Casefile True Crime - Case 231: Anna-Jane Cheney

Episode Date: November 12, 2022

In 1994, 29-year-old Adelaide lawyer Anna-Jane Cheney was looking forward to her dream wedding. But just six weeks before she was due to walk down the aisle, her fiancè Henry Keogh called paramedics to report that he’d found Anna-Jane lying unconscious in the bath of their Magill home. --- Narration – Anonymous Host Research & writing – Elsha McGill Creative direction – Milly Raso Production and music – Mike Migas Music – Andrew D.B. Joslyn Sign up for Casefile Premium: Apple Premium Spotify Premium Patreon For all credits and sources please visit casefilepodcast.com/case-231-anna-jane-cheney

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. At 9.32pm on Friday, March 18, 1994, a call came through to the South Australian Ambulance Service helpline. On the other line was a distressed male. My fiance has had an accident in the bath, he said.

I think she has drowned. The operator began asking questions, but the caller was in a state of panic. He put the phone down, explaining he was performing CPR. Six minutes later, two paramedics arrived at a federation-styled duplex in McGill, a leafy suburb seven kilometres east of Adelaide CBD. The house belonged to 29-year-old lawyer Anna Jane Cheney. She lived there with her fiance, 39-year-old financial adviser Henry Keough, who was the one who placed the call.

A distraught Henry hurried the paramedics into the small L-shaped bathroom located at the front of the house. Anna Jane was lying on the floor naked, her body halfway between the bathroom and the adjoining bedroom. Her skin was visibly pale, and her dark blonde hair was wet against the bedroom carpet. Henry dropped to his knees and hunched over Anna Jane's body, weeping. The paramedics asked him to move aside as they commenced resuscitation. Straight away, they noticed a significant blockage in her airway.

They tried to unblock it, but it was no use. Anna Jane was already dead. Given it was an unexplained and sudden death, police were summoned to the scene to rule out foul play. When officers arrived, they found Henry crying next to Anna Jane's lifeless body, his head resting on her chest. Henry Keough told officers that after knocking off work on Friday, March 18, he and Anna Jane met at a trendy suburban pub to unwind.

They chatted over several glasses of Chardonnay and a bowl of potato wedges before heading home. They weren't there long before Anna Jane had to leave to meet her sister-in-law Sue, who was also her best friend. The two had arranged to walk their dogs in a nearby park while discussing the latest wedding plans. In just six weeks' time, Anna Jane and Henry were due to get married, with Sue serving as bridesmaid.

Anna Jane jumped into her Volvo with her energetic bearded collie, Jordan. Her catch-up with Sue was short, yet enjoyable. At around 8pm, the sisters farewell one another, making plans to see each other again the following weekend. Anna Jane drove back towards her home, looking forward to a quiet night in. At home, Anna Jane encouraged Henry to go see his mother. Henry and his mum had a somewhat tumultuous relationship, and it had been about six weeks since he had last paid her a visit.

They agreed that it was a good idea. His mother only lived five minutes away, so it wouldn't take long. Meanwhile, Anna Jane was tired and her back was sore. She told Henry she'd soak in a bath while he was gone. Henry left at around 8.20pm, arriving at his mother's house shortly after. He stayed for about 45 minutes before returning home. It was roughly 9.30pm by the time he pulled into the duplex driveway. Anna Jane's Volvo was right where she'd left it, and her dog Jordan rushed to the front

door. But when Henry entered the house, it was oddly silent. He called out, but there was no response. He walked down the hall, only to find the kitchen and lounge room empty. He went back down the hall, then paused. He could tell the light was on in the bathroom, but nothing stirred within. He gave the door a push. Inside, Anna Jane was slumped over in the tub, lying on her right hand side facing north.

Her nose and mouth were completely submerged in the water, her skin pale and eyes glassy. Henry tried to lift Anna Jane out of the bath, but this proved difficult on account of him having an injured back. The water was also making everything slippery. Instead, Henry tried to let the water out of the bath, but Anna Jane's body was blocking the plug. He managed to maneuver his hands under Anna Jane's arms. Hugging her tight to his chest, Henry then dragged her wet body out of the tub, where

it flopped onto the floor. Henry had volunteered with the ambulance service 15 years prior, and he tried to remember his CPR training. He felt Anna Jane's throat, but his own heart was racing so fast that he couldn't tell if she still had a pulse. He checked her airway before commencing mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and chest compressions. When he's panic, he couldn't remember if the number for emergency services was triple zero or triple one.

Instead, he called the direct ambulance helpline while continuing to administer CPR. At no time did Anna Jane move or make a sound. The responding police officers examined the scene. The tub that ran along the back wall of the bathroom was three-quarters full of tepid water and there was no blood or vomit to be seen. It didn't look like Anna Jane had fallen and hurt herself or suffered a sudden illness. There were no signs of forced entry or any kind of violence or struggle. Police therefore concluded it was a non-suspicious death.

Anna Jane had likely fallen asleep or passed out in the tub and drowned. Henry notified the Cheney family of Anna Jane's death. For them, things didn't make sense. Anna Jane was a healthy young woman with no medical history that would explain a sudden loss of consciousness. She had consumed four glasses of wine at the pub with Henry that night, yet her sister in law Sue didn't think she'd seemed affected by alcohol when they met at the park to walk their dogs.

Anna Jane wasn't a drug user and was otherwise looking forward to the future. She had recently secured a senior position with the Law Society of South Australia, an impressive achievement for someone of her age and experience. It was a demanding role, but one that Anna Jane thrived in. Colleagues admired her ability to blend her ambitious and career-focused dedication with her characteristic warmth and joy. They did recall that Friday had been a particularly stressful day at Anna Jane's work, but no one she interacted with that day noted anything out of the ordinary.

When a deceased body is found in water, there is nothing in an autopsy that will exclusively prove that the individual died from drowning. Therefore, a range of factors such as injury, heart attack, stroke and severe allergic reaction need to be ruled out before drowning can be concluded as the cause of death. The task of conducting Anna Jane Cheney's autopsy was assigned to Dr Colin Mannock, the senior director of forensic pathology at South Australia's Forensic Science Centre. He'd conducted around 9,000 autopsies over the span of his 30-year career and was considered by many to be the state's top forensic expert.

Dr Mannock couldn't find any trauma that would have rendered Anna Jane unconscious, but he did notice a 3-centimeter circular bruise on the top of her forehead, which appeared to have occurred shortly before she died. There was also a small bruise on the back of her neck. Blood and tissue samples were taken from her lungs, heart and brain for further testing and to exclude any significant medical conditions. Until then, Dr Mannock reported his findings to the coroner, determining the provisional cause of death to be freshwater drowning.

He said no further reports would be necessary unless the tests revealed something of note. But the bruising concerned him. It was an unusual position that didn't look like it could have been caused by a fall. A constable who worked for the coronial investigation section had attended Anna Jane's home on the night she died. From the get-go, she'd felt that there was something a little off about the whole situation. She found Henry Keough's behaviour at the scene to be odd, describing his display of grief as, quote, crocodile tears.

Upon reading the report, she noted that the location of the bruise at the top of Anna Jane's head didn't fit with her falling face first or with her head back. The constable requested further inquiries be conducted to explain how the bruise occurred, and she wasn't the only one who had questions. There was no doubt in anyone's mind that Anna Jane was deeply in love with Henry Keough. The two had met at a popular city pub in 1989. At the time, Henry was working for the now defunct state bank. He'd previously pursued careers in dentistry and sales before finding his calling in the

financial industry. Although he didn't have the same upper-class background as Anna Jane and her friends, the two connected on an intellectual level. They began meeting up regularly, and an emotional connection started to grow. Anna Jane was drawn to Henry's quiet intellect and cheery exterior. He enjoyed Anna Jane's quick wit, confidence, and her no-nonsense approach to life. Henry also saw Anna Jane as physically stunning. Within weeks, they'd formed a romantic relationship.

To outsiders, Anna Jane was smitten. But for the rest of the Cheney family, the feeling wasn't mutual. While they tolerated Henry on a social level, they simply didn't feel he was right for Anna Jane. In addition to the 10-year age gap between them, there was something about Henry they didn't trust. After working in various roles over the years, he'd recently started a new job in a stockbroking firm.

Not only did the Cheneys feel Henry was possessive and somewhat cagey about what he did for a living, he had been married with three children when he started an affair with Anna Jane. Although Henry had since divorced his first wife, he was still financially supporting her and their children. Anna Jane's family wondered about how this might impact their upcoming marriage. Furthermore, since having his third daughter, Henry had had a vasectomy. Although Anna Jane insisted motherhood wasn't high on her list of priorities, there were concerns she might change her mind in the future.

When Anna Jane borrowed money from her father to purchase her McGill home in May of 1992, it was on the condition that Henry didn't move in. The pair had been running hot and cold, and the Cheneys suspected that Henry might still be romantically involved with his ex-wife. Anna Jane's mother had once spotted Henry's car in his ex-wife's driveway at a time he told Anna Jane he was interstate. But after some ups and downs, Anna Jane assured her parents that her relationship with Henry was solid.

Every month after she purchased her home, Henry was living there full-time. Once the reality of Anna Jane's death began to sink in, her father was eager to make sure her financial affairs were in order. On Sunday, March 20, he asked Henry whether Anna Jane had any insurance policies. Henry responded, No, not that I know of. But as the Cheneys quickly found out, this wasn't the case. The previous July, Henry and Anna Jane had gone on a holiday to Hong Kong.

In preparation, Anna Jane had taken out a $400,000 life insurance policy. She told her brother and other friends about it before she left, saying that if anything happened to her, the insurance would settle her $30,000 debt to her father and pay off her mortgage. The rest would go to Henry. This information from the Cheneys, coupled with the questionable bruising on Anna Jane's head, prompted police to investigate her death further. Anna Jane's sister-in-law hadn't noticed the bruise when the pair walked their dogs,

nor had a friend who met with her for lunch on the day she died. However, the dislike for Henry Keough was shared by a majority of Anna Jane's close friends, who deemed him to be secretive and a liar. A former colleague of Henry's also described him as a snake oil salesman. The general consensus was that there was something suspicious about Anna Jane's sudden death. These suspicions were shared by Dr Colin Manock, who had since conducted a second autopsy of Anna Jane's body. Two days after she passed, Dr Manock noticed what appeared to be three small circular bruises

developing just above her left ankle, with an adjacent bruise on the inner left leg. As the days went by, the bruises got darker and darker. Dr Manock placed his hand against Anna Jane's leg, and realized that his three fingers and thumb lined up with the bruises. It dawned on him. This wasn't just a random pattern. It was a handprint. Dr Manock was aware of an infamous case that had occurred in England in the early 20th

century. Over a period of three years, three otherwise healthy young women had drowned in small bathtubs. A forensic pathologist realized that all three women shared similar bruising around their elbows. He concluded they hadn't died by accident at all. Someone had likely pulled each woman up by their legs, causing their upper bodies to slide under water. The sudden rush of water into their noses would have quickly rendered them unconscious,

with their killer then holding them under water until they drowned. At the time of their deaths, all three women had been married to the same man, George Joseph Smith. Smith's connection to each woman had gone unnoticed as he changed his name and relocated often. It was determined that he had killed his three wives to inherit their money. The case came to be known as the Brides in the Bath Murders. For Dr Manock, the similarities between the Brides in the Bath case and the mysterious

death of Anna Jane Cheney couldn't be ignored. On Tuesday, March 22, four days after Anna Jane's death, police took Henry Keough in for questioning. Over four and a half hours, they asked him about his relationship with Anna Jane and the events leading up to her death. Henry had initially told police that when he left his house on Friday night, Anna Jane had been getting food out to feed her dog. This time, he said she was running the bath.

He'd earlier said that when he came home, he checked the bedroom. This time, he said he never went into the bedroom. There were other inconsistencies too. In his first statement, Henry said he found Anna Jane lying on her right hand side. But he told Anna Jane's mother that he found her lying on her back. Police questioned Henry's ex-wife, Susan. She said Henry's affair with Anna Jane wasn't the first time he'd been unfaithful during their marriage.

Regardless, she cared about him deeply and hoped he'd one day return to the family. Susan told police the two had maintained a friendship but hadn't been sexual since they first separated. Nor had Henry spent the night at her home since. When the police mentioned Henry's engagement to Anna Jane, Susan was shocked. This was the first she'd heard about it. For investigators, this raised the question. If the two were still close friends, why had Henry kept this information a secret?

Could it be because he never intended for the wedding to go ahead at all? Police visited Henry at the McGill home where he was still living and asked for Anna Jane's financial records. When asked who the beneficiary of Anna Jane's will was, Henry responded, I don't know. The records told a different story. Henry was listed as both the executor and main beneficiary. Other than the $30,000 Anna Jane owed her father for the house deposit. The rest of her estate was to go to Henry.

The $400,000 life insurance policy she'd taken out prior to their overseas holiday was only the tip of the iceberg. In fact, Anna Jane had a total of five life insurance policies with different providers, all of which had been taken out between February and April of 1993, just over a year before her death. In total, the policies were worth $1.125 million. On Wednesday, March 23, police returned to the McGill property and advised Henry they'd picked up on some discrepancies in his statements.

They knew he lied about Anna Jane's will and insurance policies, and now had reason to believe that her death was suspicious. They put their theory to Henry bluntly. They believed that Henry had invited Anna Jane out to the pub after finishing work on Friday night with the intention of getting her drunk. Her plans to walk the dogs with her sister-in-law had thrown an unexpected spanner in the works. Instead, he'd waited until he returned from his mother's house. His mother confirmed her son had visited on Friday night, leaving around 9.20pm.

It was a five-minute drive back to Anna Jane's house. Henry's call to the ambulance service was placed at 9.32pm. Although an exact time of death couldn't be established, if Anna Jane was already in the bath when Henry arrived home, this gave him just under 10 minutes to grab her by the ankles and lift her legs up over her head, forcing her head under water until she lost consciousness. Some of the first responders at the scene felt that Henry was genuinely distressed. It was possible this was an evidence of grief but a reaction to what he'd just done.

The police told Henry that he was the only one with any motive to want Anna Jane dead. With no signs of a break-in or sexual assault, everything pointed towards him. Henry was taken aback. He rejected the police theory, saying it was Anna Jane who had invited him for drinks on Friday night, not the other way around. Any discrepancies in his statements were explained by a severe lack of sleep and the stress of the situation. Henry reluctantly permitted police to search the house.

They double-checked for any signs of forced entry or missing goods to rule out the possibility that someone else could have broken in and committed the crime. There were none, nor did the neighbors recall hearing any shouting or suspicious noises. On the night Anna Jane Cheney died, around 12 people had entered her bathroom. This included paramedics, police, friends and family. No forensic samples had been collected and the bathwater had been promptly drained without any tests being conducted. Nothing had been done to protect the integrity of the crime scene.

In fact, Henry himself had stayed home alone after everyone left that night, cleaning and vacuuming the house. By the time it was deemed necessary, a forensic search failed to uncover anything of note. Regardless, on Friday, March 25, one week after Anna Jane had passed away, her death was officially declared a major crime. Her body was released to her family that same day. On Wednesday, March 30, Anna Jane was prepared for her funeral wearing the wedding dress she'd been so excited to wear down the aisle.

She was remembered as the silver thread that wove so many lives together. Local newspapers immediately began reporting on the case, making it no secret that police were now treating Anna Jane's death as a murder. Her mother made a heartfelt plea for anyone with information to come forward, saying she was worried that other young women could also be at risk. When Belinda Morris, not her real name, read the news, she sent a fax through to the major crimes unit saying she had information that might be of interest. Henry had told police he'd been faithful to Anna Jane, but according to Belinda, this

was just another in a long series of lies. Belinda had met Henry Keough in late 1991 when they were both employed in separate branches of the state bank. Although he was in a relationship with Anna Jane at the time, at no point did he mention this to Belinda. Instead, he asked her on a date, and the two began seeing each other on and off in both a professional and personal capacity. Henry had even called Belinda while he was holidaying in Hong Kong with Anna Jane, although

he told her he was travelling with a male friend. Things allegedly became physical between the two in mid-1993, but they didn't consummate their relationship until December that year. Belinda took it upon herself to book romantic trips for her and Henry, but each time he bailed at the last minute with a different excuse. It was in January of 1994 that Anna Jane's name came up at work for the first time. When Belinda asked Henry who she was, he apparently responded, An ex-girlfriend.

She phones me all the time. She's obsessed with me. She is convinced she wants to marry me, but I will never marry her. And on Valentine's Day in 1994, just one month before Anna Jane died, Henry gave Belinda a rose and a card. Belinda asked if this meant that Henry was all hers. He allegedly responded, Yes, I'm yours, and you're all mine.

Belinda wasn't the only one who claimed to have been romantically involved with Henry during his relationship with Anna Jane. Monica Coleman, not her real name, met Henry through work in 1991. Their relationship went from professional to personal, and the two began meeting up socially. In March 1992, a visibly upset Henry told Monica that he needed to break up with his girlfriend, Anna. He loved her, but she wanted to get married and have children, which was the last thing

on Henry's mind. Henry concluded he would try to end things kindly by, quote, weaning Anna Jane off of him. Three months later, Monica was out shopping with friends when she ran into Henry and Anna Jane. The following day, Henry called Monica to clarify that the two of them were now just friends. From there, Monica and Henry entered what she described as an intense sexual relationship.

They would dine out together and have sex up to six times a week. Monica considered them to be a couple, but certain things about Henry's behavior bothered her. He wouldn't tell her exactly where he lived, yet he'd never stay at Monica's house later than 2 a.m. He always made excuses as to why he had to leave, and would bail on social events on account of having to see his children. He said he didn't want to make any commitments because he was still getting over his break

up with Anna Jane. Monica eventually ended things with Henry in December of 1992. They continued meeting up every now and then, but had no further sexual contact. Henry gave the impression he was still single and told Monica that he hadn't been intimate with anyone else since their break up. Unbeknownst to Monica, at this point he was engaged to Anna Jane. Monica had lunch with Henry on Valentine's Day of 1994, during which he allegedly said he wasn't seeing anyone.

In reality, his wedding to Anna Jane was just two months away. Convinced that Henry now had further motive to want his fiance out of the picture, a full investigation was launched into the couple's finances. When taking out life insurance, standard procedure dictates that an applicant must disclose any other policies they might have with other providers. Despite Anna Jane having five insurance policies, she hadn't disclosed this on any of her proposals. Investigators soon realized this was because Anna Jane hadn't submitted the proposals at all.

Each proposal had been submitted by Henry Keough, complete with a forging of Anna Jane's signature. The couple shared a joint checking account. Henry had also forged Anna Jane's signature to pay for the premiums, as well as to reinstate her pre-existing superannuation account. On each policy, Henry Keough was listed as the beneficiary. The circumstantial evidence against Henry Keough was damning, but before placing any charges, investigators needed more physical proof that Anna Jane hadn't died from natural

causes. The toxicology results would still take some time. But, if Anna Jane had slipped and fallen unconscious into the bath, forensic pathologist Dr. Colin Manock believed that her brain would have displayed signs of injury or bruising. No such evidence had been visible. Dr. Manock submitted his final autopsy report, concluding that Anna Jane Cheney must have been conscious when she drowned. Bruisers differ greatly from individual to individual.

Some people show signs of bruising straight away, while others take days or even weeks. Therefore, Dr. Manock couldn't say exactly when the bruises on Anna Jane's legs had occurred. Given they'd become darker over the days she was being autopsyed, he was convinced they'd happened within four hours of the time that she drowned. By Saturday, May 7, seven weeks had passed since the young lawyer's death. Henry Keough was watching one of his daughters play basketball at a suburban stadium. Suddenly, two police officers approached and placed him under arrest on suspicion of murdering

Anna Jane Cheney. In custody, Henry was questioned as to whether he was aware of his fiance's numerous life insurance policies. His answer to that was the same as every other question. No comment. The following day, Henry was charged with murder and refused bail. The toxicology results from Anna Jane's autopsy were finalised in the following month. At the time of Anna Jane's death, her blood alcohol had registered at around 0.08%.

There had been no medication or illegal drugs in her system. But Dr Manok was therefore highly unlikely that Anna Jane had simply fallen asleep in the bath. When a person's airways are threatened, survival mechanisms kick in automatically. They will typically begin coughing and choking and be woken by a surge of adrenaline. Dr Manok didn't think Anna Jane was intoxicated enough to cancel these reflexes out. Henry Keough's trial commenced in February 1995, 11 months after Anna Jane's death. The prosecution's case was that Henry had been financially motivated to kill his fiance

purely out of greed. The falsification of her multiple life insurance policies served as proof of premeditation. The secret affairs Henry had with two other women proved he wasn't serious about his professed love for Anna Jane or his intention of marrying her. With their wedding looming, the prosecution said that inheriting Anna Jane's estate would enable Henry to provide the ongoing financial support to his ex-wife and children while enjoying his freedom. The prosecution said there was no evidence to support accidental death, suicide, or intervention

from a stranger. Instead, all fingers pointed to murder by Henry Keough. Having returned home from visiting his mother, finding Anna Jane in the bath gave him the perfect opportunity to launch an attack. Given that Anna Jane loved and trusted Henry, she would have thought nothing of it when he entered the bathroom and reached out to touch her. Hence why there was no sign of a struggle. The prosecution clarified that it wasn't their role to prove exactly when or how Henry

had killed Anna Jane, only that he had indeed committed the crime. They acknowledged that the evidence against Henry Keough was mostly circumstantial, but when all the factors were combined, there was no room for doubt that he had killed Anna Jane Cheney. According to Henry, when he found Anna Jane, she had been sitting at the plug end of the tub. On the stand, Dr Colin Manock presented his view that a person sitting in this position could be easily immersed if someone grabbed their legs and folded them down towards their

head. The shape of the bath meant the person's shoulders would be pushed to the bottom of the tub, trapping their arms and rendering them unable to struggle. The flotation effect would make it easy for the body to be pulled through the water, with a sudden rush of water going up the nose to cause rapid unconsciousness. For Dr Manock, the hand-like bruising on Anna Jane's legs supported this theory. The bruise on her head also indicated it was possible that someone had hurled her down below the water, while the lack of brain injury indicated she must have been conscious when

she drowned. Dr Manock's testimony was supported by his colleague Dr Ross James. However, Dr James disagreed with one thing. He explained that concussions don't show up in an autopsy, therefore he couldn't confirm that Anna Jane had been conscious when she went under the water. Another pathologist testified for the prosecution that the evidence was also circumstantial, that he didn't think the answers lay in the forensics. Given Anna Jane's blood alcohol level, he believed it was possible she could have slipped

and cracked her head on any number of the hard surfaces surrounding the tub. As for the theory that Anna Jane had been pulled under water by her ankles, he said, I think really one is limited only by one's imagination in thinking of what sort of thing might have created those sorts of bruises. The defense submitted that Anna Jane's death was nothing more than a tragic accident, and that elevating it to murder would be a quote, terrible miscarriage of justice. They argued that the bruises on Anna Jane's body could have been caused by any number of things and at any time.

Not only were forensic experts unable to conclusively exclude the possibility that Anna Jane had died as the result of an accident, their client also had a legitimate explanation for the life insurance policies. In a highly anticipated move, Henry Keough took the stand in his own defense. He explained that as a side hustle, he worked as an independent insurance agent. For every insurance policy he sold, he received a commission from the relevant insurance company. To keep his agency active, he had to continue putting business through. In preparation for his inevitable retrenchment from the failing state bank, Henry submitted

policies in both his and Anna Jane's name. Not only did this keep his agency active, but the commissions he earned were larger than the premiums, making it a win-win situation. Although it wasn't legal, this was common practice within the industry. Henry claimed that Anna Jane was fully aware of the scheme and agreed to go along with it, provided she didn't have to do the paperwork or undergo any medical testing. Henry said he never had any intention of claiming payouts on any of the policies. If that was the case, the prosecution questioned why he had withheld this information from

the police when they first inquired about Anna Jane's financial affairs, and why had Henry told Anna Jane's father he didn't know if she had any insurance. Furthermore, if Anna Jane knew about the policies, why did she only ever tell her friends and family about the one for $400,000? Henry explained he'd still been in a state of shock and confusion at the time. The defence attempted to exclude testimony from Belinda Morris and Monica Coleman, the two women Henry was alleged to have had affairs with, on the grounds that it didn't provide any genuine insight into his relationship with Anna Jane.

The judge disagreed, and both women took the stand to provide the court with details about their relationship with the accused. Henry fully admitted to his relationship with Monica, but explained that it had taken place during a period of 1992 where he and Anna Jane had been taking a break, although he also acknowledged that the two relationships did overlap for a period of time. As for the relationship with Belinda, Henry admitted the two had been friends, but he strongly denied that they'd ever been romantically or sexually involved. Knowing that Belinda had never had a serious boyfriend before, Henry believed she was confused

about the attention he gave her. He admitted to calling Belinda while he was in Hong Kong with Anna Jane, but explained this was purely business-related. In response to the prosecution's claim that the relationship between Belinda and Henry intensified while Anna Jane was busy planning for the wedding, the defense argued that Belinda had become obsessed with Henry and created a fantasy. In the last few years, Belinda had lodged 30 sexual harassment claims against 21 of her male co-workers as well as one female.

Due to the stress it caused, she was placed under psychiatric care and eventually given leave from the bank. The defense suggested that Belinda was just an infatuated woman with psychiatric issues who had misread a platonic friendship, a claim she strongly denied. In an attempt to prove that the two had never had sex, the defense asked Belinda whether Henry was circumcised. She said that he was. In a bizarre move, a photo of Henry's erect penis was submitted into evidence.

The photo confirmed that he was, in fact, not circumcised. After all the evidence was presented, the judge reiterated to the jury that the highly circumstantial nature of this case meant they had to take extra care when reaching their verdict. It all came down to reasonable doubt. It wasn't enough for the jury to think that murder might have taken place or had probably taken place. They could only find Henry Keough guilty of murdering Anna Jane if they couldn't find

any other reasonable hypothesis as to how she died. Regarding the insurance policies, the judge told the jury, It is a matter for you to decide as to how much Anna knew about these policies and when. If you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she did not appreciate the complete picture, you are entitled to ask why. If there is a reasonable possibility that she knew details such as how much her life was insured for, then the crown case on motive is significantly reduced. As for the testimonies from Belinda and Monica, the judge urged that this evidence must only

be considered in connection to Henry's relationship with Anna Jane, rather than as a smear on his character. The jury retired to consider its verdict. Unable to reach a unanimous decision, they were sequestered overnight to reconvene the next morning. But by midday the next day, they remained completely deadlocked. There would be no verdict. The jury was hung.

The case was ordered to be retried the following week. By this point, the story had been so widely reported on in the presumption of Henry Keough being found guilty that his lawyer argued the case should be thrown out entirely. In his view, there was very little chance of finding an unbiased jury. The judge rejected this, but attempted to rectify the issue by postponing the retrial. The second trial went ahead four months later, in August 1995. The evidence and witnesses were mostly the same, but the presentation was streamlined thanks to a joint agreement by both parties.

Dr Colin Manock had retired just days before the proceedings, but he returned to give evidence. This time, a bathtub similar to the one in Anna Jane's home was brought into the court. Dr Manock knelt beside it and gave a physical demonstration of his theory as to how Anna Jane could have been gripped by the leg and held underwater. He said that all bruises on her body had been caused close to the time of death. Once again, Dr Ross James supported his colleague's theory. A new professor of forensic pathology was called as an expert witness for the defense. Given that the age of the bruises on Anna Jane's legs couldn't be conclusively ascertained,

he had trouble accepting they were caused by a hand grip. The professor said he couldn't exclude the possibility that Anna Jane had died as the result of an accident, including a slip and fall that rendered her unconscious. In summing up the evidence, the judge reminded the jury, You cannot return a verdict of guilty unless the circumstances are such as to be inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis other than that the accused is guilty. This time, it took the jury just five and a half hours to reach a unanimous verdict. Guilty.

Sentencing took place the following year in February. Anna Jane's parents were fiercely private during both trials and had not attended at any point except to give evidence. They provided a confidential victim impact statement to the judge, who said it was impossible to describe the suffering that the Cheney family had experienced. The judge said that while Anna Jane might have had some knowledge of the insurance policies, she had no idea of their extent. Henry's failure to disclose these policies at the start of the investigation was proof

of this. The judge concluded, When the facts are considered in this light, they reveal an elaborate and coldly planned scheme to kill Miss Cheney and profit from her death at a time when she was deeply in love with you and excitedly preparing to marry you. Henry sentenced Henry Keough to 25 years in prison, one of the highest sentences handed down in South Australia. Henry's lawyers immediately filed for an appeal.

Since the early stages of the investigation, the case had been reported on extensively with the media calling Anna Jane's death a murder and referring to her as a victim without using cautionary words like alleged. Articles had also gone to print in anticipation of a guilty verdict being handed down and therefore contained considerable comment about Henry in that vein. Given that this broke the journalistic rules about reporting fairly and accurately without comment, Henry's lawyers argued there had been unfair, prejudicial coverage of the trial. They also stated that the evidence provided by Belinda Morris and Monica Coleman should

have been inadmissible. The appeal was swiftly rejected. From prison, Henry Keough maintained his innocence. He focused on fitness and read books to keep his mind busy, recognising the challenges faced by his fellow inmates helped prevent him from falling into a trap of self-pity. Visits from his daughters sustained him, but these became less frequent as Henry was transferred between different regional prisons. Henry's 10-year-old daughter encouraged him to stay positive.

She wrote him a letter that said, I am trying to be brave just for you and I will hope for the best in the future. If you ever don't feel happy, do what I do. I think of you, so you think of me, and we will both be happy all of the time. In addition to the ongoing support of his family, Henry's case had attracted a growing number of supporters from the academic community as well as concerned citizens. They believed he had been served a severe miscarriage of justice and not just because the case relied so heavily on circumstantial evidence.

Firstly, there was the question of why Anna-Jane's body had been cremated before her death had even been officially registered. Secondly, Henry had been charged with murder before the toxicology results had even been confirmed. Thirdly, some were dubious whether the proposed murder scenario was even physically possible. But, at the heart of it all, lay a much bigger question. Between October 1992 and July 1993, three unrelated babies died under suspicious circumstances in Adelaide. They were presented to medics with various injuries, including skull fractures, bruises, wounds, and multiple broken bones.

Police officers, paramedics, and pediatricians attached to each case believed the infants showed glaring signs of severe abuse. They anticipated laying homicide charges against some of the parents. Autopsies were ordered, yet a pathologist determined that all three babies had died of an inflammation of the lungs called bronchonamonia. They were each recorded to have died by natural causes. Authorities were incredulous. The post-mortems were supposed to open lines of investigation, but had instead closed them.

They requested that a coronial inquest be held to determine the true causes of death. Bolstering their belief that the diagnoses were grossly inadequate was the fact that the same pathologist had conducted each post-mortem. Dr. Colin Menoc The inquest revealed that Dr. Menoc had taken minimal tissue and organ samples to arrive at an accurate cause of death. His reports were noted as lacking detail. The coroner concluded that there was no evidence of bronchonamonia in two of the infants and

only minor traces in one. Even if science had been present, there was no forensic evidence to indicate such a condition would have caused to death. In one case, Dr. Menoc had interpreted a scar on one of the baby's bottoms to be nappy rash. It was presented that this could have actually been a cigarette burn. The injuries on another of the infants was described as being akin to those of an adult motor accident victim. The inquest into the baby's deaths also revealed that in the late 1970s, Dr. Menoc had taken

his employer to court after an attempt had been made to demote him from the position of director of forensic science. It was alleged that his co-workers had become increasingly concerned that Dr. Menoc lacked the specialist skills required to perform his job. While he had completed a medical degree in the United Kingdom, he had never completed the five years of histopathology study required of a senior pathologist. This entailed the microscopic examination of human cells and tissues for the presence of disease and was essential in certifying causes of death.

In lieu of this qualification, Dr. Menoc simply completed a 20-minute oral exam. In court, Dr. Menoc's immediate superior admitted to knowing that Dr. Menoc wasn't adequately qualified for his role. He'd hired him due to lack of viable options. Regardless, Dr. Menoc won his industrial court case and his position was upheld. This meant it was his job to certify cause of death for such major clients as the State Police, Coroner's Office and the Director of Public Prosecutions, until his retirement almost 20 years later.

The evidence regarding the three babies had been given several months before Henry Keough's murder trial, yet the findings weren't publicly disclosed until two days after Henry's conviction. This was a deliberate move by the coroner. He was concerned that publishing the results while the trial was underway would result in a mistrial. But for Henry Keough's supporters, it raised the question, if Dr. Menoc's findings in the three infant cases were found to be flawed, why was he able to testify as a major witness in the Anna Jane Cheney case at all?

Another Tony Thomas had been the pathologist tasked with reviewing Dr. Menoc's autopsies of the three babies as part of the coronial inquest. At the request of one of Henry Keough's supporters, he agreed to review Anna Jane Cheney's case. The fundamental duty of a pathologist is to consider all logical possibilities of a cause of death. However, at Henry's committal hearing, Dr. Menoc had blatantly stated, I was at no time looking or thinking that the death was accidental because I could find no explanation as to why she would drown.

The prosecution had argued there was no other explanation for her death other than murder. But from Professor Thomas' experience, he didn't think it was all that unusual for an otherwise healthy young woman to die an unexplained death. Professor Thomas discovered that Dr. Menoc didn't request Anna Jane's medical records. He didn't send her heart or brain to be examined by specialists who could rule out whether Anna Jane had any defects that could help explain her sudden death. Nor did he take samples from her liver, pancreas or pelvis. The tissue samples he did take were declared woefully inadequate.

He'd submitted just one sample of heart tissue, whereas a specialist would have expected around 350 tissues from the heart alone. Weighing and measuring the body and organs of a deceased is considered standard practice during an autopsy. Dr. Menoc hadn't reported any of these things. Pathologists are required to document in writing all of their observations and findings, which must then be checked and initialed by an independent observer. Dr. Menoc didn't do this.

It was also standard practice that colour photographs be taken during an autopsy showing the procedure, as well as the deceased's full body and full face. Neither Dr. Menoc nor any other forensic investigator had done this. The only photos that existed from the autopsy were 22 black and white images of Anna Jane's legs and torso. The most damning forensic evidence in Anna Jane Cheney's case were the subtle bruises on her left leg that purportedly supported the grip theory. When a bruise is microscopically examined, red blood cells can be seen in the surrounding

tissue. At Henry Keough's trial, Dr. Menoc had testified to confirming the existence of the bruise under microscope. Professor Thomas obtained the tissue samples from the crucial bruise on the inside of Anna Jane's leg that was said to have been caused by a thumbprint. He placed the slide under the microscope. He saw nothing. There was no scientific evidence that this was a bruise at all.

And if there was no bruise, there was no evidence of the grip that allegedly proved Henry Keough had murdered Anna Jane Cheney. Dr. Robert Moles is a legal academic and researcher who in the 1990s worked for the Flinders University miscarriages of justice project. Five years after Henry Keough's murder conviction, he started looking into the case. With help from other supporters, Dr. Moles noticed that in addition to Professor Thomas' findings, there were several aspects that raised some serious red flags. To bolster the so-called grip theory at Henry's second trial, the prosecution introduced a

photograph of the inner side of Anna Jane's left leg. To the naked eye, the so-called thumb bruise was virtually non-existent. At the judge's request, Dr. Manok had circled it with a red marker. The problem with this was that he essentially directed the jury to see what Dr. Manok believed he'd seen. Tissue samples weren't available for the other marks that were thought to be bruises on Anna Jane's leg. If they were in fact bruises, there was no evidence that she had them before she got

into the bath. But the opposite was also true. As nobody had seen Anna Jane's legs that day, no one could say that she didn't already have them. In both trials, Dr. Manok testified that Anna Jane's aorta showed evidence of burst blood cells, in what's known as hemolytic staining. He called this a classic sign of freshwater drowning, a conclusion he'd reached by referring to a pathologist's handbook issued in 1968.

However, in more recent editions of this handbook, such reference had since been removed after it was determined that hemolytic staining could be caused by other processes, including natural decomposition. Therefore, it couldn't necessarily be attributed to what Dr. Manok had testified was a classic sign of freshwater drowning. Henry's supporters looked into some other murder cases where Dr. Manok provided evidence and noted several other instances of flawed or questionable practices. In one case, he'd performed an autopsy on an indigenous male outdoors on the street in

full view of the public, much to the horror of onlookers. A professor of anatomy at the University of Adelaide dispelled Dr. Manok's drowning theory entirely, saying his views were inconsistent with the disciplines of anatomy and biomechanics. Dr. Manok had described the proposed drowning scenario as relatively easy. However, the anatomy professor said that the power of the extensor muscles in Anna Jane's legs would have been greater than the power that Henry Keough could exert through grabbing onto her calves. In 2001, a team of Henry's supporters gained permission from the new owners of Anna Jane's

house to conduct a re-enactment of the murder scenario proposed by Dr. Colin Manok. They hired a model with similar proportions to Anna Jane, and using a male of similar proportions to Henry, they attempted all possible combinations of hand grips and positioning. In every case, the model was able to fight back to prevent her head from being held underwater. Sitting at the plug end, it wasn't even possible to pull her legs up fully overhead. A wall at the end of the bath prevented the acting perpetrator from gripping the model's legs in the manner Dr. Manok had described. Even if her head had gone underwater, her arms would have been free to grab the taps or edges

of the tub or fight against her attacker, leaving visible injuries on both of them. Photographs of the re-enactment and statements discrediting Dr. Manok's theories were published in the Sunday Mail newspaper, leading to public outrage. The Cheney family complained to the press council, and Dr. Manok sued the paper for defamation. By this point, Henry Kao's supporters were stalwart. Their mission wasn't to prove that Henry was innocent, but that he'd received an unfair trial that had resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Undeterred by any criticism, investigative journalist Graham Archer joined the crusade

and started covering the story extensively for Channel 7's current affairs show, Today Tonight. He would later report his detailed findings in a comprehensive award-winning book titled, Unmaking a Murder. Other major publications and TV shows started exposing the allegations against Dr. Manok, putting ongoing pressure on South Australian politicians to act. A specially established medical board agreed to review Dr. Manok's autopsy findings of the Anagene Cheney case, independent of any other complaints against the pathologist. Appearing before the board, Dr. Manok conceded that the tissue samples of the so-called bruise on Anagene's leg had improved, it was in fact a bruise. He admitted to being aware that hemolytic

staining was no longer a medically recognized sign of freshwater drowning, but stood by his diagnosis regardless. All four panellists unanimously found that Dr. Manok's autopsy had been incompetent, yet they concluded there was no unprofessional conduct on Dr. Manok's behalf. At Henry K.O.'s trial, Dr. Manok's colleague Dr. Ross James had also given testimony in support of Manok's findings. His evidence had been completely reliant on Manok's post-mortem report. At no point had Dr. James examined Anagene's body himself. Regardless, he'd supported his colleague's theory entirely, agreeing that the bruise on Anagene's left leg was caused by fingers. At the tribunal hearing, Dr. James admitted that he'd examined the tissue samples taken from

Anagene's leg and found no evidence to indicate that there was a bruise. When asked why he didn't explain that to the jury, Dr. James responded, I didn't think it was particularly relevant. The medical board ultimately found that Dr. James was guilty of unprofessional conduct by failing to disclose relevant information to the court. In 2011, the case was featured in an episode of Australia's leading current affairs program 60 Minutes. It wasn't the first time a high-profile television show had questioned Henry K.O.'s guilt, but it was the first time that Dr. Colin Manok made an appearance. Speaking about the case of the three dead babies, Dr. Manok admitted that he'd gotten one of the slides mixed up.

Presenter Carl Stefanovic called it a gross error. Manok responded casually, it is an unfortunate error, but one which can be made when things are hectic. Dr. Manok conceded that the supposed bruises on Anagene's legs could have been up to four days old. Stefanovic asked Manok what evidence there was that Henry K.O. had killed his fiance. Manok responded, the evidence is the cause of death was drowning. A bewildered Stefanovic said, that's drowning, that's not murder. To which Dr. Manok replied, that's right, the evidence is there was large amounts of life insurance on her. Stefanovic pointed out, that's motive, it's only motive if there's been a murder.

Stefanovic said it would take a brave attorney to reopen Henry K.O.'s case, given that testimony from Dr. Manok had been given in over 400 South Australian convictions. He said lifting the lid on Dr. Manok's forensic career could open a Pandora's box. Stefanovic asked Dr. Manok if he was worried that a review of Henry K.O.'s case would lead to all of his cases being reviewed. Laughing, Dr. Manok answered, I really don't know. I'm too old to worry like that. In South Australia, a convicted criminal can only lodge one application to the court of appeal. Once Henry's appeal was rejected, his best bet was to file a petition for

mercy to the Governor of South Australia. If successful, his case could then be referred back to the appeal court. Over the years, Henry's legal team lodged three petitions outlining the flawed evidence in Dr. Manok's autopsy and subsequent testimony. Each plea was rejected. The Solicitor General admitted there were minor issues with the forensic details, but concluded that this didn't cancel out the fact that Henry K.O. had forged Anna Jane Cheney's signature on over $1 million of life insurance, of which he was the sole beneficiary. After the third rejection, a spokesperson said,

The people of South Australia can be comforted in the knowledge that a two-and-a-half-year exhaustive examination has concluded that there is no doubt as to the guilt of Henry K.O. Henry's legal team eventually submitted a fourth petition against Henry's conviction. It was a monumental undertaking, with four books worth of information making it the most dense submission yet. The submission argued that Henry's case be revisited on the fact that, quote, The prosecution as it was presented at trial no longer exists. Every feature of that case has either been withdrawn, in some instances totally altered, and in other instances, completely demolished.

In 2013, new laws were passed in South Australia that allowed for prisoners to appeal again if they had fresh and compelling evidence. Henry appointed a new legal team, who managed to uncover a report that had been sitting on the government shelves for nine years. When Henry K.O. had submitted his third petition for mercy in 2004, the Solicitor General ordered a government-appointed forensic expert to conduct an independent review. The job went to Professor Barry Vernon Roberts. In his 16-page report, he concluded there was no pathology to support the hypothesis that Anna Jane Cheney had drowned as a result of someone gripping her lower legs to force her

under water. Vernon Roberts believed that Henry's case had been removed from the court and that Anna Jane had more likely passed out from some kind of cardiac episode, knocked her head on the bathtub, and then drowned while unconscious. He found no evidence of foul play. Despite the government having this information from their own expert witness, they had concluded that no miscarriage of justice had been served against Henry K.O. With this report and all the other information that had come to light since his conviction, Henry K.O. lodged an application to appeal. This time, his request was granted.

The appeal hearing went ahead in December 2014, during which all the new evidence was presented. It was also put forward that swelling on Anna Jane's face at the time of her death could have indicated an allergic reaction caused by an antihistamine she'd been prescribed in the past. One forensic expert said it was possible that the bruises on Anna Jane's head could have actually been caused during the autopsy. The court of appeal ultimately found that Dr. Manok's evidence was flawed and the verdict was therefore unsafe. The judgment said, There is nothing in the autopsy findings to exclude the probability that Ms. Cheney's death was a drowning in the bath following a fall and a head injury which

rendered her unconscious. A number of highly significant observations and opinions of Dr. Manok materially misled the prosecution, the defense, the trial judge, and the jury. In these circumstances, there has been a substantial miscarriage of justice. Henry K.O.'s conviction was overturned and he was released on bail after two decades behind bars. However, this wasn't an acquittal. He would still have to face trial for a third time. Henry left the courthouse with his now adult daughters by his side. Applauses arose from the crowd of his supporters who gathered outside. Henry K.O.'s third trial was scheduled for March 2016, this time before a judge alone.

As the director of public prosecutions began preparing for the retrial, it emerged that a key witness had become ill and wouldn't be available to give evidence. Without their testimony and cross-examination, the DPP concluded that it wasn't appropriate to proceed. The witness was none other than Dr. Colin Manok. On November 13, 2015, the DPP held a hearing to formally declare a nolly prosecwee, meaning the murder charge against Henry K.O. was being dropped. Henry wasn't present for the hearing, but outside court his brother told reporters,

Today my brother walks effectively free after 21 years in prison. 21 years an innocent man for a crime he didn't do. For a crime that sadly never occurred. Henry will be taking some time to restructure his life and try to recapture those 21 years that he's lost. A lawyer read a statement on Henry's behalf that said, I now look forward to trying to make up for all those lost years with my family and friends. I want to state very clearly that I loved my fiancee Anna Jane and absolutely deny having anything to do with her death. This was and still is a terrible tragedy for Anna Jane,

her family and me. The Cheney family weren't present for the hearing and they requested the media respect to their privacy. Later speaking to channel seven, Henry K.O. said he was making no immediate plans for the future given that he'd been disappointed by the legal system too many times already. He remained a person of interest in Anna Jane Cheney's death and could still be charged at any time. Henry said the fact that the retrial wouldn't be going ahead was good enough for him stating, I have my liberty, I know the truth, those that love me and support me know the truth and that's enough. To avoid having to face any civil action, the state government awarded Henry K.O. an ex-Gracia payment of two and a half million dollars. While being significantly

less than the six million dollars Henry sought, he ultimately accepted the offer. The decision to compensate him caused a stir among politicians and the public who remained divided in their view of Henry K.O.'s innocence. The payout was disputed in a parliamentary inquiry during which lawyers for the Cheney family said, The family were shocked and appalled that this government saw fit to pay any money, let alone what they regard as an obscene sum to a man who they regard as the person that murdered their daughter and their sibling. Henry argued that the smaller figure wasn't enough to make up for everything that he lost, saying, More than 7000 sunrises and sunsets that I never saw. Can you sit here today and even contemplate the everyday joys and happiness that

you take for granted that I missed out on? The marriage of children, the birth of grandchildren, my own advancement in the workplace. I believe I'm owed a debt for this nightmare, as is my family, as is Anna Jane, who deserves better to be falsely remembered as the woman killed by the man she loved and the man who loved her. You've called this inquiry to ask why I was given an ex-grassia payment. I ask, why not? What price would you put on 20 years of your life if that had been stolen from you? In a Channel 7 interview in 2018, Henry said one of the true tragedies of the whole ordeal was that the autopsy was so flawed that the truth about how Anna Jane died will never be known. Speaking about his experience, he said, I've never considered myself

a victim and I didn't want to bang on about poor me. That just gets totally boring and doesn't serve anybody. Henry said he no longer placed importance on being acquitted. As long as he had his freedom and liberties, he didn't want to waste more of his time in court. One of his daughters said, It doesn't really matter to me if people think he's guilty or not. This isn't even about clearing his name. It's about the biggest story, about the system that needs to change. Henry Keough now spends his days making up for lost time with his daughters and grandchildren. He refuses to hold on to any bitterness or resentment. Alongside other rex inmates, Henry works for an organisation that provides support for individuals

once they're released from prison. Their aim is to break the cycle that sees so many inmates going in and out of jail. In 2020, Henry told the advertiser, I don't judge people. I didn't want to be judged and I certainly wasn't going to start pointing the finger at anybody. I firmly believe all of us are more than whatever has happened to us or the sum of the worst things we have done. Over the years, numerous requests have been made for an inquiry into the cases where Dr. Colin Manock's evidence helped secure a conviction. The likeliness of this going ahead seems minimal. Not only would this be a mammoth undertaking in terms of resources and costs, some believe that Henry Keough's large compensation payout is another deterrent. If an inquiry led to other

convictions being quashed, the government could be liable for millions of dollars in payouts. Dr. Robert Moles was one of Henry Keough's constant supporters. He runs a website dedicated to the case and other potential miscarriages of justice, called Networked Knowledge. Speaking of Anna Jane Cheney's death, Dr. Moles said, Maybe no one knows what really happened on that dreadful night. We can make an educated guess just as the jury was invited to do. When we make such a guess, we do so based on the information that we have at the time, combined with our more general views of human nature and society. Such judgments may be better or worse than others. But we can never really know what happened.

The Cheney family are as fiercely private about the case today as they were in 1994. Despite the flawed forensics, they still believe there is enough circumstantial evidence against Henry Keough to warrant a retrial. The Cheneys were never consulted about the nolly prosecwee. A statement released by their lawyer in 2018 said a retrial was their only hope for closure. It's a case that continues to divide the public. Some call it one of the biggest miscarriages of justice Australia has ever seen, while others think a guilty man walks free.

A statement made by one of Anna Jane's friends in 1995 highlights an important point to remember as the debate continues. She said, I think it is fitting that Anna Jane be remembered for the beautiful person she was, not just as the body in the bath.