone who intended to spend the night off grounds tell the staff where they were going. On the night of January 26, staff recalled that Megan spent the night away and had given them the address of a unit in Mount Nelson, a suburb just above Sandy Bay. The detective looked into it and discovered it was a fake address. This was the first time this information had come to light, but by this point, Megan Vass had already been dismissed from court. The judge decided not to recall her and simply instructed the jury to ignore this information from the detective, as it was only hearsay. As the trial progressed, Sunil Fraser was called to the stand as the sole witness for the

defense. For four days, she was subject to intense questioning. Sue denied ever saying that her relationship with Bob was over. On the contrary, they had planned to get married on their upcoming 20th anniversary. She strongly denied ever telling her former friend, Philip Triffett, that she wanted her brother and Bob dead. She claimed the real reason her friendship with Philip deteriorated was because he was stockpiling weapons and it made her and Bob very uncomfortable. Additionally, Philip's partner at the time had told them that Philip had burned her house down for insurance money and that he had once killed a man. Sue stuck by the story that she sometimes strapped her wrist due to an old boating injury that often flared up. As for the band-aid,

the interviewing officer recalled seeing on her left thumb the morning of Bob's disappearance. Sue claimed to have no recollection of cutting herself. She said she must have been scratched by her cat. She admitted it was quote, very silly that she'd kept word of her trip to Sandy Bay on the night of January 26th a secret. She said she hadn't been thinking clearly at the time. The prosecution accused Sue of planting red herrings to direct the investigation away from herself. Sue disputed this, explaining that one of the reasons she withheld information from police was that she began suffering acute mental blackouts a few days after Bob's disappearance. She stated, it was as if everything was receding and then I would basically not know where I was,

just for a few seconds or a minute. Sue also claimed it was stress that had caused her to give incorrect recollections of her trip to Bunning's warehouse, hindered further by the fact that her days blended into one because she typically followed the same routine every day. The prosecution labelled these as false memories and suggested that Sue told so many lies she was unable to keep track of them all. The prosecution also accused Sue of exaggerating stories about the four wins being broken into to lead police towards that line of investigation. Her 2009 diary in which she had made note of a break-in that occurred on January 10 was presented to the court. This entry had been written using different coloured ink to other

entries from the same day. The prosecution alleged this was because Sue had made the entry later on to give her story about the break-ins more credence. Sue denied this allegation, pointing out that most of her diary entries were written in different coloured ink. During her time on the stand, Sue often gave vague, non-committed responses. The judge cautioned her against this, but Sue ignored the caution and continued giving passive answers. Some perceived this as being uncertain and deceitful. When the prosecution blatantly accused Sue of killing Bob and dumping his body at sea for financial gain, Sue responded, There is not a grain of truth in any of this.

After three weeks, Sue Norfraz's trial began wrapping up. Her lawyer reminded the jury that the prosecution's case was entirely circumstantial and Tasmanian law dictated that an individual couldn't be convicted of a crime when the evidence lies purely on suspicion. He said the prosecution's case ignored the evidence that clearly proved Sue was innocent, telling the jury, You hold Ms Norfraz's future in your hands today and you have a solemn duty to discharge in accordance with the oath that you took at the beginning of these proceedings to decide the case according to the evidence. That oath says nothing about suspicion.

The judge reiterated to the jury that telling a lie mustn't be treated as evidence suggesting guilt. He clarified, You may find Ms Norfraz guilty of murder if you're satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of all the following things. A. She killed Mr Chappell. B. The physical acts or acts by which she killed Mr Chappell were voluntary and intentional. C. At the time of the killing she intended to cause Mr Chappell's death. D. Her physical acts or acts were not justified under the provisions of the criminal code. D. The jury deliberated for 18 hours. For the murder of Bob Chappell they found Sue Norfraz guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Sue was noticeably shocked by the outcome. She had been so convinced that the jury would find her innocent that she'd barely considered the alternative. Sentencing took place 12 days later. Bob's family chose not to provide victim impact statements in order to preserve their privacy. The judge stated he was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Sue had murdered Bob on board the four wins and used the dinghy to dump his body at sea for the purpose of her own financial gain. Quote, She seems to me to be clever, very cool headed and well able to control her emotions. This was not a killing that occurred because of a loss of self-control. It was not a crime of passion. It was an intentional and purposeful killing.

Acknowledging that Sue had no prior convictions, the judge stated that her refusal to plead guilty or assist with locating Bob's body, coupled with her lack of remorse, warranted a heavier sentence than most murders. He therefore sentenced Sue Norfraz to 26 years with a non-parole period of 18 years, backdated to the date of her arrest. Sue appealed against her conviction straight away and in August 2011, her case was heard in the court of criminal appeal. The appeal was quashed immediately, but the appellate judges agreed that given her age and previously good character, her sentencing was excessive. Sue's sentence was reduced to 23 years with a non-parole period of 13 years, meaning she would be eligible for parole in 2022.

Sue wasn't satisfied with this outcome. Six months later, she applied for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia on the grounds that the case against her was purely circumstantial. She argued that the DNA evidence belonging to Megan Vass found on board the four wins should be given further consideration. Her application was rejected that same day. Writing to a friend about her experiences, Sue said, It has been a pretty horrific few years for us. No one in our family had ever been involved in the criminal justice system, and we were therefore naive when it came to interacting with police. We had faith that if mistakes were made, there were checks and balances to address them.

Now, in hindsight, our worldview has changed, and of necessity, we find ourselves tumbling about in the eye of a turbulent fight for justice. As more time goes by since Bob disappeared, the more clearly I see what has happened, and just how outrageous the claims made by police and prosecution actually were. For Sue's appeal lawyer, Barbara Retter, one particular detail continued to play on her mind. In the weeks following Bob's disappearance, a man named Stephen Gleason had gone to the Hobart police station, wanting to report his sightings on the night of January 26, 2009. Gleason had been living in his car in Sandy Bay at the time, and knew Bob and Sue,

as he occasionally helped them with their dinghy. He expected that police would follow up with him to provide a statement, but they never did. Barbara Retter wanted to know why. She contacted the police and insisted they conduct a formal interview with Gleason. The police reluctantly agreed. Stephen Gleason told the interviewing officer that his friend, Paul Rowe, should be viewed with suspicion. Rowe lived on a boat which had been moored alongside the four winds on the night of Bob Chapel's disappearance, and he was known to invite homeless people aboard. A month prior to the four winds incident, Rowe had allegedly told Gleason that Bob Chapel was, quote, a condescending old cunt, and I'd like to rip his

teeth out of his head with a pair of old pliers. Gleason claimed that he'd been sleeping in his car overlooking Sandy Bay on the night of January 26, 2009, when a homeless teenage girl knocked on his window. He suspected that she and her boyfriend had bordered the four winds, and might have something to do with Bob's disappearance. It was curious that Paul Rowe had never been questioned. After all, his boat was the closest one moored to the four winds on the night in question. Rowe also had a long criminal history which included serving prison time for stabbing a man. At the persistence of Sue's lawyer, police finally questioned him in 2012. Rowe denied knowing Sunil Fraser or Bob Chapel, but remembered the four winds because of its

distinct double mast. He admitted to having a violent temper that worsened when he was intoxicated, but denied having anything to do with Bob's disappearance or assisting Sue with the murder. He said he didn't know anyone named Megan Vass. According to Rowe, on the night of January 26, 2009, he had been drinking with Stephen Gleason before returning to his boat. Rowe claimed he kept his boat there until around November 2010. However, photographs taken during the investigation into Bob Chapel's disappearance proved otherwise. There was no sign of Paul Rowe's vessel in any of the images. In reality, Rowe had up and left the day after Bob's disappearance, relocating his

boat to Constitution Dock on the other side of the city. Police never queried this inconsistency. While the public remained divided about whether or not Sunil Fraser was guilty, her family and supporters continued to rally around her. They felt there were other possibilities that weren't explored due to investigators having cast their suspicions on Sue prematurely. What about Megan Vass's DNA? In the rare chance that Megan's DNA was walked on board by somebody else, it would have likely appeared in multiple places rather than in one single puddle. Furthermore, secondary transference of DNA is extremely rare and it would have been

nearly impossible in such a large amount. There were also some unidentified fingerprints and human hairs found on board the four winds that didn't belong to Sue. Then there was Bob's daughter, Lisa, who had spoken of her father coming to harm on the four winds the very night he disappeared. Despite this, Lisa wasn't questioned by police until four months into the investigation. There was also the issue of a police log recorded on January 27, 2009 that had been withheld from Sue's defense team and therefore not presented at her trial. The log stated that at some time between 7.45 and 8.30 on the night Bob went missing, a woman who lived in a large house overlooking Sandy Bay had looked out over the water.

She'd seen an inflatable dinghy leaving the area where the four winds was moored. She believed the dinghy was being driven by a male aged between 40 and 50 years old with thick, wavy, reddish-brown hair and a, quote, weather-beaten sailor look. Underneath the woman's statement, a detective had written, Person fits description of Sue Niel Fraser. Witness was some distance from dinghy and presumed it was a male due to the way the dinghy was sitting low in the water at the rear. That comment was entirely subjective, yet investigators hadn't bothered looking into any other possibilities. In actuality, the woman might have in fact seen a male as she told police.

There had also been a report from a woman who lived on the foreshore who said she had heard a distressed male's voice in the middle of the night. Police had largely ignored this report, even though it could have been vital in identifying the timing of Bob's attack. Then there was the ongoing argument about Sue's drug smuggling theory. While Sue's trial was taking place, the Australian Federal Police seized 464 kilograms of cocaine with a street value of $160 million from a yacht in Brisbane. Three Australian men were arrested after law enforcement agencies in the United States tipped off Australian authorities. While the prosecution passed off Sue's drug smuggling concerns as

ludicrous and unfounded, some argue that this bust showed the possibility wasn't without merit. During Sue's trial, the police had told the court there were no known break-ins to yachts in the Hobart area in the weeks leading up to Bob's disappearance. However, this wasn't true. Several locals had in fact had their dinghy stolen and boats broken into, but the police never followed up these reports in relation to Bob's disappearance. Instead, placing the blame on the local homeless population. On the night of Bob's disappearance, another vessel north of Sandy Bay had been ransacked in a similar manner to the Four Winds, with the power turned off at the switchboard and the alarm

system disengaged. With mounting pressure from Sue's supporters and various media outlets, the heat was on for the state coroner to announce a public inquest into Bob Chappell's death. But in January 2014, coroner Glenn Hay confirmed that there wouldn't be an inquest, as he supported the findings of Sue's murder trial and didn't believe anyone else had been involved. Coroner Hay believed a formal hearing would be a waste of court time and resources, while subjecting Bob and Sue's loved ones to unnecessary stress. Given that Sue had exhausted her appeal options, an inquest was her last chance to have the case reexamined. Then, almost two years later in November 2015, a new opportunity arose.

An amendment was made to the Tasmanian Criminal Code Act that allowed the right to appeal to the courts in circumstances where fresh and compelling evidence had become available. This meant Sue could launch another appeal, providing she could present evidence that was compelling enough to convince a judge for her appeal to be heard. Sue's supporters erected billboards in the centre of Hobart and along major roads, offering a $40,000 reward for anyone with quote, true facts that led to Sue's release. In 2016, former detective turned true crime writer Colin McLaren started investigating the Bob Chappell case himself.

He was convinced that Megan Vass held a vital clue to solving the mystery of what went down on the four winds that Australia Day. While Colin didn't think Megan killed Bob, perhaps she had been on the yacht that night and witnessed something terrible happen. By this point, Megan Vass was 23 years old and running with the motorcycle gang. Colin McLaren managed to track her down and she eventually agreed to speak to him in person. They met at a hotel in Hobart. Megan was accompanied by her boyfriend, with the counsellor on standby to provide support. Megan was visibly apprehensive. It was clear that she was highly stressed and on edge. She didn't want to talk,

saying the whole situation had haunted her for 11 years, but her boyfriend urged her to. It wasn't your fault, he told her. Somebody did the wrong thing by you, you're the one carrying it all. Megan paced nervously around the room, unable to sit still. She then begged her boyfriend to let her leave. Colin McLaren urged her to think of Sunil Fraser, who was spending her elderly years in prison in a wheelchair. He told Megan how grateful Sue would be if she just told the truth. Distraught with her head in her hands, Megan responded, I know this and I've tried so hard. It's draining me for fuck's sake. I can't do it today.

Megan said she thought about Sue every single day, and that if she could, she would go and unlock her cell door herself. Unable to cope with the pressure of the situation, Megan ended the meeting. However, before leaving the hotel, she was presented with the statutory declaration that Colin McLaren had prepared in advance. It stated, I was on the four wins yacht on the night of Australia Day 2009. I was there with people that I won't name. I don't want to give any details except that I was on the yacht. The lady, Sunil Fraser, was not on the yacht. I have never met her. I don't know her. I just know she is in prison.

I don't want to say why I was on the yacht, and I don't want to say any more. Megan signed the document. The statutory declaration was given to the director of public prosecutions, but no further action was taken. Megan Vass's boyfriend was eventually charged with perverting the course of justice after police argued that he pressured her to sign it against her will. Sue's lawyer, Barbara Retta, remained committed to proving her client's innocence. There was another detail that had been bugging her. It related to the red yachting jacket belonging to Sue that was found on the Esplanade on the morning of Bob Chappell's disappearance.

When this item was forensically analyzed, a 26cm long, dark hair was found on it. However, the hair was never tested. Barbara urged the director of public prosecution to test it against the DNA database, and in April of 2017, they finally agreed. The hair did not belong to Sue. Instead, it was linked to a woman who had been taken into police custody at 8pm on January 27, 2009, the night after Bob Chappell's disappearance. Barbara Retta discovered that when police first found the jacket, it was thrown into the back of a police car without being properly bagged as evidence. The hair made its way onto the jacket when the woman was

taken in the car for reasons unrelated to the Bob Chappell investigation. Four days later, when an officer went to retrieve the jacket for forensic testing, he found it laying in the dirt in the police car park. During that time, the jacket had been exposed to both rain and sun, with many people passing it by. The police log submitted at Sue's trial had made no mention of this. Sue's legal team believed they'd amassed enough new information to finally present their case to the Supreme Court of Tasmania. They had the stat deck from Megan Vass, the witness statement from Stephen Gleason that named Paul Rowe, and various experts who were willing to weigh in on the elements of the investigation they believed were handled incorrectly.

In October 2017, Sue began her leave to appeal with the aim of convincing the judge that there was enough new and compelling evidence to warrant a retrial. 19 witnesses were expected to take the stand over the course of the hearing, the first being Megan Vass. However, when Megan appeared in court, she retracted the statement made in her statutory declaration, saying it was, quote, not fucking true. She denied being on board the four wins on the night that Bob Chappell went missing and claimed that she had been pressured into signing the stat deck and offered payment to do so. Megan became aggressive, screaming, I had been made to sign that statement out of fear. I was threatened to be put in the boot of a car. She eventually ran from the courtroom

to avoid the media waiting outside. Stephen Gleason had since been convicted of causing grievous bodily harm after repeatedly bashing his neighbour over the head with an iron and was currently serving nine years in prison. A lawyer acting on behalf of Colin McLaren had visited Gleason in prison and presented him with a photographic lineup to see if he could identify the teenager who knocked on his window on the night of Bob Chappell's disappearance. Gleason had singled out a photo of Megan Vass. However, because the lawyer had presented this lineup to Gleason without permission from law enforcement, police claimed that both the lawyer and Gleason were perverting the course of justice. They also believed that the lawyer had strongly

influenced Gleason to identify Megan Vass. Both men were charged with interfering with Sue's appeal bid. Regardless at the hearing, Gleason maintained his belief that Paul Rowe was responsible for Bob's disappearance and maintained his identification of Megan Vass as the teenager who knocked on his car window on the night in question. To complicate matters further, Gleason also admitted he would lie to help Sue prove her innocence. The leave to appeal concluded on February 6, 2019, with the verdict to be delivered at a later date. Around this time, Colin McLaren published his findings in a book titled Southern Justice. A firm believer in Sue's innocence, the book sought to highlight the various mistakes made

the investigation. McLaren also teamed up with filmmaker E Vash to present their case for Sue's innocence in a six-part documentary series for the Channel 7 network, titled Undercurrent. Both the book and the series explained McLaren's theory as to how Bob Chapel was really murdered. He believed the more logical possibility was that two or more people broke into the four winds, not expecting to find Bob on board. Caught off guard, they killed him in the saloon and then attempted to let water into the yacht to destroy as much evidence as possible. Based on a length of rope that was found dangling from the rear entry hatch, the drops of blood on the lounge suite underneath and scuff marks above the lounge,

McLaren theorized the attackers then tied a rope around Bob's body and pulled him out of the saloon via the skylight above. As McLaren explained in Southern Justice, the rope is visible in police photographs. Its presence teases the astute investigator. This clue is vital to understanding the crime scene and cannot be ignored. But it was. Elongated vertical blood drops are evident on the lounge, their shape indicating that at some point his body was above where the drops fell. This is Detective 101 stuff. Logically, I can see no other solution.

With the release of Southern Justice and the Undercurrent documentary series, Sunil Fraser's case was back in the spotlight. Channel 9's 60 Minutes secured an exclusive interview with Megan Vass, which promised viewers explosive revelations. The episode aired on March 10, 2019. Megan, now aged 25, was still tormented over a secret that had now haunted her for a decade. She became incredibly emotional as she began to reveal the whole truth of what happened on the night of January 26, 2009. Through tears, Megan claimed she and two other men whom she didn't

want to name had been in the Sandy Bay area breaking into boats to steal money to buy alcohol. They entered the four winds thinking it would be vacant and were caught off guard when they found Bob on board. One of the men started arguing with Bob and the confrontation escalated. The man launched an attack that lasted for around 20 minutes, hitting Bob over the head multiple times with an unknown object. Megan said she urged the man to stop, but he was much bigger than her and she was helpless. The sight of the blood eventually caused her to vomit, likely accounting for the dinner plate sized DNA sample found on board, as well as the vomit stained rags and face washers.

She refused to name either of the attackers or reveal what they did with Bob's body, but stated, quote, whatever's happened, it's been horrible. Megan explained it had taken her so long to speak up because she had been living a hard life on the streets and was afraid to come forward. When interviewer Liam Bartlett asked why people should believe her now, Megan responded, I don't have a good reason really. I'd like to see Sue home with her family. It's the right thing to do, I suppose. As to whether she would retract her story when put in front of the court again, Megan said, I can't give a legitimate reason as to why anyone should believe me,

and given my track record, yeah, maybe they shouldn't. But I'm here now and I'm doing all I can. I can't do anymore. The episode was banned in Tasmania due to Sue's pending application for appeal, but on March 14, 2019, Megan signed an affidavit confirming that she was on the four wins on the night of Bob Chappell's murder. This carried more power than the statutory declaration she had previously signed for Colin McLaren. In the affidavit, Megan named the two men she was with and said that they had accessed the four wins because there was no dinghy attached, leading them to believe it was unoccupied. She said she couldn't recall the events that transpired after the attack on Bob or how she got back to shore.

One week later, a judge ruled there was enough fresh and compelling evidence to warrant Sunil Fraser's leave of appeal. This was excellent news for Sue. Since her arrest, she had missed the death of her mother and the births of four of her grandchildren. If her appeal was successful, it was possible that she could face a retrial or that her conviction would be overturned. If it failed, she would be able to apply for another leave of appeal only if further fresh and compelling evidence came to light. Outside the courthouse, Sue's daughter Sarah commented, This is just one step in what's going to be a very long journey for us as a family. She's an innocent woman and it's time she came home and was with her grandchildren for cuddles.

I want my mum back. Sue's appeal was scheduled to commence at Hobart Supreme Court in late May 2020, however it was delayed due to the global COVID-19 pandemic. It finally took place at the start of March 2021, by which point Sue had been in prison for 11 and a half years. Megan Vass was the star witness for the defense. While Sue's lawyer acknowledged that Megan had been an unreliable witness and had changed her story several times over the years, they explained that the issue of her credibility was secondary to whether or not her DNA had arrived on the yacht by her being present on board. Sue's lawyer said, There is an anchor that is fixed and

that is the finding of DNA of Megan Vass. If that anchor holds, it will produce a compelling case that there's been a miscarriage of justice. On day one, Megan appeared via video link, explaining she had recently overcome her drug addiction but remained mostly homeless. Once again, it was clear the situation caused her a great amount of stress. She became visibly emotional as she admitted to being on the four winds when Bob Chapel was murdered. It was the first time she'd made this admission before the courts. In a similar story to the one she gave to 60 Minutes, Megan said that she had been drinking in the suburb of Goodwood with her then-boyfriend and two of his friends, one of whom was Steven Gleason.

This expanded on Steven Gleason's previous comments, in which he said Megan had just knocked on his car window at the beach. According to Megan, the men came up with a plan. They'd go to Sandy Bay and rob boats for more alcohol money. Megan hadn't been involved with the plan but went along with it because she was drunk. In Sandy Bay, they found a dinghy on the beach and used it to enter the four winds, not expecting to find anyone on board. When they encountered Bob Chapel, Megan said her boyfriend started, quote, flipping. He attacked Bob and it was the sight of blood that caused Megan to vomit. She couldn't recall anything that happened after that.

Things were looking promising for Sue, until Megan took the virtual witness stand again the following day for cross-examination. This time, Megan said she'd been mistaken when she said there were three men on the yacht, when in fact there were only two. She then changed her story again, saying there was only one man. Having caught her in a lie, the prosecutor asked Megan, you can't remember being on that boat, can you? Megan responded, no. She said she'd been harassed into giving evidence and that someone had threatened to harm her if she didn't provide one of the men's names she had given. It was a major blow for Sue's defense. They requested that Megan Vass be relieved as a witness and her testimony abandoned.

Instead, they focused on what they saw as issues with the original trial, mainly the DNA evidence linked to Megan. A DNA expert for the defense had contradictory findings to the prosecution to prove that Megan's DNA couldn't have appeared on the four winds of via secondary transfer. They argued that if the jury heard from this expert, there would likely be enough to exonerate Sue on the basis of reasonable doubt. However, the prosecution explained that on the day the four winds was found sinking, it wasn't treated as a crime scene. It was eventually transferred to a marine facility in Goodwood, the same suburb where Megan Vass claimed to have been on January 26, 2009.

At least 21 other people, including insurance assessors, police officers and civilians, had entered the yacht before forensic swabs were taken. Any one of these individuals could have transferred Megan's DNA on board. The prosecution concluded that it was highly unlikely that Megan Vass was involved in Bob's death, while there was, quote, overwhelming evidence that Sue Nielfrazer was. After five years in the making, the appeal came to an end after just two and a half days. Outside court, Sue's daughter Sarah said she was optimistic that the judges would realise that a miscarriage of justice had been served.

Sarah said, Mom is innocent and this needs to be rectified so that she can get out and be acquitted. The true perpetrators of this crime need to be held to account and justice achieved for the sake of Bob. For seven months, Sue and her supporters waited anxiously as a panel of three judges reached their decision. On November 30, 2021, the judge's announcement was finally handed down. While one judge accepted Sue's appeal and welcomed a retrial, the other two dismissed the appeal. With two against one, Sue had lost. Bob Chapel's family have remained tight lipped about the case over the years,

while Nielfrazer's supporters remain unwavering in their belief that she is innocent. Among them is Stuart Tipple, the lawyer that helped exonerate Lindy Chamberlain, whose wrongful conviction was covered in episode 136 of Case File. Another lawyer has called the case against Sue the greatest miscarriage of justice in this country since Chamberlain. Sue's supporters have made numerous requests for a royal commission into Bob's disappearance to no avail. In January 2022, 13 years after Bob's presumed death, Sue lodged an application to appeal to the High Court over the dismissal of her case. It's unknown whether the court will consider her application.

Either way, Sue will be eligible for parole in August 2022. To Sue and her family, clearing her name is just as important as her freedom. The question of what really happened to Bob Chapel continues to polarise the Australian public. Some wonder if Bob had faked his own death. Others question if it were an accident. Perhaps the toilet water pipe broke and Bob injured himself trying to fix it, accounting for the blood on board. He might have then attempted to use the E-PURB to call for help before falling overboard and drowning. Others remain convinced of Sue Nill Fraser's guilt, noting her string of lies and a constantly changing story.

Sue's incarceration has been viewed critically, not necessarily because people believe she is innocent, but because she shouldn't have been convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. Whatever the case, Bob Chapel's outcome remains unknown. The four wins were sold at public auction to one of the salvage agents who helped stop it from sinking. They planned to take its sailing once they retire, just as Bob and Sue had planned to do.