Why did Commissioner Kevin Hammond resign from the CCC early?

Was Hamond disillusioned by the CCC Process?

Corruption and Crime Commission Commissioner, Kevin Hammond announced his resignation in November 2006 and finished-up almost a year ago at the end of March 2007.

He said his decision was based solely on the fact that he would turn 71 a month after his resignation became effective.

The Desert Rat and many others think it very unusual that Judge Hammond resigned after only three years of a five year term, at the end of a public hearing; but before the report was written. On the face of that, it needs a better explanation than turning 71.

Judge Hammond resigned at the end of the hearing into the Smith’s Beach Development, but strangely, before the report on Smith’s Beach was written. Judge Hammond was the only person who heard all the evidence, he was the person who observed the body language, the verbal intonation and nuance of the evidence given by those who were interrogated. These observations are extremely important when judging if a witness is truthful.

This vital part of the evidence is not available in a transcript of the interrogation. This information is extremely important in making sensitive judgments, as the “victims” have no right to cross examine the witnesses, hostile or otherwise, no rules of evidence apply and there is no forewarning of the matters to be examined. In the case of Burke and Grill, they as witnesses did not have access to their files, records and computers for reference as they had been seized by the CCC.

Strangely, Judge Hammond left the writing of the Smith’s Beach Report to his Deputy Commissioners, neither of whom the Desert Rat understands, had heard all the evidence of the interrogation in the Commission hearings. This fatal inadequacy was dismissed by one Special Council as unimportant, as they had access to the transcripts.

It is highly probable that one or both of Christopher Shanahan SC and Neil McKerracher SC were involved and responsible for writing the report - which has now been shown to be grossly inaccurate, reflecting poorly on the competence of the CCC. Neither of these two supposedly distinguished lawyers / barristers have defended the report, or apologised or belatedly admitted having involvement in the report, let alone put up their hand for writing it.

Back to the resignation of Judge Hammond whom the Desert Rat once held in high regard. The Desert Rat is not aware of any judge who has heard a case and not written the report or judgment. The Desert Rat also knows good lawyers and judges fiercely defend the right of natural justice being afforded to all people.

It is highly unusual for Judge Hammond not to have written the report with his army of 150 staff, including special councils, lawyers, barristers, journalists, ex-police officers, etc. All he had to do was oversee the report and edit it.

The Desert Rat thinks that Judge Hammond may have jumped ship early because he:

• could see no criminal or corrupt behaviour or misconduct by Burke and Grill (a later finding in the Smith's Beach Report)

• could see the reckless damage that had been done to peoples’ reputations, businesses, careers, livelihoods and health for no public interest benefit

• could see the inquiry was heading nowhere, drowned in salacious publicity by a heady media circus

• could see there was no prospect of Grill and Burke getting a fair hearing or even a semblance of natural justice

• may have been aware of some “inappropriate behaviour” by CCC staff in the conduct of the investigation. Hammond may have hinted at this in a farewell speech when he said the greatest threat to the CCC was for the Commission “to breach those public sector standards that it holds others to account for.

The Desert Rat asks “Was there more to Judge Hammond’s resignation than just turning 71 - was he disillusioned by the CCC process?”