Ms Abigail Rebecca Foulkes a Police prosecutor pleads guilty to deception over former Magistrate Bob Harrap’s traffic offences in the Adelaide Magistrates Court on Monday. Ms Foulkes admitted to one count of deceiving and another to gain a benefit. Her guilty plea came after Mr Harrap pleaded guilty last week to the charges. He pleaded guilty – two counts of deception with respect to the use of government vehicles and to one count of conspiring to commit an abuse of public office. The SA Prosecutors withdrew a fourth charge – conspiring to pervert the course of justice.

Mr Harrap’s early plea affords him the opportunity to take advantage of a ‘discount’ of 40 per cent in his sentence that will be handed down by the District Court of South Australia. Ms Foulkes will appear before the District Court at the same time. The deception charges are in relation to misrepresentations made by Mr Harrap. He was driving the car when he committed traffic offences in March and April of this year. It was not someone else. Another person has also pleaded guilty in relation to the offence.

With respect to the conspiracy charge laid against Mr Harrap, that relates to a court case where he was the presiding judicial officer. No further particulars have come to light. Lawyer Catherine Jayne Moyse was jointly charged on that count and has admitted to the offending.

Mr Harrap has secured bail and has made ‘no comment’ to date. The former Magistrate was on ‘leave’ since the charges were laid and has recently resolved to resign from his position as a Magistrate of the South Australian court. That resignation is said to take effect on 10 August. Curiously, there is also no particulars available with respect to why there has been a delay in the processing of Mr Harrap’s resignation.

Controversy with respect to ‘road traffic matters’ involving a sitting judicial officer in South Australia is not unprecedented. That said, and in a different context, (that being the matter did not involve any alleged dishonesty but certainly dangerous and bad judgement on the part of the judicial officer), was the drink driving and driving without due care matter involving the South Australian Supreme Court Justice Anne Bampton. She pleaded guilty in the Adelaide Magistrates Court to drink driving and driving without due care in January 2014 and was fined $1,300 and had her licence disqualified for more than eight months and 14 days after being reported for drunk-driving and colliding with a cyclist while drunk on 30 November 2013. Justice Bampton took her Judicial Oath and Oath of Allegiance on 2 December 2013 (her official appointment to the South Australian Supreme Court bench).
Justice Bampton was the fourth Australian judge to be convicted of a drink driving offence, after District Court (SA) judge Neal Hume (2002), Supreme Court (NSW) judge Jeff Shaw (2004), and acting Judge of Appeal (NSW) Roderick Howie (2011). In South Australia, a judge can only be removed by the Governor upon the address of both Houses of the Parliament. Justice Bampton did not resign nor did the Parliament seek her removal. In fact, Justice Bampton proceeded to make Oath and pleaded her Oath of Allegiance two days after the incident.
Prosecutor Emmanuel Athans told the court the incident occurred in the left-hand lane of Greenhill Rd, approaching Kitchener St, Toorak Gardens a prestigious eastern suburb of Adelaide. Justice Bampton recorded a blood-alcohol reading 0.121, more than twice the legal limit, after colliding with the female cyclist who was riding her bicycle. However, Justice Bampton was barred from presiding over driving matters at the direction of the Honourable Chief Justice Chris Kourakis of the South Australian Supreme Court.

READ MORE: A year on… Courtney Herron’s mother demands justice for her ‘little girl’

Chief Justice Kourakis confirmed on 15 January 2014 by media release that the newly appointed Justice Bampton would not be permitted to adjudicate on alcohol and driving-related matters for another 12 months.

The statement reads as follows: 

Justice Bampton was appointed to the office of a Judge of the Supreme Court by the Executive Government on 14 November 2013.

On appointment to that office, Justice Bampton was both entitled and bound in law to discharge the duties of a Judge of this Court.

The Chief Justice has no authority to suspend the constitutional operation of a judicial appointment.
It is a condition of the exercise of judicial duties that a Judge takes the Judicial Oath and Oath of Allegiance.

Accordingly, I administered the Judicial Oath and Oath of Allegiance to Justice Bampton in my chambers on 2 December 2013.

However, I had already determined that Justice Bampton would not hear matters associated with driving offences until any charges which might be laid were finalised. I made a public statement to that effect on 1 December 2013. As the Chief Justice, my authority with respect to the judicial duties of the other Judges of this Court is limited to fixing rosters and supervising the assignment of matters to them.

I have again considered the question of the matters which should be allocated to Justice Bampton in the light of the circumstances of the offences of which her Honour has been convicted.

In my view, the reasonable concerns of the public arising out of offending of this kind by a serving judicial officer can be adequately addressed by providing that for a period of 12 months from today, Justice Bampton shall not sit on any matter:

  • concerning a driving offence or a civil claim arising out of a driving offence;
  • which involves a dispute over the mental element of an offence arising out of a defendant’s consumption of alcohol;
  • concerning the sentencing of an offender who was materially affected by alcohol.”

There is no further comment from the Chief Justice and no comment from Justice Bampton.

Justice Bampton apologised to the cyclist and the community.

“I’m very sorry and deeply ashamed. I apologise to the young woman who was riding her bike that evening and to the South Australian community,” she said.

READ MORE: South Australian Magistrate arrested and charged

As mentioned the fine was $1,300 fine. That was the maximum allowed under South Australian law at that time.

Justice Bampton was also ordered to pay $10 in compensation to the cyclist to repair a damaged light on her bike, an impounding fee of $695 as well as court fees in excess of $400.