Innocence Project Takes Up Case Behind Tasmania’s AI-Backed Parole Speech Ban

A conversation about Susan Neill-Fraser’s murder conviction set off a question about her parole rules. The answer became a ban on publicly claiming innocence, supported in part by a document citing court decisions that did not exist. The ban has been removed after a court challenge. Now Robyn Blewer has publicly confirmed that Griffith University’s Innocence Project is taking on Neill-Fraser’s case.

A question about what parole allowed

Neill-Fraser was convicted of murdering her partner, Bob Chappell, and has maintained her innocence. She is serving a 23-year sentence and was released on parole in 2022. The parole dispute concerned what she could say while outside prison, not the validity of her conviction.

After discussing her case with Blewer in late 2024, Neill-Fraser asked her parole officer whether such conversations were permitted. That December, the Parole Board barred her from communicating with media outlets to claim innocence or wrongful conviction. She sought clarification and then began legal action.

A wider ban, then nonexistent cases

In May 2025, the board added a broader condition, saying it wanted to protect Chappell’s family from further trauma or distress. Neill-Fraser could not assert her innocence or dispute her conviction through third parties, social media, podcasts or other public channels. A breach of parole could have meant serving the rest of her sentence in prison—a further seven years, according to the Guardian.

At a 15 September hearing, the Tasmanian Supreme Court heard that the board had uncovered AI use in a document from its secretary, Ben Hancock. It cited nonexistent court decisions in support of tightening Neill-Fraser’s conditions. The document was part of the support for the restriction; the invented citations were not established as its sole cause. The condition preventing her from speaking to the media was removed.

People need to be able to continue to advocate for lawful means to challenge wrongful convictions.

Sarah Schwartz, legal director of the Human Rights Law Centre

The case Blewer plans to pursue

In her first public comments confirming the Innocence Project’s involvement, Blewer said the conviction raised serious questions. She plans to seek case materials and a criminal law team to pursue either a new appeal based on fresh evidence or an inquiry. Police have defended their investigation and pointed to courts that found no fault with their detectives’ work.

Tasmanian Attorney General Guy Barnett called the parole-board episode unacceptable and said he would seek an explanation from its chair. Schwartz warned that parole decisions can be difficult and costly to challenge. Neill-Fraser, meanwhile, said after the hearing that she would keep trying to clear her name.