Security Experts Warn of Impact of Court Battle Details Publication on Rinehart Family Safety
Three security experts told the New South Wales Supreme Court on Tuesday that the Rinehart family would face higher safety risks if details of their court battle would be published. The court case is part of the bid of Gina Rinehart, Australia and Asia's richest woman, to keep secret details of their family feud.
However, there are no specific threats to Ms Rinehart and her family, the experts led by risk assessment specialist Anthony Moorhouse admitted.
Three of Ms Rinehart's married children, who are estranged from her, have petitioned courts to remove their mother as head of their family trust.
Mr Moorhouse said the billionaire would need to increase her security measures if the details of her family feud were further exposed. He added that it would cause a financial and lifestyle burden to the family.
"She believes, with the heightened interest in her wealth, the lifting of the suppression order and the reporting of the proceedings and the link to that wealth, that it is realistic for her to hold fears for herself, her children," Mr Moorhouse's report was quoted by News.com.au.
To bolster their claim of the danger posed by media reporting of the Rinehart family wealth and their court battle, the experts presented a briefing made by the billionaire's lawyers that cited the 1960 kidnapping and murder of a Sydney schoolboy, Graeme Thorne, after newspapers published his father's lottery win.
Even Ms Rinehart's three estranged children, in emails to her, have expressed fear for their safety because the world thinks they are richer than Bill Gates. The emails were part of the details that Ms Rinehart has been attempting to suppress through a court ruling.
In his report, the other expert, Justin Bowden, said that among the Rinehart children it is New York-based Hope Welker who is at the highest risk. Mr Bowden explained that since kidnappers tend to be amateurs, they are likely eager to silence their victims once caught.
Various media groups opposed the suppression orders.
"There is scant evidence as to the likelihood of harm, no evidence of a great, no evidence of a connection between an increased risk and any material which might arise from the proceedings," News 9 quoted David Sibtain, who represented media groups.
The courts have extended to March 9 the existing suppression orders. On that day, Ms Rinehart will ask the High Court for leave to challenge a ruling which revoked orders keeping the trust lawsuit secret.
