Meghan Markle had a big year, but now the rumours are swirling

By Yasmin Jeffery, ABC News

This year saw the Duchess of Sussex officially join the Royal family, marry Prince Harry in what was undeniably the biggest wedding of 2018 (sorry, Eugenie), and casually announce a pregnancy months later.

But despite the "happily ever after" line peddled by fairytales, behind the scenes things have been far from smooth for the Duchess of Sussex.

For the newly minted Royal, the year has also involved endless media coverage, widespread criticism, racism and an alleged feud with Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge — all in addition to her storybook romance.

As the year draws to a close, we take a look at Meghan's 2018 and have a peek at what 2019 has in store.

First, the good things

While it may feel like it happened a lifetime ago, Harry and Meghan were married on May 19 in a ceremony at St George's Chapel at Windsor Castle.

Unsurprisingly, all eyes were on what the bride was wearing. Meghan made a statement in a Givenchy wedding gown with an open bateau neckline designed by Clare Waight Keller, the fashion house's first female artistic director.

A mere five months after the wedding-to-end-all-weddings, Meghan and Harry announced they were expecting their first child, set to arrive in the spring of 2019 (autumn in the Southern Hemisphere).

The news — which came one day after Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbanks' wedding on October 12— was shared as Harry and Meghan arrived in Sydney at the beginning of their 16-day Royal tour of Australia, New Zealand, Tonga and Fiji.

As Harry and Meghan embarked on their first Royal tour in October, it felt as if they could do no wrong.

The pair attended more than 70 engagements over the course of the whirlwind visit, meeting koalas in Australia, celebrating athletes at Harry's Invictus Games and visiting the King and Queen of Tonga.

The parallels to Princess Diana came in thick and fast as Meghan stayed up late to bake banana bread for local farmers in Australia and again as she gave an impassioned speech about women's suffrage in New Zealand, the first country to give women the vote.

Basically, it seemed as if the only way was up for the newlyweds.

It may have been Meghan's year, but it has not been without problems

That is, until reports of a less-than-sisterly bond between Meghan and Kate surfaced in November.

The alleged feud started when Kate was reportedly left in tears after the fitting for Princess Charlotte's bridesmaid dress ahead of the Royal wedding.

A second report emerged earlier this month claiming the sisters-in-law had an argument over the way Meghan treated a member of Kate's staff.

Because pitting women against one another is one of society's favourite pastimes, the alleged incident escalated to the point that Kensington Palace issued a public statement, insisting, "this never happened".

News of the "feud" was followed by associated drama between brothers William and Harry, and by Harry and Meghan's decision to move out of Kensington Palace — where William and Kate live — to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor in 2019, officially breaking up the "Fab Four".

Things appeared to turn from bad to worse when none other than the Queen herself reportedly confronted Meghan over the feud with Kate earlier this month.

How seriously should we be taking the 'feud'?

According to Australian Women's Weekly editor-at-large and Royal correspondent Juliet Rieden, "the feud is a massive storm in a teacup".

"It has been completely blown out of proportion by the media, who every day need to come up with a different story," she said.

Why, then, are we so obsessed?

"The media will continue to concoct these stories as long as they get interest from the public, and now that interest is quantifiable with the internet," Ms Rieden explained.

"We're all sensible people — we read these stories and we realise it's based on one flick of an eye or some tiny little detail that could be interpreted in so many different ways, and we all realise we've been had.

"But, by that time the story has been read, the click has been registered and another story is being created."

According to Royal correspondent and commentator James Brookes, we should view Meghan and Harry's move to Windsor in much the same light as the rest of the "feud".

"The move seems more like a logistical one and one that comes back to Harry and Meghan wanting to forge their own path," he said.

"Harry's spent the last few years in his brother's shadow … so it's understandable."

Mr Brookes put the Queen's alleged involvement down to rumour.

"The Queen's worked hard to try and welcome [Meghan] into the family and she'll be all too aware from Prince Philip's experiences of being an outsider how isolated that situation can make one feel," he said.

Confusion over Royal protocol

She has only been a Royal for eight months, but Meghan has already broken protocol at least 18 times — if numerous media reports are to be believed.

According to Mr Brookes, the media often gets it wrong.

"There's been a lot of talk, particularly in the British press, of Meghan breaking so-called 'protocol'," he said.

"A lot of it is rubbish. The 'shutting her own car door' is a good example — many times, the Royals have someone there to open their car door for them and they're straight out and into greeting people, but if there's nobody there to shut it and it's in the way, they'll close it themselves.

"Remember, they are human after all."

 What will next year hold?

With a baby due in Spring, a move to Windsor on the horizon and a new patronage from the Queen set to be announced, Meghan's 2019 is likely to be just as fast-paced.

Aside from the Royal baby — which Ms Rieden said will "break the internet" — we can expect Meghan to continue following her passion of representing female empowerment, and maybe even using her experiences with racism to talk about racial issues in a first for the Royals.

"It's all very well having white and privileged members of the monarchy standing up and trying to support multiracial communities, but to actually have someone who is themselves multiracial gives it more credence, and I can't imagine she wouldn't want to be that role model," Ms Rieden said.

"We've [already seen that] in the cookbook she wrote for [the victims of] Grenfell Tower.

"[Meghan is] already making pretty powerful speeches [on female empowerment], which is quite new for the Royal family, and especially for the wife of a member of the Royal family."

The Royal correspondent said she expects the Queen will hand Meghan a patronage linked to the theatre — an industry close to Meghan's heart.

While this is yet to be confirmed, whatever patronage Meghan is tasked with, 2019 will be "a time for her to settle into her new role and start to develop it and show the world the type of Royal she wants to be," according to Mr Brookes.

"It's also a time for her to realise that the press coverage will always be there … that's something that will take a little time to adjust to — either by ignoring it altogether or developing a thick skin."

At least one thing is for sure — 2018 was the year of the Duchess of Sussex.

And if we consider society's obsession with Meghan's departed mother-in-law Princess Diana — which ultimately led to her untimely death with the involvement of the paparazzi — this is unlikely to change.

US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis' resignation letter

Full text of Mattis's letter

Dear Mr President:

I have been privileged to serve as our country's 26th Secretary of Defence which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defence of our citizens and our ideals.

I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defence Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department's business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong US global influence.

One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defence, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO's 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.

Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model — gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions — to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbours, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defence.

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.

Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defence whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department's interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defence Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defence occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability within the Department.

I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.

I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.

Jim N. Mattis

George Christensen dismisses travel allegations as 'vile and defamatory'

ABC news

Queensland federal MP George Christensen has identified himself as the politician at the centre of allegations about travel to South-East Asia, dismissing them as part of a vile hate campaign.

Key points:

·         George Christensen wrote in a post on social media that Australian Federal Police (AFP) had launched inquiries into him

·         He said the AFP had found no evidence or information supporting the allegations, or any criminal conduct

·         Mr Christensen wrote he would not be making any further comment on "these lies and smears for now"

News Corp Australia this week reported Australian Federal Police (AFP) launched inquiries into an MP because of trips he made to parts of Asia known for prostitution and drugs, and suggestions he sent money to bank accounts in the region.

The Prime Minister's office issued a statement saying the allegations were made by a Labor frontbencher and had been discredited and dismissed by police.

This morning, Mr Christensen, the federal MP for Dawson in Mackay in north Queensland, wrote in a Facebook post that the allegations were about him, but the AFP had found no evidence or information supporting them, or any criminal conduct.

"I have confirmation in writing from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) that someone made an allegation to the AFP about me, even though they 'had no direct knowledge of the conduct' they were alleging — that's called vexatious in my books," Mr Christensen wrote.

"The AFP have further stated they 'found there was no evidence, or other information to support the allegation, or establish criminal conduct' and, as such, they did not launch any investigation nor did they, at any stage, interview me about any matter, criminal or otherwise.

"I also have confirmation of that in writing."

Mr Christensen dismissed the report as part of a "putrid" smear campaign by his political opponents.

He said "this whole matter is vile and defamatory".

"I've asked myself why I've been the subject of such a vile and hateful smear campaign and I can only think it is because I stood up for my electorate against the powers that be, or rather, that were, on too many occasions," Mr Christensen wrote.

"They now want revenge and have sided with Labor in this smear campaign to try and get that revenge."

He said he would not comment on the matter "for now".

"I say to my political opponents that if you want me out of Parliament, beat me the old fashioned way — on the hustings, not through smear," Mr Christensen wrote.

"No doubt they will still throw mud from the sidelines without putting their name to their allegations, because the people involved in this smear campaign are so gutless, in fact they are the lowest of the low to stoop to such actions as they have.

"I will not be making any further comment on these lies and smears for now, and those seeking to defame me will be contacted by my lawyer."

The ABC contacted Mr Christensen this morning for comment.

His media spokesperson said Mr Christensen would not make any further comment.

"As per [the] Facebook post, that is all he's saying at this point," the spokesperson said.

ATO gains access to Swiss bank accounts, wealthy individuals on notice

By senior business correspondent Peter Ryan

Australians holding Swiss bank accounts are being monitored by the Tax Office for the first time, with transactions by certain high-wealth individuals a special focus, the ABC has been told.

Deputy tax commissioner Jeremy Hirschhorn said the ATO now has access to Swiss bank accounts, which will be tracked to ensure Australians pay their fair share of tax.

"If we go to the almost cliched Swiss bank account, we just received our first list of all Australians who hold Swiss bank accounts," Mr Hirschhorn told the ABC's AM program.

"Of course, there's nothing wrong with holding a Swiss bank account. But certainly there's a few people in the list that we're pretty interested about."

Mr Hirschorn would not confirm whether or not high-wealth individuals on the list monitored by the ATO included prominent Australians.

"I don't want to go into people on the list in terms of individuals. But what I would say is that prominent Australians are generally good taxpayers," Mr Hirschhorn said.

In its corporate transparency report released yesterday, the ATO said 81 per cent of Australian private entities were linked to groups controlled by wealthy individuals.

The report pointed to 11,000 high-wealth entities, which include companies, trusts, partnerships and superannuation funds.

"The first thing is that we know who they are, we know who the big fish are," Mr Hirschhorn said.

"The digital economy, in some ways makes it easier to move things around the world, but you also leave digital footprints everywhere and so it is possible to track people as they move things around the world."

'The days of stashing money overseas are over'

Mr Hirschhorn said the digital world now made it easy for employees to highlight companies or individuals that might be involved in shady tax affairs.

"A disgruntled employee can download the entire database of a company — we saw that in the Panama papers — and then that can be easily shared amongst the revenue authorities of the world," Mr Hirschhorn said.

The continuing surveillance of tax avoiders was a key feature of the corporate tax transparency report, which revealed that around a third of large Australian companies did not pay tax despite making a gross profit.

Mr Hirschhorn cited previous losses, sensitivity to economic conditions, tax deductions and tax offsets that enabled some of the 2,109 entities to pay no tax.

"That's particularly the case when companies are starting up," he pointed out.

"Often that's the case with a large mining company or extractive industries company and then when a company actually makes a loss in a particular year, they are able to carry that forward into future years."

While not commenting on specific companies, Mr Hirschhorn agreed that Qantas had now exhausted its "carry forward" ability from a $2.8 billion full-year loss in 2014 and is paying corporate tax again.

'Outlandish' encryption laws leave Australian tech industry angry and confused

ABC Science

By technology reporter Ariel Bogle

The Australian technology industry is "incredulous to fuming mad" after the Government's controversial encryption bill passed the Senate.

Under the new laws, security agencies have greater powers to get at the encrypted messages of criminal suspects — in some cases they can demand companies build new capabilities to allow them access.

Labor members called the bill flawed during debate on Thursday, but the Opposition later pulled its amendments at the last minute and voted to support the Government.

The situation has left Australian technology companies struggling to understand the potential impact on their global standing and bottom line.

John Stanton, chief executive of the Communications Alliance, said the bill's passing was a "magnificent triumph of politics over policy".

Partner at M8 Ventures Alan Jones argued the bill will have unintended consequence for the security reputation of Australian businesses — "crippling" attempts to export their technology.

"It could be just enough to lose a deal to a competitor in Israel and the US," he said.

The 'perception of mistrust'

Prior to the bill's passing, members of the Australian technology industry argued the bill's technical capability notices (TCNs) would undermine the perceived trustworthiness of Australia-made hardware or software.

TCNs could force a company to make a secret modification to its product to help a government agency access a suspect's messages.

Such a notice must be "reasonable and proportionate". Neither can it cause a "systemic weakness", although there is debate about the protection the bill's definition of the term affords.

The bill proposes three key powers:

·         A technical assistance request (TAR): Police ask a company to "voluntarily" help, such as give technical details about the development of a new online service

·         A technical assistance notice (TAN): A company is required to give assistance. For example, if they can decrypt a specific communication, they must or face fines

·         A technical capability notice (TCN): The company must build a new function to help police get at a suspect's data, or face fines

"I hope that it's possible for some of these companies to move offshore before they are tainted with the stain of originally being an Australian company," Mr Jones said.

This echoed the warning of Francis Galbally, chairman of the encryption provider Senetas, who told a Senate inquiry last month Australia was currently regarded as being among the world's most trustworthy countries for cybersecurity products.

But not if the bill passed. "This bill gives a perception of mistrust," he said.

Chris Duell, the chief executive of the customer onboarding start-up Elevio, said the bill was "so outlandish and stupid I didn't think it would get this far".

While his company does not handle communication data, he said some European customers had already reached out to query the potential impact of the new legislation.

Mr Duell said if served with a notice, his company could potentially be in breach of European privacy law as well as provisions in its own contracts that demand it notify customers of any security breach.

The head of Girl Geek Academy Sarah Moran, who teaches cybersecurity, said local start-ups were angry the laws were rushed.

Like Mr Jones, she suggested it could now be more difficult for Australian technology companies to sell their products overseas.

"Something is either secure or it just isn't, and giving the keys to the government is not something that makes your business easy to sell to customers," she said.

A lack of oversight

Many Australian technology leaders expressed concern the bill was being rushed during the last few days of Parliament.

Mike Cannon-Brookes, the co-founder of Atlassian, tweeted that "rushing such complex legislation through in days is reckless".

Whatever you feel about the #AABill in Australia, I agree with the @thelawcouncil that rushing such complex legislation through in days is reckless. At the least, these unprecedented laws need far more expert scrutiny & debate. 

The Communication Alliance's Mr Stanton, who represents companies such as Telstra and Verizon, said amendments to the bill had improved it "marginally".

"It still holds enormous potential to damage our IT industry and the thousands of people who work in it," he said.

In particular, he is concerned about the bill's secrecy provisions that mostly prevent the disclosure of a notice.

"A network can be compromised and the people on those networks won't even know," he said.

"If they don't know there's a vulnerability in their system, they can't guard against it."

Mr Stanton also described the lack of a warrant framework around the issuing of notices under the bill as "extraordinary".

In most cases, authorities would still need an "underlying warrant or authorisation" to access the actual content of encrypted communications, but not to issue a notice.

Amendments at the last moment added additional safeguards to the TCN regime, but fell short of requiring judicial scrutiny each time one is issued.

"Given the risks and the power associated with those notices, we think that there's a severe lack of oversight," he added.

Opposition pledges to amend the law

Opposition leader Bill Shorten claims he has a deal that the laws will be improved when Parliament returns in February.

However, the Government has pledged to only support amendments consistent with a parliamentary report from the intelligence committee.

In a statement, Shadow Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said the Government never properly addressed the concerns of business about the legislation's impact.

"Labor believes there are remaining deficiencies in this legislation, and encourages those concerned to participate in the renewed Intelligence Committee inquiry which will be taking submissions," he said.

But that may prove cold comfort for technology companies over the summer holidays.

"They've left us with this Christmas bonbon, and we don't understand what will be coming to our businesses in the future," Ms Moran said.

"Do the politicians not understand the internet? … Or do they understand and do not care?"

A Department of Home Affairs spokeswoman said the new regime was designed to be collaborative, not undermine trust.

"Clear prohibitions against undermining security will ensure that providers can't be asked to do things that make their products less safe," she said.

Chris Dawson arrested over wife’s 1982 murder

By
Ben Graham@bengrahamjourno

Chris Dawson

By
Ben Graham@bengrahamjourno

Lynette Dawson disappeared in 1982, her body has never been found.

Former Newtown Jets rugby league star Chris Dawson — the subject of popular podcast The Teacher’s Pet — has been refused bail and will be extradited to NSW where he is expected to be charged with the murder of his wife, Lyn.

He appeared in the dock of Southport Magistrates Court for his extradition hearing, wearing a crumpled T-shirt and shorts.

According to the Courier Mail, he showed no emotion, had his head in his hands and covered his ears as the magistrate read out police evidence, including allegations of domestic violence against his wife.

NSW Police confirmed a 70-year-old man was arrested shortly before 8am (AEST) in relation to the murder of Lyn Dawson.

The case has grabbed worldwide media attention since the launch of the The Australian’ s investigative podcast series The Teacher’s Pet, for which reporter Hedley Thomas and producer Slade Gibson won the Gold Walkley, Australian journalism’s highest honour.

Detectives hoped Mr Dawson would first appear in Parramatta local court, in Sydney’s west, tomorrow morning but the intense public interest surrounding the case has delayed his extradition.

WHERE IT ALL BEGAN: The Australian’s Teacher’s Pet podcast

 Mr Dawson will not be extradited until tomorrow and instead spend the night at Southport Watchhouse on the Gold Coast after a number of airlines admitted they were reluctant to carry the 70-year-old due to his high profile and the potential of it becoming a security risk.

Police are reportedly looking into chartering their own flight to get Mr Dawson back to NSW.

Mr Dawson, a former high school teacher, was taken to the Gold Coast suburb of Southport where he will be charged with an arrest warrant.

NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller told reporters Mr Dawson went “quietly” with police as he was arrested this morning. Detective Superintendent Scott Cook added he was “calm and little bit taken aback”.

Speaking to Ben Fordham on 2GB this afternoon, Mr Fuller said they received “wonderful information” earlier this week from the Director of Public Prosecutions that there was enough evidence to arrest Mr Dawson.

Mr Fuller said detectives arrested Mr Dawson “to face, finally, to face court over the homicide of Lynette Dawson”.

Mr Dawson’s family released a statement earlier today, insisting the 70-year-old will be found not guilty.

“We are disappointed at the decision of the DPP as there is clear and uncontested evidence that Lyn Dawson was alive long after she left Chris and their daughters,” the statement, from Chris’ twin brother Peter said.

“We have no doubt whatsover that Chris will be found not guilty as he is innocent.”

Mr Fuller said Lyn’s family was relieved to hear of this morning’s arrest.

“I have said from the start what is important to me was justice for Lynette Dawson and her family,” he said. “Today is an important step forward for that.”

Lyn and Chris Dawson

When asked what new evidence had led to the arrest, Mr Fuller said statements from witnesses had “helped pull pieces of the puzzle together”. These new statements came about as a result of media coverage.

“We have solved homicide before without identifying the body,” he said. “Ideally in this case we will not give up on trying to identify the whereabouts of Lynette Dawson, but from our perspective, it is not crucial to finalising the matter.

“We haven’t given up hope in terms of finding Lynette Dawson’s body.”

Mr Fuller added that no new evidence arose from the latest dig at the former Dawson family home on Sydney’s northern beaches in September.

Mr Cook told reporters detectives were “confident” about their case against Mr Dawson.

“There are other examples in policing history and history of the courts where people have been convicted of murder without a body,” he said. “That may or may not be accepted in this particular case. It is a matter for the court in due course.”

Lyn’s family reacted with shock and relief.

“I’m shaking,” her nephew David Jenkins wrote on Twitter this morning. “There is a long road in front of us in bringing Lyn home, but this is a big step.”

Lyn’s brother Gregg Simms said he was “quite emotional” when he heard of Mr Dawson’s arrest this morning.

“We’ve had a cry, we’ve cuddled, we’re just completely over the moon that something has finally happened,” he told The Australian.

Lyn vanished 37 years ago from Sydney’s northern beaches.

Mr Dawson has always denied being involved, telling police she ran off to join a “religious cult”. However, two coroners found Lyn was probably murdered by Mr Dawson in 1982.

A fresh dig for evidence at the former family home in the northern beaches suburb of Bayview took place in September.

Mr Dawson, has long been a suspect in the disappearance of his ex-wife, who was last seen alive more than 35 years ago.

Detectives from the Homicide Squad’s Unsolved Homicide Unit established Strike Force Scriven in 2015 to reinvestigate the circumstances surrounding her disappearance and suspected murder.

“Earlier this week, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions provided advice to police, and following further inquiries, detectives applied for an arrest warrant before travelling to Queensland,” NSW Police said in a statement this morning.

“Just before 8am today, a 70-year-old Coolum man was arrested by detectives from the Queensland Police Service’s Homicide Squad in the presence of Strive Force Scriven investigators at Biggera Waters, on the Gold Coast, in Queensland.”

NSW detectives will apply for his extradition at his first court appearance.

Lynette Dawson’s family has been advised of today’s arrest and have requested privacy.

WHAT HAPPENED TO LYNETTE DAWSON?

Lyn and Chris Dawson were childhood sweethearts.

On the surface, they had it all — a wholesome relationship, respectable jobs and a home in an idyllic suburb on Sydney’s northern beaches.

Lyn worked as a nurse, and was seen as a kind and gentle soul. Mr Dawson was a popular high school physical education teacher and talented sportsman, as the popular The Teacher’s Pet podcast revealed.

Mr Dawson began a relationship in 1980 with his 16-year-old Cromer High School student Joanne Curtis. Their relationship became sexual, and he took the teenager into his home as a “babysitter” for his two daughters.

He tried convincing his wife to let the girl move into their home for the remainder of her schooling, saying she came from a broken home and had a violent stepfather. The couple ended up in marriage counselling.

Lyn was due to meet her mother at Northbridge Baths, where Chris worked, on January 9, 1982. But Lyn never arrived. Mr Dawson later claimed he dropped her off at a bus stop in Mona Vale and that she called him later in the day saying she needed time to herself. Lyn was never seen again.

No more than two days after her disappearance, Joanne had moved into Mr Dawson’s home — and marital bed. She would even wear Lyn’s jewellery and her clothes.

Mr Dawson didn’t report his wife as missing until six weeks later, and told everyone she had run off to join a religious cult.

A body was never found — but they did discover Lyn’s pink cardigan during a police dig. The garment had multiple cut marks consistent with stabbing.

Two coroners later found that Lyn was murdered by Mr Dawson, but no charges were ever laid. Former director of public prosecutions Nicholas Cowdery, QC, said there was not enough evidence to prosecute.