After rigorous research we have uncovered an extract from Hansard of the West Australian Parliament where the question was asked of the WA Attorney General if Arthurs was charged with a similar offence, (and the charge then dropped) a year before the murder of Sofia RODRIGUEZ-URRUTIA SHU.
Firstly the question was blocked by the Attorney General and the Speaker was forced to leave the Chair to consider the question before submitting it in the House,as it was said to have breached Standing Order 91 – Sub Judice… to which The speaker eventually ruled the question did not breach Standing Order 91.
The Attorney General then refused to answer the question, on the grounds of fear of prejudicing the case – what are they hiding here ?
Extract Below:
DANTE ARTHURS
Ruling by Speaker
The SPEAKER: I have considered the arguments put to me about the question asked by the member for Hillarys. I consider that the question does not offend standing order 91. I give the call to the member for Hillarys.436. Mr R.F. JOHNSON to the Attorney General:
(1) Can the Attorney General confirm that an individual named Dante Arthurs was charged last year with an offence?
(2) Is it the case that the charge was subsequently dropped by the Director of Public Prosecutions?
(3) Will the Attorney General give a full explanation of these events to the public of Western Australia?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)-(3) I have no intention of saying or doing anything that might prejudice the ability of the Director of Public Prosecutions to bring the offender to justice or to otherwise be in contempt of court.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order,members!
So after October the games up you can tell us???