Updated flow chart, Elly’s Murder investigation over a decade

ELLY WARREN – MURDER INVESTIGATION FLOW CHART (2016–2026)

Table of Contents – Systemic Flow Chart (Chronological Structure)

Introduction and Background to the Case
Initial Discovery and Early Investigation (2016)
Mozambique Autopsy, Police Findings and Early Classification of Death
AFP Involvement and Initial Handling of Evidence (2016–2017)
DFAT, Consular and International Agency Coordination
Radiology, Forensic and Medical Evidence Review (2017–2019)
SERNIC Reports and Mozambique Homicide Classifications (2017–2020)
Coronial Investigation and Proceedings in Australia
Disclosure Issues and Crime Scene Evidence Handling Concerns
Mutual Assistance Request (MAR) Process and International Cooperation
Witness Selection, Expert Evidence and Evidentiary Gaps
Complaint, Escalation and Oversight Pathways (AFP / Government Agencies / Ombudsman)
Coroner’s Findings, Submissions and Competing Expert Opinions
Post-Inquest Government Correspondence and Accountability Responses (2023–2025)
Official Closure of Mozambique Case and Continuing Investigations (2024)
Commonwealth Ombudsman Review and Systemic Accountability Findings (2025–2026)
Ongoing Advocacy, Public Interest Disclosures and Case Updates (2025–2026)
Systemic Issues and Broader Implications for Coronial and Overseas Death Investigations
Conclusion – Continuing Questions and Unresolved Matters

Elly’s murder investigation – Complete Chronological Timeline (2016–2026)

This is a detailed, fact-based timeline of Elly Rose Warren’s murder in Mozambique, the investigation, AFP and government actions, and correspondence. All dates, events, evidence, and outcomes are included to ensure clarity and transparency.

2016 – 2017, Initial Investigation and AFP/DFAT Engagement

9th November 2016 – Death

Elly Warren was found deceased in Tofo Mozambique under highly suspicious circumstances.
Fisherman takes a vital crime scene photo at around 5am. Tells No one he took the Photo at the crime scene.
Mozambique Police Open investigation Chief inspector suspects body was moved as sand is different in Elly’s mouth to where she was found at the crime scene. Warrants Homicide investigation with suspicious circumstances discovered at crime scene.
Elly’s mouth was found packed, chockablock with sand. In the photograph taken by the fisherman at 5am Elly’s t- shirt is totally ripped apart however the ripped apart top is not reported by the Mozambique Chief inspector or Doctor at the crime scene at 9am on the 9th November 2016.
A witness who was asked by police to identify Elly’s body also finds it strange that her mouth is packed full with sand on the firm surface where her body was found. Also no mention of ripped apart top from witness!

12-13-14th November 2016 – Autopsy

Maputo Central Hospital conducts, autopsy on 14/11/2016. Concluding violent death homicide. Airways packed full with sand (abundant as recorded in autopsy report) Elly’s body was transported by road from Tofo due to extensive flooding at the time closing all local airports. Therefore Moz-Autopsy was conducted 5 days after Elly’s death and her airways were still packed with sand.
12-13th,The Australian Honorary Consul attended the crime scene. Fisherman informs him that he had taken a photograph of Elly’s body when he found her at 5am. There are two versions, one blurred and later the fisherman sends the photo to the Honorary Consul by email which is the clear version clearly showing Elly’s top ripped apart.
The Australian Honorary consul sends both versions blurred and clear separately to the Australian embassy in Pretoria.
Clothing worn by Elly at death is retained at Maputo hospital for family or authorities to retrieve.
Clothing Elly was wearing at the time of her death critical for DNA; the hospital. aware of importance due to homicide findings by their doctor. retrains clothes, but after time when no one retrieves clothes they are eventually incinerated.

16th 17th &18th November 2016 – AFP/SLO & DFAT translator Arrives in Inhambane. meeting with the Chief Inspector Attended the crime scene and had very important MeetingS with officials. (Elly’s clothes at time of her death were not retrieved for DNA analysis from maputo hospital by the AFp or DFAT)!!

16/11/2016 South African Autopsy conducted by Dr Klepp also discovers a large volume of sand in Elly’s airways and states; The cause of death as aspirating a very large amount of sand while still alive combined with abrasions and bruising especially around her mouth and lips which had become more evident over time 7 days after, therefore Dr Klepp suspected Foul Play and stated this to me over the phone not long after she conducted her autopsy.
AFP /Senior Liaison Officer (SLO) and DFAT/SLO translator deployed to Mozambique to support Victorian Coroner 17&18th November 2016.
17th AFP/SLO and DFAT/SLO meet the Chief Inspector in Inhambane SERNIC Headquarters having to change flights both ways at Maputo. Where the Maputo central hospital was holding Elly’s clothes she was wearing at the time of her death! This was only 3 days after her autopsy at the Maputo hospital!! The AFP & DFAT did not attend Hospital when in Maputo twice once going over and again on there return at this vital times!!
Chief Inspector obliging granting AFP/SLO and DFAT Translator permission to visit the crime scene in Tofo 20mins drive away.
Chief inspector was cooperative in allowing AFP/SLO to enter Tofo to investigate on behalf of the coroner informing the AFP/SLO that he can pick up Elly’s other clothes suitcase and backpack belongings on their return to Inhambane airport for their flight back to Maputo then onto Johannesburg.
Mozambique police were uninterested in vital clothing Elly’s was wearing at the time of her death. The inspector who accompanied her body from Tofo to Maputo for the autopsy had left her clothes there at the hospital as they were not capable of any DNA testing. Therefore these vital clothes were never placed into evidence by SERNIC detectives. (facts taken from Action sheet)
The AFP/SLO and DFAT’S translator attended vital meetings with crime scene doctor, Chief inspector, prosecutors and chief health minister taking vital notes all entered in the AFP action sheet as facts. However there is no mention of Elly’s ripped apart top, Why not?
17th-18 November the AFP/SLO had taken vital notes from meetings and some belongings, but not clothing worn at the time of Elly’s death, however when in Maputo changing flights it was possible to attend Maputo central hospital where Elly’s autopsy was conducted three days earlier 14th November to obtain evidence (Clothes) and talk with hospital staff and doctor.
It must be noted the Mozambique authorities were “obliging” allowing the AFP and DFAT to “interview” the Crime scene Doctor while in Tofo taking vital notes which were entered into the AFP action sheet. This meeting was held on the same day the 18th November 2016 on there return flight Back to Maputo where Elly’s autopsy was conducted only three days earlier!!
The AFP/SLO obtains a vital sand sample from crime scene. The AFP/SLO was made aware that they suspect Elly’s body of being moved post-mortem by Moz chief inspector. AFP Action Sheet records vital notes for records. No report from AFP/SLO on any critical evidence mentioned above to the coroner in 2016/17. Trace evidence, “clear” photo showing ripped apart top and sand sample was not officially entered into evidence with the AFP/SLO statement. Note the “vital official AFP action sheet” was never submitted to the coroner in 2016/17!!

The conduct of the local Tofo police in the early hours of 9th November raises serious and troubling questions regarding the handling and documentation of critical evidence. As time has passed, further information has emerged which raises additional questions about the integrity of the early stages of not only the Mozambique investigation, but also the AFP’s handling of critical evidence!!
Elly’s murder occurred on 9th November 2016. At approximately 5:00am that morning, her body was discovered by a local fisherman, who also photographed Elly’s body at the crime scene. That photograph clearly shows Elly’s top ripped apart, a detail that is significant as it indicates she had been involved in a physical struggle prior to her death. Later at the inquest a witness who saw Elly at 11.30pm on the evening of the 8th November 2016 told the court Elly’s behaviour was normal and their was no ripped clothing on Elly at this time around six hours before her body was found by the fisherman at 5am the next day.
Later that same morning, at approximately 9:00am, the main Mozambique investigating team attended the scene. This included the crime scene doctor and the Chief Inspector, both of whom later participated in official meetings held on 17th and 18th November 2016 involving the AFP/SLO and a DFAT translator.
Despite the involvement of these senior Mozambique investigators and the formal cooperation between agencies, there was no documented acknowledgment of one of the most important physical pieces of evidence: Elly’s destroyed, ripped apart top!!
The critical question is: why was this never addressed or placed into evidence?
If Elly’s top was already ripped apart and clearly visible at the crime scene when the Mozambique investigators arrived at approximately 9:00am on 9th November, why did neither the crime scene doctor nor the Chief Inspector report, document, or refer to this damage to the AFP/SLO as it is not refenced in his Action Sheets from notes taken during the official meetings held on 17th and 18th November 2016?
It is possible that Elly’s top was “switched or replaced” at some stage by local authorities some time before 9am, however this cannot be stated as absolute fact. Based on the solid available facts surrounding the ripped apart t-shirt Elly was wearing at the time of her murder the pieces of the puzzle start to come together as there are only two main possibilities and both raises serious concerns regarding the handling of the ripped apart top trace evidence by Mozambique authorities. Both possibilities calls into question the integrity of the Mozambique investigation and the management of key evidence!!
What can be stated with certainty is that the 5:00am photograph provides clear visual evidence that Elly’s top was already ripped apart at the time her body was discovered by the fisherman. This establishes the condition of the clothing at the earliest recorded point at the scene. Despite this, there are serious and unresolved inconsistencies in how this critical evidence was recorded, documented, and referenced throughout the investigation. (The ripped apart top is not mentioned in any police, doctors official statements/reports from either country to this day!!) These inconsistencies raise significant questions about the continuity, integrity, and reliability of the evidence from the time of discovery through to later examinations and official reporting by all authorities involved!!
According to the available records, no entry was made in the AFP/SLO Action Sheets regarding the condition of Elly’s top, despite the existence of photographic evidence that clearly shows her top ripped apart from the right shoulder and all the way down the right side of her torso.
Two of Elly’s favourite black T-shirts did not come home with her luggage!
Taken together, this represents a fundamental and unexplained failure to record, address, or account for critical physical evidence, “raising serious concerns” about the integrity, transparency, and reliability of the investigative record, the Mozambique investigation and AFP support of the coroner’s coronial investigation as a whole, leaving significant unanswered questions about how such key evidence was handled and documented from the crime scene!!
Elly’s autopsy was conducted at Maputo Central Hospital on 14th November, three days earlier, at a time when her clothing was still available for retrieval. The family later contacted the hospital director in 2019/2020, who confirmed to both the family and independent investigator Mr Roos that clothing is retained for a period of time to allow retrieval by family members or authorities before eventual incineration. At the same time, the AFP/SLO, while on the ground in Tofo investigating on behalf of the Australian Coroner, obtained a vital sand sample from the crime scene and was informed by the Chief Inspector that investigators suspected Elly’s body had been moved post-mortem. AFP Action Sheets also recorded important notes concerning the sand sample and the suspected movement of Elly’s body.
Despite the significance of this evidence, no report by the AFP/SLO regarding the sand sample, the suspected post-mortem movement of Elly’s body, or the availability of the clothing Elly was wearing at the time of her death was ever provided to the Australian Coroner, despite the AFP/SLO actively supporting and obtaining trace evidence (Sand) for the coronial investigation in 2016/2017. While Elly’s suitcase, backpack, and other clothing were retrieved, the very clothes she was wearing at the time of her death were never recovered, secured, or forensically preserved for vital DNA testing, representing a major and irreversible investigative failure in a highly suspicious death from the outset.
Furthermore, a second sand sample was never sought from Elly’s body for forensic comparison and potential DNA matching with the sand sample obtained from the crime scene. Critically, the original sand trace evidence sample taken from the crime scene by the AFP/SLO was never officially entered into evidence or disclosed to the Coroner in his formal statement!!
(Note later in 2019 a Radiology report proves there was “ample sand” present at the Melbourne autopsy on the imagery for a second forensic sample from Elly’s body for forensic matching also recording very high density reading of 1290Hu 947Hu equivalent to cement and bone density levels!!”
Outcome: vital Opportunity for DNA analysis lost by the AFP/SLO in not attending Maputo hospital when in Maputo for change of flights going over and returning only three days after Elly’s autopsy!!! The chief inspector was obliging in granting permission to the crime scene and to obtain Elly’s other clothes on or the next day after 17th-18th. Informed the AFP/SLO they suspected the body was moved still No report to coroner. (This was confirmed at the inquest with evidence given by the AFP/SLO that the chief Moz inspector had “alluded to the fact he suspected Elly’s body had been moved” which is recorded in his own action sheet at the time!) Sand trace evidence sample not enter in AFP/SLO official statement to the coroner. There were some very important notes (Vital Factual Evidence) entered in the AFP/SLO action sheet which was not disclosed to the coroner in 2016/17! The important AFP/SLO Action Sheet is not revealed to the coroner by the AFP until 2020/21. The then coroner Mr Bracken asked the AFP at a hearing did they not take any investigation notes or records!! The AFP then had no choice to “expose their Action Sheet” as they were directly asked by the Court/Coroner five years after Elly’s murder!!

20–22 November 2016 – Dr Klepp’s Findings, Embassy Notification, and the Melbourne Autopsy

Following concerns regarding the circumstances of Elly’s death, the family arranged for a second autopsy to be conducted in South Africa by Dr Klepp on 16th November 2016.

On 20th November 2016, I spoke directly with Dr Klepp by telephone. During that conversation, she explained that Elly’s airways were packed with sand and expressed serious concern that, when considered together with the marks and abrasions around Elly’s mouth and lips, the findings suggested a suspicious death. I asked Dr Klepp whether she believed foul play may have been involved. Her response was:

“It is looking that way, Mr Warren.”

On 21st November 2016, Dr Klepp contacted the Australian Embassy and reported that the facial injuries had become more evident over time. Based on her examination, she suspected that Elly’s head may have been forcibly held face down in the sand, causing her to aspirate a large quantity of sand and resulting in her death.

On 22nd November 2016, a third autopsy was conducted in Melbourne. The family was unaware that the Coroner had requested a further autopsy. Had the family known a third autopsy was to be undertaken, it is unlikely that a second autopsy in South Africa would have been approved. The family was only informed of the Melbourne autopsy at the last minute.

Dr Klepp’s findings were consistent with the Mozambique autopsy conducted on 14th November 2016, which recorded an abundance of sand within Elly’s airways and concluded that the death was a violent death or homicide. Dr Klepp likewise confirmed the presence of sand throughout Elly’s airways and identified injuries around the mouth and lips that caused her to suspect foul play.

In contrast, the Melbourne pathologist concluded on 22nd November 2016 that the cause of death was undetermined!

Approximately eleven months later, during a recorded meeting attended by the family, the Melbourne pathologist stated:

“If I was asked in court, ‘You didn’t find any sand did you?’ I would have to say, ‘No I didn’t.’”

This statement highlighted a fundamental conflict within the medical evidence. Two separate overseas forensic examinations had identified substantial quantities of sand within Elly’s airways, whereas the Melbourne pathologist maintained that no sand had been identified.

The significance of this contradiction increased further in 2019 when radiological review of the CT scan imaging demonstrated the presence of sand throughout Elly’s airways and, more significantly, that both lungs were filled with sand. These findings were consistent with the observations recorded in both the Mozambique and South African autopsies and supported the conclusion that significant packed sand aspiration had been present from the outset.

At the 2023 coronial inquest, the Court heard compelling evidence from Dr Klepp and radiologist Dr O'Donnell. Following consideration of that evidence, the Coroner ultimately reclassified the cause of death. That reclassification reflected the significance of the combined medical and radiological evidence and marked a substantial departure from the Melbourne autopsy's original conclusion that the cause of death was undetermined!

Despite this, the starkly conflicting medical opinions were never fully reconciled. The fundamental question of how two autopsies and later radiological evidence identified extensive sand aspiration, while the Melbourne pathologist maintained that no sand was found, was never adequately explained in the Coroner's final findings.

As a result, a significant inconsistency remains at the heart of the medical evidence. Although the Coroner ultimately reclassified the cause of death after hearing the later evidence, the contradiction between the Melbourne autopsy and the findings of the Mozambique autopsy, Dr Klepp, and the radiological evidence was never fully resolved.

These unresolved contradictions continue to cause considerable distress to Elly’s family. The concern is heightened by the fact that the Melbourne autopsy formed a central part of the Victorian coronial investigation and was conducted by a pathologist from the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, an organisation closely connected to the Victorian coronial system.

For many people, the contradiction is difficult to understand. The Mozambique autopsy recorded an abundance of sand in Elly’s airways and classified her death as a violent death or homicide. Dr Klepp independently found Elly’s airways were packed with sand and expressed concerns about possible foul play. The Melbourne pathologist, however, concluded that the cause of death was undetermined and later stated that no sand had been found. Radiological evidence reviewed in 2019 subsequently demonstrated sand throughout Elly’s airways and that both lungs were filled with sand, findings that were consistent with the earlier Mozambique and South African autopsies.

After hearing the evidence of Dr Klepp and radiologist Dr O'Donnell at the 2023 coronial inquest, the Coroner ultimately reclassified the cause of death.

However, the central question remains: how could two autopsies and later radiological evidence identify extensive sand aspiration, while the Melbourne autopsy concluded that no sand was present and the cause of death was undetermined?

That question has never been fully answered or adequately addressed in the Coroner's findings.

25TH- 19th November/december 2016 – Crime Scene Photo

DFAT provides AFP/SLO and therefore the AFP with a clear crime scene photograph on the 25th November 2016 clearly showing Elly’s half naked body and top ripped from her shoulder all the way down her torso. Still No report sent to the coroner by the Australian governing police authority the AFP! In fact to this day there has been no report on the clear crime scene photograph to the coroner from the AFP who is in total control of serious police matters overseas!!
Notes: No report sent to the coroner! Vital evidence of a struggle clearly seen in photograph; not submitted to coroner in 2016/17 by the AFP/SLO or AFP!!
AFP/SLO and therefore the AFP after having the “clear” crime scene photo to analyse for 14 days they then hand this vital evidence over to the Chief inspector by email on the 8th December. (recorded in his action sheet on this date) The coroner is still not informed and still No report sent to the coroner even though this evidence clearly shows highly suspicious circumstances showing a struggle has occurred with the top clearly ripped apart!!
Later none of the above vital evidence is entered in his official AFP/SLO’s report or statement sent to the coroner. Its as if this vital evidence “never existed” by the AFP! The AFP/SLO statement was sent to the coroner on the 17th October 2017 and he has still not disclosed the “clear photo” or that “he handed it over to the chief inspector”. Also the trace evidence, sand sample was not entered into his official statement to the coroner making the coroner aware and therefore was not officially entered into evidence for the coroner!! later in 2023 with an official letter June 16th from the Australian Government Solicitor to the coroner which the AFP still does not disclose in this official letter that the AFP/SLO had passed on the clear photo to the Mozambique chief inspector on the 8th December 2016! However it is in official records on this date that the AFP/SLO had passed on this vital clear photo clearly showing Elly’s top ripped apart and naked body without asking the families or coroners permission to do so!! (AFP - Action Sheet Pg. 11). This is also confirmed by an official letter from the assistant secretary of DFAT Claire McComish on the 22nd March 2019 stating:
‘ The Honorary Consul later received an “unblurred version” from the local fisherman of the same photo however it is unclear whether you (Elly’s family) received this. ‘ The photo was passed to the Mozambique police by the AFP/SLO on the 8th December 2016.
19th December meeting with two AFP officers at my home. They informed me of the Mozambique autopsy conclusion that Elly died a “violet/Homicide”. They also informed me that the investigation was the jurisdiction of the Mozambique authorities and that they could not interfere with another country’s investigation. The Melbourne doctor concluded undetermined and that the coroner may make her decision in chambers on the case.

Nov–Dec 2016 summary –AFP is allowed on the gRound to provide assistance to the coroner

AFP with boots on the ground in Tofo and Inhambane, directly involved in the investigation, including attending SERNIC headquarters, attending the crime scene, and participating in vital operational meetings where critical evidence was reviewed and recorded. This included the taking of detailed investigative notes, collection of some vital trace evidence (sand samples), and photographic documentation. (All not Disclosed to the coroner in 2016/17!!)
Vital evidence was obtained but the coroner was not informed. No report sent to the coroner in 2016/17 by the AFP/SLO.
No action was taken even though the AFP/SLO was aware of highly suspicious circumstances with the Clear photo ,Ripped apart top and body moved post-mortem in 2016 with No official Mutual Assistance Request (MAR) sent by the AFP through the Australian Attorney General.( Body moved, was clarified by the AFP/SLO at the inquest that the Moz chief inspector alluded to the fact the body was moved in a meeting on the 18th Nov-2016 as it is recorded in notes in the AFP/SLO action sheet on Pg.9)
Mozambique Autopsy concludes Elly’s death as Violent /Homicide (Abundant sand found throughout her airways)
Note: The AFP were aware of the Mozambique autopsy conclusion “early on”, as I was informed by the AFP of its conclusion at a meeting at my home on 19th December 2016, along with other vital information relevant to the investigation.
Evidence: vital evidence given to the AFP overwhelmingly supports suspicious circumstances not reported to the coroner!
Vital South African autopsy photographs given to AFP in 2016, however these were not given directly to Melbourne pathologist by the AFP!
No clear crime photo or report on Elly’s ripped apart top was ever sent to coroner clearly Depicting these highly suspicious circumstances in 2016 by the AFP/SLO or AFP. Family also not informed of this vital evidence the clear photograph and MAR options available for reassessment of the case; police-to-police offers are weak, often rejected internationally. Countries generally respect coroners investigation or official attorney general MAR request sent which holds far more weight between governments!

2017 – Mozambique police Reports and AFP Inaction

April 2017 – SERNIC police Reports

DFAT 6th April receives overdose Mozambique police report.
DFAT & AFP 10th April receives “revised” SERNIC Mozambique report (Case 775/2016) confirming Elly’s death as a homicide.
The AFP/SLO and AFP was aware of the homicide classification; however, the AFP Action Sheet does not disclose or properly expose the SERNIC Mozambique police report and instead appears to downplay its significance by withholding the critical homicide classification from the Action Sheet itself mentioned on the 10th April 2017 Pg. 13. No Mutual Assistance request (MAT) was sent, and no formal investigative action was taken to submit the clear crime scene photograph report or secure Elly’s clothing for examination for the Coroner.
Homicide clarification obtained revised SERNIC police report the mandate for AFP to officially submit Mutual assistance request (MAR). Still not sent in 2017!
Conclusion: Critical evidence remains unsubmitted; clothing not pursued for DNA. Homicide classification clarified by SERNIC Moz-criminial police but No MAR sent!
7th September 2017 – Family Recorded Meeting with Melbourne Pathologist, AFP, and Coroner’s Assistant Raises Serious Questions
I requested this meeting because there were major and unresolved inconsistencies between the Melbourne pathologist’s conclusion that the cause of death was undetermined and the Mozambique autopsy findings, which recorded Elly’s death as a violent death and homicide. There were also clear differences between the Melbourne findings and those recorded in both the Mozambique and South African autopsies.
The Mozambique autopsy recorded an “abundance” of sand within Elly’s airways. The South African autopsy stated that Elly had aspirated a large volume of sand. The South African pathologist later gave evidence at the inquest describing the airways as “chockablock” with sand.
During the recorded meeting, I asked the Melbourne pathologist about a blurred photograph of Elly’s body outside the toilet area and whether he could make anything of it as the pathologist and family were only ever given the blurred photograph at this time. His reply was:
That the image was too grainy to draw any conclusion from it!
I also asked whether he had seen any autopsy photographs. He confirmed that he had not!
At that time, the AFP already held a clear crime scene photograph and South African autopsy photographs showing significant facial injuries and damage to Elly’s clothing. These images were not disclosed, shown, or discussed at any point during the meeting, or prior to the meeting with the pathologist by the AFP. This vital evidence was also not reflected in his final autopsy report because the AFP who is responsible for this critical evidence which they had acquired in 2016 nearly a year earlier had never given this vital evidence directly to the Melbourne pathologist!!!
This was a critical omission. The failure to provide this material meant that highly relevant visual evidence was not before the pathologist and was not properly before the coronial process at a crucial stage. Given the AFP’s role in supporting the coronial investigation and facilitating overseas evidence, this raises serious and fundamental concerns about the completeness and integrity of the information being provided.
The Melbourne pathologist also clearly stated:
“That if asked in court whether he had found sand, he would have to say that he did not find any sand in the airways”.
After the pathologist left the meeting, discussions continued with AFP officers and the Coroner’s Assistant. During this discussion, I directly asked “whether Mozambique police were conducting an active homicide investigation”.
The AFP confirmed on the recorded meeting that there was an “active homicide investigation” being conducted by Mozambique police.
This was a highly significant admission from the AFP officers at this recorded meeting and later concerns the MAR. It confirms that by September 2017 the AFP knew Mozambique authorities were actively treating Elly’s death as a homicide/crime investigation from the onset. Despite this, the family was not informed of the Mutual Assistance Request (MAR) process, which could have enabled Australian authorities to formally support and obtain critical overseas evidence!!
Because the meeting was formally recorded, it provides an objective and contemporaneous record of both the AFP’s acknowledgment of an active homicide or crime investigation, and the absence of disclosure of key photographic evidence already in the AFP’s possession. These matters raise serious questions about the adequacy, transparency, and completeness of the AFP’s handling of critical evidentiary material in a highly suspicious death investigation involving an Australian citizen overseas!!
AFP Oversight, Disclosure Failures and Inconsistencies in the Evidentiary Record
The AFP was responsible for conducting fact finding inquiries in Tofo, Mozambique, in support of the Victorian coronial investigation into Elly Warren’s death. However, a substantial body of important evidentiary material was not provided to the Coroner or to the Melbourne pathologist during the critical early stages of the investigation in 2016 and 2017.
In 2019, the radiology report was released to the family. The findings caused significant concern, revealing extensive foreign material consistent with sand throughout both lungs. Seeking clarification, the family obtained a second opinion from forensic pathologist Dr Byron Collings, who stated:
“Paul, I cannot account for why the Melbourne pathologist did not identify the sand. However, what I can say is that the radiological imaging clearly shows its presence throughout the airways, extending deep into the lung tissue of both lungs ”
Dr Collings further indicated that the radiogoloist Dr O’Donnell would be best placed to explain his own findings in his report.
At the inquest in 2023, Dr O’Donnell addressed this issue directly, confirming that the density levels identified within the airways were equivalent to bone density and that both lungs were filled with foreign material consistent with sand.
The AFP Action Sheet covering the period 2016 to 2018 contained important investigative information but was not provided to the Coroner until the hearings conducted in 2021 and 2022, despite having been created years earlier. It was only then entered into the coronial brief as it was included with my affidavit only. Likewise, an important official letter dated 22nd March 2019 from DFAT Assistant Secretary Claire McComish was not initially included in the coronial brief and was only added following requests by the family.
The radiological evidence ultimately proved compelling. It demonstrated extensive sand throughout the airways and both lungs, a finding of major forensic significance. Despite this, no formal Mutual Assistance Request has ever been sent to the Attorney General of Mozambique. Throughout much of the investigation, the family, and at times the Court, were left without access to important information that had been available within official channels. Critical evidentiary material was not disclosed for years after the initial investigation, giving rise to legitimate concerns regarding transparency, accountability, and the completeness of disclosure.
Particularly concerning for Elly’s family are submissions made on behalf of the AFP Commissioner in December 2023 which appear difficult to reconcile with the contemporaneous documentary record and earlier official statements.
Based on the available evidence, multiple independent records indicate that Mozambique authorities had already treated Elly Warren’s death as a homicide years before May 2023. These records include:
• The Mozambique autopsy findings recording a violent death and homicide;
• The Mozambique police report dated 10th April 2017 classifying the death as a crime and homicide;
• The SERNIC report dated 11th August 2020, issued by the Director General of SERNIC, confirming Elly Warren as a victim of crime and homicide; and
• “Recorded statements” made by AFP officers during a meeting on 7th September 2017 acknowledging that Mozambique police: (were conducting an active homicide investigation)!!
Additional concerns arise from the handling and disclosure of key forensic material. Correspondence and official records indicate that a clear version of a critical scene photograph was obtained by the AFP in November 2016 and circulated within the investigative chain. However, that image was not provided to the pathologist, Coroner, or the family at the relevant time by the AFP Instead, only a blurred version had been placed into the evidence Brief during the early forensic review process.
At the recorded meeting of 7th September 2017, the Melbourne pathologist confirmed that he had only been provided with the blurred grainy photograph and no autopsy photographs despite official records indicating that such material had been obtained by the AFP in November/December 2016 in June 2023 seven years later. This raises important questions as to whether all relevant forensic material was made available to independent experts and to the coronial process during the formative stages of the investigation.
Taken together, these matters raise serious concerns regarding the completeness, consistency, and transparency of the information provided throughout the coronial process.
The apparent inconsistency between the AFP Commissioner’s submission that no Mozambique authority had classified Elly’s death as a homicide prior to May 2023 and the contemporaneous documentary record is significant. As the factual evidence indicates, Mozambique authorities had already classified and investigated the matter as a homicide years earlier, then the factual foundation upon which those later submissions were made requires careful examination.
The documentary record, including official police reports, autopsy findings, investigative correspondence, and recorded statements, demonstrates that the homicide classification existed well before the timeframe relied upon in the AFP Commissioner’s submissions. This inevitably raises questions regarding how that material was assessed, interpreted, and presented to the Coroner from the onset!!
For Elly’s family, these issues remain unresolved. The concern extends beyond the classification itself. It encompasses whether all relevant evidence, including foreign police determinations, forensic findings, investigative records, and key photographic material, was fully disclosed and accurately reflected in the evidence and submissions presented to the Court.
The Coroner ultimately stated in his findings that he was not critical of the AFP. However, having regard to the documentary record and the matters outlined above, the basis upon which that conclusion was reached remains a matter of serious ongoing concern for not only Elly’s family but all Australian families!!!
February 2021 – Coroner Bracken Orders the AFP to send official request

Coroner instructs AFP to send formal MAR to Mozambique due to AFP Submissions disclosing Mozambique official stating at No 40:
‘It was always possible for the AFP to have a joint operation’”
However Elly’s family finds out later the AFP only sends a personal letter, not formal MAR.
Delayed 6 years; family discovers MAR was not sent only a letter; formal cooperation obstructed after Mr Bracken asked the AFP to send a formal request!
Mr Bracken asked AFP why they did not record anything for the coroner in 2016/17. This forces AFP to expose there Action sheet at hearing six years later!! However it appears that when you fully examine the AFP Action sheet vital evidence is hidden by its wording or not even disclosed!!!
Coroner hearings: transcript as factual evidence confirms all above facts. AFP action sheet only placed into the colonial brief of evidence with my affidavit. My affidavit exposes all discrepancies from both countries to the coroner Mr Cain in detail.

2021–2023 – SERNIC Re-opens Homicide Investigation and Vital Information Emerges Before the Inquest

Note: I have provided greater detail in the flow chart below, as during this timeframe there were significant and highly important developments occurring prior to the inquest, including witnesses and the emergence of official records that support what the family has maintained throughout the case. This is particularly relevant in relation to concerns regarding the AFP’s level of involvement and the non-disclosure of what I consider to be vital evidence to the coroner and family in 2016/17!

In 2021/22, Mozambique authorities formally reopened the investigation into Elly Warren’s death as a homicide investigation through SERNIC (National Criminal Investigation Service). Family investigator Mr Roos and lawyer work alongside SERNIC police with the case. This was a highly significant development, confirming that Mozambique investigators had major concerns and continued to treat Elly’s death as a homicide investigation.
During this period, the AFP’s involvement was largely limited to ongoing discussions and liaison meetings that failed to progress into any substantive investigative outcomes. From my perspective, these repeated discussions led nowhere, particularly in the absence of a formal Mutual Assistance Request (MAR), which carries far greater legal authority and investigative weight, and which the AFP were fully aware of these circumstances. Instead, the process appeared to serve little practical purpose beyond creating the impression that meaningful action was being undertaken. I was left with the clear view that what I considered to be repeated delays and deflection tactics were being used, where the family was continually told that progress was being made in order to keep us reassured, when in reality no genuine investigative advancement was occurring.
Consequently, the process became a complete waste of time and effort, while critical opportunities to properly progress the matter continued to be lost over time. From where I stand, it has at times felt as though the expectation was that I would eventually just go away. After nearly a decade of delays, it is difficult not to believe that the cumulative effect of this process has placed immense strain on the family, while allowing the matter itself to remain unresolved and largely unaddressed.
If this had happened to me, Elly would have been the same, definitely even more so, without question, and the Australian authorities would not have known what hit them!
Elly would have been the same. She didn’t go away when something mattered, she held on and pushed until she got answers. She was like a dog with a bone. She was relentless. We were both defiant in character. That’s exactly where I’m at now. I’m not going anywhere, and I’m not letting this go, not now, not ever, until there are real answers and accountability.
Mr Roos was a private investigator for Nicole (Mother) and Elly’s step father David. Mr Roos had reached out to the AFP however they declined his offer for help with the murder of an Australian citizen, Critically Elly’s clothes she was wearing were not retrieved for forensic DNA testing, In fact know DNA testing was carried out on any trace evidence obtained despite Mozambique investigators identifying solid suspects. The AFP had the state of the art Forensic laboratory and still they declined Mr Roos offer for assistance!! This represented a major missed investigative opportunity at a crucial early stage of the case, when forensic evidence is often most valuable, and may have permanently compromised the ability to recover key evidence and ultimately weakened the prospects of achieving some definitive answers.
Frustrated by years of unanswered questions and ongoing failures by authorities, Elly’s family publicly protested on the steps of Parliament House in late 2022, demanding action and accountability. Consequently this raised concerns as In February 2023, the Coroner Mr Cain conducted a further hearing and again accepted that a full inquest was necessary to obtain answers, acknowledging that there were clear gaps in the available evidence before formally setting a date for the inquest. However, key witnesses who may have been able to address or resolve many of these evidentiary gaps were not called, leaving significant issues unresolved and contributing to ongoing concerns about the completeness of the relevant information available to the inquest.
An official letter sent to Mr Cain on 16th June 2023 from the Australian Government Solicitor (AGS) later confirmed that the AFP had officially been provided with the clear crime scene photograph in November 2016, specifically on 25th November 2016. This was the first time, approximately seven years later, that it was formally acknowledged in writing by the AFP that they had obtained the clear photograph clearly showing highly suspicious circumstances! The letter also confirmed that the Honorary Consul obtained the clear photograph directly from the fisherman after leaving Tofo, before forwarding it to the Australian Embassy in Pretoria.
A critically important clarification arises from this correspondence. The AGS letter makes clear that the photograph initially provided to the AFP/SLO by the Honorary Consul was only the “blurred version” at that time, and that this blurred version was the one only entered into in evidence by the AFP/SLO’s official statement to the coroner, with the clear version never being included or recorded in the AFP/SLO’s statement. However, the AFP/SLO later passed the clear crime scene photograph to the Mozambique Chief Inspector on 8th December, as recorded in his own action sheet on this date Pg.11, conclusively demonstrating that the AFP/SLO had prior knowledge of, and later access to, the clear image in 2016! This indicates that the clear photograph was independently obtained at a subsequent point and was not part of the original material formally documented in the AFP/SLO statement dated 17th October 2017 as the AGS letter clearly proves it was the blurred photo only presented to the coroner by the AFP/SLO and therefore entered into his statement!!
Despite the extraordinary significance of this clear photo evidence and the details it proved within these facts were completely absent from the AFP/SLO’s official statement to the Coroner dated 17th October 2017. There was no disclosure that the AFP had acquired the clear photograph, No report on this vital evidence sent to the coroner, no explanation as to how it was obtained, and no acknowledgment that it had been forwarded to the Mozambique Chief Inspector on the on the 8th December 2016!! How is this “Even Possible” as this evidence is as critical crime scene evidence as you can have clearly showing Elly’s Half naked body and her top totally destroyed, ripped apart!!
This omission by the AFP/SLO to the coroner and in his official statement is profoundly serious!! The clear crime scene photograph was vital evidence directly relevant to the condition of Elly’s clothing, including the ripped top, the positioning of the body, and the surrounding circumstances at the scene. The failure to disclose the AFP’s possession and transmission of this photograph meant that, during 2016–2017, the Coroner was denied full and accurate knowledge of “critical evidence” already known to the AFP at the time.
This raises grave concerns regarding transparency, disclosure obligations, and the overall reliability and completeness of the AFP’s conduct during the early stages of the coronial investigation into Elly’s suspicious death. It further raises serious questions as to whether key evidence was withheld, minimised, or not properly presented to the Coroner from the onset, resulting also in the inquest proceeding possibly without access to highly significant factual material directly relevant to the circumstances surrounding Elly’s death due to critical Information being Non-disclosure by the AFP.
The omission of these facts is not a minor administrative oversight. It goes directly to the integrity of the evidence presented to the Coroner and undermines confidence in the accuracy and completeness of the AFP’s submissions during the formative stages of the coronial process. The fact that the AFP possessed, transmitted, and relied upon a clear crime scene photograph while failing to disclose this to the Coroner in 2016/17 raises deeply troubling questions also about whether the inquest was conducted with access to the full factual picture known to authorities at the time.
Further concerns emerged in a second official letter sent to Mr Cain on 19th June 2023. This correspondence confirmed that Mozambique authorities had “reaffirmed” the homicide classification previously issued by the Director-General in August 2020. It also stated that Mozambique investigators had identified solid suspects, but currently lacked sufficient evidence to secure a conviction.
The Deputy Mozambique Attorney-General further confirmed that Mozambique authorities would “only accept” and formally recognise an official Mutual Assistance Request (MAR) for the release of the Mozambique case file, unequivocally demonstrating the seriousness, legal authority, and formal importance the Mozambique Government placed on the MAR process as the proper government-to-government mechanism between Australia and Mozambique. Despite this, Australian authorities failed to treat the matter with the same seriousness or urgency, and consequently no MAR has ever been submitted to this day, resulting in the ongoing failure to formally obtain the full Mozambique case file through the recognised legal process expressly required by Mozambique authorities. Had the MAR been submitted in 2016, it may have opened the door to far greater transparency, formal cooperation, and direct assistance between Mozambique authorities and the AFP, including access to critical evidence, but not their case investigative file as security measures were imposed on their case file only. I did try and explain this to Mr Cain at the inquest in my oral submissions but he would not listen to me, that it was always possible to send the MAR as their security provisions were in place only for the release of case file therefore it was always possible to sent the MAR in 2016/26. However it must be “strongly noted” the Mozambique government still needs to agree to the MAR official request but we never gave them the opportunity to, as we have never sent the official MAR for them to be placed in that position to Agree or Disagree!!
I reiterate that Mozambique authorities also lacked the forensic capabilities to properly test or analyse potential trace evidence, whereas Australia had access to state-of-the-art forensic laboratories and advanced forensic expertise capable of conducting comprehensive forensic examination and testing of critical evidence that may have materially assisted both the investigation and the Coroner.
Importantly, this correspondence confirmed that, years after Elly’s death, Mozambique authorities continued to formally treat the matter as a homicide investigation in an attempt to identify suspects. This stood in stark contrast to the limited scope and presentation of evidence advanced during the earlier Australian proceedings before the Coroner. It raised serious questions as to whether Australian authorities withheld, failed to disclose, or failed to properly present critical evidence and investigative information known to Mozambique investigators at the time. As a result, the Coroner and Elly’s family were never provided with the full extent of the information, intelligence, and investigative findings surrounding Elly’s suspicious death form the onset!!
The same official correspondence provided to the coroner Mr Cain in June 2023, also revealed that Investigator Mr Roos held vital and updated information regarding the case through his ongoing direct work with SERNIC inspectors. Despite this, he was not called as a relevant witness at the inquest. Importantly, Mr Roos had previously provided a report to the coroner in 2019 which was tendered into evidence, therefore recognising him as a credible and relevant witness within the coronial proceedings.
In addition, no AFP reports relating to these significant developments were properly produced or examined during the inquest. The AFP submissions to the court were therefore incomplete and misleading, as they failed to present the full factual position known to the AFP at the time. This omission prevented the coroner from being fully informed of critical evidence and ongoing investigative developments directly connected to the case.
Throughout 2022/23, suspects continued to be questioned by Mozambique authorities. However, the investigation remained significantly limited due to the absence of critical forensic evidence, including DNA testing that could have been obtained from Elly’s clothing during the earlier stages of the investigation.
The family was placed in a serious confrontation with the Coroners Court regarding relevant witnesses, and both I and my lawyers were shocked that Mr Cain did not want a number of the relevant witnesses we had requested to be called, particularly after he had stated at an earlier hearing that year that there were “gaps in the evidence.” This made no sense to either myself or my legal team. We had to fight extremely hard to retain Dr O’Donnell, the radiologist, eventually sending a detailed letter directly to Mr Cain requesting that Dr O’Donnell be reinstated as a witness, which Mr Cain ultimately agreed to do. Dr O’Donnell’s compelling evidence directly challenged the conclusions of the court’s “own” Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine (VIFM) Melbourne pathologists. Other important witnesses had also been requested at the earlier pre-inquest hearings, including independent pathologist Dr Collins. However, the Coroner later changed direction and instead relied upon the Court’s “own” VIFM team, through a peer-review process, to assess and interpret the medical evidence. The family strongly protested this approach and process, informing Mr Cain that we believed the process lacked independence and was inherently biased. However, Mr Cains response was that he had full confidence in his “own” VIFM doctors.
Mr Roos was a credible witness, with his previous 2019 report to the coroner forming part of the coronial brief as evidence. He had worked directly alongside SERNIC police when the case was reopened in 2021 and therefore possessed first-hand knowledge of the updated Mozambique investigation, case circumstances, and file information.
Despite this, Mr Cain ultimately stated in his findings that, without access to the Mozambique investigation file, significant gaps in the evidence remained. Given Mr Roos’s direct involvement and first-hand knowledge of the updated SERNIC investigation, he would have been in a position to inform the coroner of critical case circumstances, investigative developments, and the status of the Mozambique police findings.
Mr Charlie Bezzina, a highly respected retired homicide detective who had been working on the case with me for more than five years, was also aware of these highly suspicious circumstances surrounding Elly’s death, as outlined in his statement and report provided to the Court. Importantly, Mr Cain was aware that these witnesses had all previously provided reports or statements indicating that they considered the factual circumstances surrounding Elly’s death to be highly suspicious and consistent with Elly being the victim of homicide. Despite the significance of their evidence, all three of these vital and relevant witnesses requested by my legal team were rejected by Mr Cain. At least we were successful in retaining Dr O Donnell as Dr Klepp did not agree to be a witness for the Inquest until the very last minute. This would have only left the Melbourne pathologist and he had “NO idea whatsoever about any packed sand in the Airways”!!
This raised extremely serious concerns for both myself and my lawyers, as the very purpose of an inquest is to thoroughly investigate unanswered questions and properly address gaps in the evidence, as Mr Cain himself had previously acknowledged. In our view, it made no logical sense to exclude highly relevant witnesses while at the same time conceding that significant evidentiary gaps remained unresolved.
From the very beginning, both my legal team and I believed it was always going to be an uphill battle before Mr Cain, as the circumstances leading into the inquest were deeply troubling, not only for myself and Elly’s family, but also for my legal team. The deliberate failure to call witnesses with direct and updated knowledge of the circumstances surrounding Elly’s death, together with first hand knowledge of the Mozambique investigation, raised serious concerns regarding the fairness, integrity, and transparency of the coronial process itself. When key witnesses possessing critical first hand information are excluded from giving evidence, there is a significant risk that the court is prevented from hearing the full factual position. This not only undermines confidence in the findings ultimately reached, but also raises broader concerns for future Australians relying on the coronial system to independently, transparently, and properly examine all relevant evidence before the court!
11th December 2023 – Family and AFP Commissioner Submissions to Coroner Cain (Final Inquest Hearing)
Key Issues Raised
At the conclusion of the inquest, the Coroner accepted that it was a possibility that Elly Warren's death was a homicide.
The family's oral submissions highlighted significant concerns regarding AFP investigative failures, the handling of evidence, the management of Mutual Assistance Requests (MARs), and the continuing non-disclosure of vital material relevant to the coronial investigation.
AFP Commissioner Submissions
In submissions provided to Coroner Cain in December 2023, the AFP Commissioner stated:
That no police authority had ever stated that Ms Warren was a victim of Crime/Homicide before the meeting in May 2023."
However, multiple contemporaneous records appear inconsistent with that proposition, including:
The Mozambique autopsy findings recording a violent death or homicide.
The Mozambique police report dated 10th April 2017 classifying the matter as a crime/homicide.
The SERNIC Director-General's report dated 11th August 2020 confirming that police reports classified Elly Warren's death as a homicide.
Recorded statements from AFP officers during a meeting on 7th September 2017 acknowledging that Mozambique police were conducting an active homicide investigation.
The clear crime scene photograph showing Elly's top ripped apart apart prior her death.
Evidence presented during the inquest that Elly's airways were packed "chockablock" with sand.
South African autopsy photographs not disclosed to pathologist by AFP showing serious marks and abrasions to Elly’s face.
Taken together, these records indicate that Mozambique authorities had treated the matter as a homicide well before the May 2023 meeting. The family therefore contends that the AFP Commissioner's submission was misleading and inconsistent with the available documentary evidence.
Witness Issues
The family raised concerns regarding the proposed witness list for the inquest.
Initially, Dr Christopher O'Donnell, the radiologist responsible for the post-mortem CT imaging report, was not included as a witness. Through their legal representatives, the family formally requested that Judge Cain reconsider this decision, arguing that Dr O'Donnell's evidence was essential to understanding the presence, density and likely volume of sand identified within Elly Warren's lungs, trachea and larynx.
The family's submission noted that Dr O'Donnell was uniquely placed to explain the radiological findings, including the Hounsfield density measurements recorded in his report, and to assist the Court in understanding the significance of the hyper-dense foreign material identified throughout Elly's airways.
Following that request, Dr O'Donnell was ultimately called to give evidence at the inquest.
However, the family remains concerned that other witnesses considered capable of providing highly relevant evidence, including Dr Collins, Mr Roos and Charlie Bezzina, were not called. The absence of those witnesses left significant areas of evidence unexplored and contributed to continuing concerns regarding the completeness of the evidentiary record considered by the Coroner.
Outcome
The integrity of both the AFP and coronial processes has been seriously questioned by the family due to the continuing non-disclosure of critical evidence, the withholding of material information, the provision of information that the family contends was misleading, and concerns regarding the completeness of the evidence presented during the inquest.
Despite the passage of almost ten years, no comprehensive AFP report addressing the vital trace evidence has been provided to the Coroner. This remains a significant concern given that the AFP was the primary Commonwealth law enforcement agency responsible for matters involving the suspicious death of an Australian citizen overseas and was supporting the Victorian coronial investigation.
The AFP acquired and retained important evidence relating to the highly suspicious circumstances surrounding Elly Warren's death. As the government agency responsible for overseas investigations involving Australian citizens, the AFP had a responsibility to ensure that all relevant evidence was disclosed to the authority it was supporting, namely the Victorian Coroner.
The available records indicate that significant evidentiary material was not provided to the Coroner, the pathologists, or the family for many years. As a result, critical evidence capable of assisting the investigation was unavailable during key stages of the coronial process.
Although the family successfully sought the inclusion of Dr O'Donnell as a witness, concerns remain that other relevant witnesses were not called and that important areas of evidence were therefore not fully explored. The family contends that significant issues remained insufficiently tested and unresolved, contributing to continuing concerns regarding the completeness of the evidentiary record before the Coroner.
The family believes that the issues identified during this inquest have implications beyond Elly Warren's case. Coronial courts play a central role in determining the scope of an inquest and the witnesses called to provide evidence. Where relevant witnesses are not called, important evidence may not be fully examined, potentially affecting the Court's ability to explore all relevant issues. The family therefore considers that the concerns arising from this case raise broader questions regarding coronial processes that may be relevant to other Australian families seeking answers following unexplained, suspicious or overseas deaths.
The family does not accept that the findings reached by the Coroner were conclusive in light of the totality of the evidence presented and important witness not called. In particular, the family considers that the expert compelling evidence of Dr Klepp and Dr O'Donnell, together with the clear crime scene photograph showing significant damage to Elly Warren’s clothing prior to death and Autopsy photographs showing marks and abrasions to Ellys mouth and lips and face, was not fully reconciled within the final conclusions. The family therefore remains of the view that the evidentiary record, when viewed as a whole, did not result in a definitive resolution of the circumstances surrounding our daughter’s murder!!
These circumstances continue to raise serious questions regarding evidence management, disclosure obligations, witness selection, investigative accountability, and the overall integrity of both the investigative and coronial processes.
As a result, significant questions raised by the available evidence remain unresolved despite a coronial process that extended over almost a decade.

2024 – Official Closure of Mozambique Case

27th May- October 2024

The Coroner at the inquest instructed the family that, with our concerns regarding the AFP, these would need to be taken up directly with the AFP, as they fell outside the jurisdiction of the coronial inquest.
On 27th May, a formal report and systems complaint concerning the murder of my daughter Elly Warren was sent directly to the AFP Commissioner and other relevant government authorities, and on 28th May an acknowledgment was received from the AFP Commissioner’s Office confirming receipt and advising that a formal response would be forthcoming; however, despite the extreme seriousness of the matters raised and repeated attempts over an extended period to obtain any form of substantive reply, including seeking assistance through the local MP, no response has been provided by the AFP to this day.
Contacted the Commonwealth Ombudsman with the families concerned with the AFP.
A Mozambique judge officially closes the case due to insufficient evidence.
AFP/GOV Action: communication and transparency still remains difficult for Elly’s family No response from families system complaint directly to AFP commissioner still in 2026.
Outcome: Justice for Elly not achieved; case remains unsolved and ongoing in 2026.

20 November 2024

Family emails Prime Minister’s Cabinet requesting inquiry into the handling of Elly’s case by the AFP.
Outcome: Responsibility referred to AFP; no action taken on Four occasions same reply sent by the Australian government. However, the AFP won’t reply to the Family!!

4 December 2024

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus KC replies. He states the MAR process is not known to the Australian authorities and not relevant with this matter!! Family suspects the Australian attorney general has not been fully informed of all the facts on the Case by the AFP that Classification of homicide by SERNIC police reports and their Director general in 2017 & again in 2020 well before May 2023.
Outcome: Responsibility referred back to AFP; family frustrated with lack of accountability.

2025 – Public Updates & Government Correspondence brick-wall!

7 February 2025

Family posts on Facebook highlighting parallels with Laos tragedy.
Notes: Emphasizes AFP inaction and MAR failures. Homicide classification (CRIME) made years before May 2023!!

22 January 2025

I personally met with MP Jodie Belyea requesting response from the family’s complaint to the AFP commissioner 27th May 2024.
Elly’s Family also asked MP Jodie Belyea for immediate action for the Australian Attorney General to send the MAR for the Mozambique Case file as requested by the Deputy Attorney General by letter to the coroner on the 19th June 2023. (That they will only accept the official MAR for the realise of their case file). Basically the Australian Attorney General is not interested in the matter with a reply letter to the MP!
Outcome: No progress to date; family encounters bureaucratic “brick wall.”

16 June 2025

Blogs/Homepage Website added detailing AFP, DFAT, and Mozambique police cover-up from November 2016.
Verified Evidence: Letters, photos, official documents, transcripts and recordings all official records in support.

22 July 2025-2026

website updated My report on coroner’s findings in systematic order for clarity.
Even the Commonwealth Ombudsman appears to be avoiding the substantive issues raised by Elly’s family regarding the AFP, instead focusing on procedural technicalities in a way that gives the impression of avoiding accountability.
There is a broader concern that when serious matters arise overseas involving Australian citizens, the current system does not always provide families with clear, timely, and meaningful support. This raises questions about whether existing processes are sufficient, and whether improvements are needed to ensure families are better supported in crisis situations and that oversight mechanisms are genuinely responsive to substantive concerns.
Outcome: Highlights Melbourne pathologist and AFP misleading/failures, coroner transparency issues, relevant witnesses not called and MAR process mismanagement.
30th June 2026 book to be published (HUNTING ELLY’S KILLER)
It has just been confirmed May 2026 that the families launch for the book (HUNTING ELLY’S KILLER) will be held on the 10th July 2026 at Robinsons book store, Melbourne-Frankston central shopping Hub between 6-9pm.
Commonwealth Ombudsman decision 14/05 2026
The Commonwealth Ombudsman’s decision of 14th May 2026 has been devastating for Elly’s family. After years of engagement with Commonwealth agencies, and the provision of extensive verified documentary evidence, official records, coronial material, AFP correspondence and supporting evidentiary material, serious concerns regarding AFP conduct, disclosure obligations, investigative integrity and accountability remain unresolved and unanswered.
This matter concerns the murder of a young Australian citizen overseas and raises exceptionally serious public interest issues regarding alleged misleading AFP representations, non-disclosure of critical evidence, failures of transparency and the handling of material evidence relevant to the coronial process and associated investigations.
The documentary record demonstrates that formal complaints and concerns were repeatedly raised directly with the AFP Commissioner, acknowledged by the AFP, referred by multiple Commonwealth agencies and pursued through parliamentary and oversight channels over many years.
The material provided includes evidence that the AFP received a clearer version of the crime scene photograph in November 2016 depicting Elly’s top ripped apart and exposing her upper torso, yet this clearer photograph and its evidentiary significance were never properly identified or disclosed within AFP reporting to the Coroner or Elly’s family.
The material further includes official SERNIC documentation supporting that Mozambique authorities had classified Elly Warren’s death as a homicide years prior to the position later advanced in AFP submissions to the Coroners Court.
Despite the existence of substantial verified supporting material, no independent accountability process now appears willing to properly examine these matters.
In circumstances involving the murder of an Australian citizen overseas, allegations concerning misleading representations, evidentiary non-disclosure and failures of investigative transparency are exceptionally serious and warrant the highest level of independent scrutiny and public accountability.
The Australian public is therefore entitled to ask a serious and unavoidable question: who then holds the AFP accountable for misleading conduct, non-disclosure of critical evidence and failures of transparency in matters of such gravity?

Key Evidence

Clear Crime Scene Photo (Nov 2016): Shows T-shirt ripped from shoulder to torso, half-naked body. Not submitted or reported to the coroner by the AFP.
Autopsy reports Mozambique and South Africa both concur that aspirating an abundance of sand which had packed/ chockablock in Elly’s airways obstructing the airways causing death.
Radiogoly Report 2019
South african autopsy photographts clearly showing abreasions were never given to Melbourne pathologist before the release of his autopsy report
Elly’s Clothing: Retained at Maputo Central Hospital; AFP/SLO did not secure; DNA opportunity lost.
SERNIC Mozambique Police Reports (DIRECTOR GENERAL) (Apr 2017 & 2020): Confirms homicide classification.
Official letters to the coroner dated 16 &19th June 2023.
Official DFAT’s letter 22nd March 2019 sent to family and AFP.
The Website update was LAST UPDATED on 24/05/2026.

Critical Failures

AFP failed to send official MAR in 2016; only informal requests/personal letters. SERNIC confirmed Homicide with official revised police report in 2017 and again in 2020 by their Director general and reaffirmed again in May 2023 to the AFP. Note all SERNIC police reports were sent to DFAT and the AFP.
Vital crime scene photograph withheld from coroner and pathologist. No report no any trace evidence to coroner not even in official statements reported by the AFP to this day.
Radiology report by Dr O’Donnell 2019 taken from CT Scan just prior Melbourne autopsy clearly showing both lungs trees filled with foreign material (Sand) with other areas of very high density equivalent to bone and cement density levels measured by Hounsfield unit of measurement at 1290 HU and 947 HU. No sand found or recorded in the lungs in the Melbourne autopsy report concluding cause of death in 2016/17 as Undetermined!!
Elly’s clothing she was wearing at the time of her death was never collected for DNA testing.
Sand sample taken from crime scene by AFP. No sample taken from Elly’s body for comparison. (Body moved post- mortem AFP had prior Knowledge in 2016 and later confirmed by Mozambique chief inspector)
AFP prioritized appearances and diplomatic concerns over justice. Mozambique cover-up 6am ripped apart top tampering with crime scene by local police before main investigation police, chief and doctor turned up at 9am.
The family and Coroner kept largely in the dark from the onset; transparency and accountability lacking by AFP.
Mozambique case officially closed due to lack of evidence; missed opportunities for DNA evidence clothes for conviction if matched with any solid suspects. This was vital as a match in DNA with suspects places them at the crime scene. Drop of sweat any body fluids or skin cell from hand grip ripping apart Elly’s t-shirt!!!
Latest SERNIC Operation in Tofo Involving Independent Investigator Mr Roos
Recent developments in the investigation have further intensified concerns surrounding Elly Warren’s homicide case.
In 2025, during a SERNIC operation in Tofo connected to Elly Warren’s homicide investigation, accommodation used by investigating officers was reportedly raided at night in a brazen incident during which a laptop computer and mobile phone were stolen. The circumstances surrounding the raid raised further serious concerns regarding the sensitivity of the investigation and the possibility that individuals connected to the case believed critical evidence or intelligence was held on those devices.
Mozambique authorities have previously confirmed through official reports that Elly Warren’s death was classified as a homicide and that investigators had identified “solid suspects” connected to the case. Information received by Elly’s family indicates that SERNIC investigators are now increasingly confident regarding the identity of those responsible for Elly’s murder, however insufficient admissible evidence currently remains unavailable to secure criminal convictions.
This is why the failure to retrieve and preserve Elly’s clothing in November 2016 remains such a critical issue. The condition of Elly’s clothing, including her top being ripped apart and her underwear and bra or bathers displaced, represented potentially vital forensic evidence capable of DNA analysis and other forensic examination. A confirmed DNA match to any suspect could potentially identify the person responsible for Elly’s murder and provide critical evidentiary support capable of leading to criminal conviction.
Despite the obvious forensic significance of the clothing, the material was never formally retrieved or preserved by the AFP while officers were present in Maputo Mozambique twice three days after Elly’s autopsy was conducted in Maputo.
Some suspects have reportedly since left Tofo, while others remain. The “HUNT” still continues today even though the Mozambique Judge has closed the case in 2024.
Comwonwealth decision email below
On ,Thu May 14 2026 11:30:18 GMT+1000 (Australian Eastern Standard Time), Ombudsman <Ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.au> wrote:
---------- Original Message ----------
OFFICIAL: Sensitive

Our ref: 2024-705934

Dear Mr Warren

Thank you for your recent emails outlining your dissatisfaction with the decision I made regarding your complaint to our Office about the Australian Federal Police (AFP).

I have reviewed the additional information you have provided by email and made preliminary enquiries with the AFP, and my decision to close your complaint remains unchanged. I have explained the reasons for my decision below.

Complaint reconsideration

The AFP confirmed that you have sent multiple emails to the Office of the Commissioner, including the email sent on 27 May 2024. The AFP stated that these emails were not considered to be complaints, which is reflected in its response letter to you on 24 August 2024. Having reviewed your emails to the Office of the Commissioner, I am satisfied that the determination that the emails were not complaints is reasonable in the circumstance.

The AFP advised that the Professional Standards team, who investigate serious matters such as misconduct and corruption, has not received any complaints from you.

It remains open to you to lodge a formal complaint with the AFP. Information on how to submit a complaint is available on the AFP’s website: Complaints and feedback for the Australian Federal Police - AFP

If you disagree with my decision, you are welcome to request a review by completing our online form.

You should request a review within 3 months of being told about our decision. Your review request should clearly identify why you believe the decision was wrong and provide any additional supporting information or evidence. You can find information about our review process on our website under ‘Complaints about us’ and request a review of your complaint outcome.

Yours sincerely,

Teri
My final response email below to the Commonwealth Ombudsman email above 19th May 2026 sent to all:
Re: Commonwealth Ombudsman - 2024-705934 - Paul Warren CRM:0459003 [SEC=OFFICIAL:Sensitive]
pwww@bigpond.com
to
Ombudsman, attorney@ag.gov.au, foreign.minister@dfat.gov.au, DLO@pm.gov.au, commissioner@afp.gov.au, 60Minutes@nine.com.au, allylangdon@nine.com.au, mandy.squires@news.com.au, sarahmarinos@optusnet.com.au, Steven.jackson@mailonline.com, erugg222@nine.com, penelopeliersch@nine.com brodiempnews@gmail.com, daniellejcollis@gmail.com, scucchiara@nine.com.au, 4corners@your.abc.net.au, Producer@thebriefingpodcast.com.au, johnparrish@optusnet.com.au, Olivia
Tue, May 19, 2026 9:03 AM
Dear Teri,
I write to formally express my profound concern regarding the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s handling of my complaint concerning the conduct, integrity and complaint handling processes of the Australian Federal Police in relation to my daughter Elly Warren’s murder in Mozambique.
This matter concerns the death of a young Australian citizen overseas and raises exceptionally serious issues surrounding the AFP’s handling of critical evidence, disclosure obligations to the Coroner and Elly’s family, and the AFP’s subsequent failure to properly respond to a formal complaint lodged directly with the AFP Commissioner.
Given the gravity of the matters raised, including concerns regarding the AFP’s withholding of critical evidence in relation to the death of an Australian citizen overseas, the position now adopted by your Office is extraordinary, profoundly concerning and difficult to reconcile with the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s oversight responsibilities in matters of this seriousness.
After approximately two and a half years of engagement with the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Elly’s family is now being informed that no complaint had been made to the AFP prior to approaching your Office. That conclusion is plainly inconsistent with the documentary record already provided and cannot reasonably be reconciled with the evidence before you.
On 27th May 2024, I lodged a formal systems complaint directly with the AFP Commissioner concerning the AFP’s conduct, integrity and handling of my daughter’s case. This was not informal correspondence. It was a detailed complaint supported by official records, coronial material, AFP documentation, correspondence, forensic material and evidentiary records relating to the AFP’s involvement in the matter.
On 28th May 2024, the Office of the AFP Commissioner formally acknowledged receipt of that complaint and advised in writing that the “matters raised” would be considered and a response would be forthcoming.
I further note that correspondence from the Australian Attorney-General’s office also acknowledged that the concerns raised regarding the AFP’s handling of my daughter’s case fell outside its jurisdiction and were appropriate for the AFP to address directly.
Correspondence from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet expressly advised that the AFP would be best placed to respond and confirmed that the correspondence had been referred to the AFP for consideration. Multiple Australian Government agencies provided similar responses, consistently directing the matters back to the AFP.
I also sought assistance through my local Federal Member of Parliament in an effort to obtain substantive responses from the AFP. These representations further demonstrate that the concerns were formally and repeatedly raised with Commonwealth authorities and that the AFP was aware of ongoing requests for accountability, transparency and response.
Elly’s family also sought independent Australian Government intervention and consideration of an inquiry into the AFP’s handling of the case. Despite the seriousness of the concerns, including disclosure obligations, investigative integrity and evidentiary handling, the consistent response was referred back to the AFP, leaving Elly’s family in a circular process where the agency subject to complaint remained responsible for assessing its own conduct.
Despite repeated referrals, follow up correspondence and formal acknowledgment by the AFP Commissioner’s Office, no substantive response addressing the core issues raised in the complaint was ever provided.
The factual position is therefore clear.
A formal complaint was lodged with the AFP Commissioner on 27th May 2024. It was acknowledged on 28th May 2024. The AFP advised a response would be provided. The Attorney-General’s office and other Australian Government agencies recognised the complaint and referred it to the AFP. My local Federal MP also raised the matter. No substantive response was ever provided. Elly’s family continued to seek responses without resolution.
This continuing failure is further evidenced by correspondence sent to Commander Raegan Stewart on 24th October 2024, in which I again referred to the 27th May 2024 complaint and requested a response, stating that the family needed answers and explanations to the issues raised.
In those circumstances, it is profoundly troubling that your Office has now determined that no complaint had been lodged with the AFP prior to Ombudsman involvement. That conclusion is inconsistent with the documentary record, the AFP’s own acknowledgment, the conduct of multiple Commonwealth agencies and your Office’s own extended engagement with this matter.
I must also address reliance upon AFP correspondence dated 23rd August 2024 referring to my latest correspondence. That letter does not identify the complaint of 27th May 2024 and does not engage with its substance.
It is also important to clarify the Mutual Assistance Request (MAR) process. At no stage did the Mozambique Attorney-General state that a Mutual Assistance Request could not have been initiated by the AFP from the outset. In fact, a Mozambique Government official had previously stated in 2021, within AFP submissions, that a joint operation between our two nations was always possible, and those submissions were provided to the then Coroner, Mr Bracken.
The issue raised instead concerned access to specific case file material prior to the lifting of Mozambique security restrictions, which is materially different from whether investigative cooperation or formal mutual assistance mechanisms could have been pursued between the two countries from the outset.
It must be strongly noted that, in the 19th June 2023 letter to Mr Cain, the Mozambique Deputy Attorney-General clearly stated that Mozambique would only accept the formal Mutual Assistance Request process with Australia in relation to access to the case file material. This demonstrates the importance and respect the Mozambique Government places upon the formal MAR process between our two nations.
The 19th June 2023 correspondence clearly supports this position and indicates that the appropriate official pathway for cooperation remained available through formal Mutual Assistance channels. The evidence therefore does not support any suggestion that the AFP was prevented from initiating or pursuing a Mutual Assistance Request process at any time. Rather, it demonstrates that Mozambique expected such engagement to occur through the proper official government-to-government mechanism.
Material later provided to the Coroners Court by the Australian Government Solicitor in June 2023 further demonstrates that formal cooperation mechanisms were in fact available and were used. That correspondence confirms AFP communication with Mozambique authorities in November 2016, sharing of evidentiary material, and ongoing interaction between Australian and Mozambique authorities.
The AFP acknowledged that Detective Superintendent Scruton, the AFP liaison officer based in Pretoria, received a blurred crime scene photograph from the Honorary Consul on 13th November 2016. Australian Government Solicitor correspondence later confirmed that the photograph obtained on 13th November 2016 was the blurred version provided by the Honorary Consul to the AFP/SLO on that date.
Although Detective Superintendent Scruton’s final statement was not made until 17th August 2017, he referenced the photograph obtained on 13th November 2016 without distinguishing between the blurred image originally received and the clearer version later supplied by DFAT. DFAT subsequently provided the AFP/SLO and AFP with a clearer version of the same photograph on 25th November 2016. The AFP/SLO then forwarded the clearer photograph to Mozambique authorities on 8th December 2016. However, neither the Coroner nor Elly’s family were informed that the AFP had provided Mozambique authorities with the clearer and explicit photograph depicting our daughter’s partially exposed body.
The Australian Government Solicitor correspondence confirms the clearer photograph was only provided to the AFP by DFAT on 25th November 2016. The image originated from the fisherman, passed through the Honorary Consul after leaving Tofo, then to Embassy staff in Pretoria before reaching the AFP.
This distinction is critical. The clearer photograph clearly shows Elly’s top ripped from the shoulder, exposing her upper torso all the way down her right side. This evidentiary detail was capable of supporting the possibility that a violent physical struggle had taken place prior to her death. Despite this, the clearer photograph was not identified or explained in the AFP/SLO statement provided to the Coroner in 2017, nor in any AFP submissions, reports, or other statements issued to this day.
The AFP statement of Detective Superintendent Scruton refers generally to the photograph from the fisherman without clearly distinguishing between the blurred and clearer versions or acknowledging receipt of the clearer image.
The Coroner ultimately stated during my oral submissions at the inquest that there was no dispute that Elly’s top was ripped apart. However, the clearer photograph and its significance were not properly disclosed or addressed in AFP reporting to the Coroner.
This raises serious concerns regarding disclosure, evidentiary handling and investigative transparency. The AFP possessed the clearer image in November 2016, provided this material to Mozambique authorities, and was involved in supporting the coronial process, yet the clearer photograph was never provided to the Coroner by the AFP. No report concerning this vital evidence was provided to the Coroner indicating that, with Elly’s top so violently ripped apart, clear evidence existed of a violent altercation and probable third-party involvement prior to Elly’s highly suspicious death. No Mutual Assistance Request was ever sent, and the significance of the clearer photograph was never formally disclosed.
The clearer image showed Elly’s top ripped apart from the shoulder and exposing her upper torso, an evidentiary feature strongly capable of supporting the conclusion that a violent struggle had taken place prior to Elly’s death, which was later formally classified by Mozambique authorities as a homicide in two official police reports, including a comprehensive report issued by the Director-General of SERNIC well before May 2023.
The position previously advanced to Elly’s family that investigative limitations existed due to the absence of a Mutual Assistance Request is difficult to reconcile with documented AFP cooperation with Mozambique authorities.
After being advised the case had been closed, I wrote to Commander Raegan Stewart seeking clarification regarding whether a Mutual Assistance Request could still be pursued for the Mozambique file, reflecting ongoing efforts by Elly’s family to seek transparency and accountability.
The AFP correspondence of 23rd August 2024 does not address the substance of the complaint, including disclosure failures, evidentiary handling, integrity concerns or the handling of the crime scene photographs. These matters remain unanswered.
The AFP Commissioner’s submissions to Coroner Mr Cain dated 18th December are misleading in asserting that no Mozambique police authority had classified Ms Warren’s death as a crime or homicide prior to May 2023. This assertion is directly contradicted by two official reports issued by SERNIC, the Mozambique criminal investigation authority and their Director-General.
One report was issued in 2017, and a subsequent comprehensive report was later provided to both DFAT and the AFP by the Director-General of SERNIC August 2020 expressly confirming that Ms Warren’s death had been classified as a homicide and that they have solid suspects.
This is wholly unacceptable and significantly undermines the integrity of the AFP’s submissions and assistance provided to the Coroner.
It must also be strongly noted that the requirement for the AFP to issue a Mutual Assistance Request (MAR) and formally offer Australian assistance is dependent upon Mozambique authorities classifying the death of an Australian citizen as a crime. Once such a classification is made, it provides substantial weight and foundation for the MAR to be submitted through the Australian Attorney-General’s Department.
In this matter, despite the homicide classification having been formally communicated, no MAR was ever sent.
The contrast between the Mozambique Government’s respect for the formal MAR process and the AFP’s apparent failure to pursue that process raises further serious concerns regarding the adequacy of the AFP’s investigative efforts, international cooperation, and overall handling of this matter.
The seriousness of this matter cannot be overstated. It concerns the murder of a young Australian citizen overseas and allegations that critical evidence relevant to the coronial process was not properly disclosed to the Coroner or the family.
The material provided to your Office includes official records, coronial material, AFP correspondence, highly relevant clear photographic material and inquest evidence which collectively raise serious concerns regarding investigative integrity, accountability and disclosure obligations.
During the coronial proceedings, I raised concerns regarding AFP conduct. The Coroner advised that such matters were outside the jurisdiction of the Coroners Court and should be raised directly with the AFP. On that basis, Elly’s family lodged the formal complaint with the AFP Commissioner on 27th May 2024.
That sequence of events demonstrates that the family acted appropriately and in accordance with judicial direction. The inquest record is publicly available and supports this chronology.
At the time my complaint was made, the Commonwealth Ombudsman was actively examining systemic concerns relating to AFP complaint handling processes, including issues regarding effectiveness, consistency, responsiveness and public confidence in the handling of complaints against AFP members.
Those concerns were publicly acknowledged in public reporting regarding the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s examination of AFP
Region Canberra article regarding Ombudsman concerns about AFP complaint handling practices
The issues experienced in Elly’s case appear entirely consistent with those broader systemic concerns.
I further note that when I first approached your Office, I was advised that complainants were generally expected to raise matters with the relevant agency first. However, this was not presented as a jurisdictional bar preventing assessment of exceptionally serious public interest matters involving accountability and institutional integrity.
Your Office then engaged with this matter for approximately two and a half years, requesting material and progressing assessment stages. At no point was it clearly indicated that the matter would ultimately be rejected on the basis that no complaint had been made to the AFP, despite the documented evidence showing that it had.
A formal complaint was made. It was acknowledged. It was referred to by multiple agencies. It was raised through parliamentary channels. It was followed up repeatedly. It was never substantively answered.
To now conclude that no complaint existed is inconsistent with the documentary record and the AFP’s own written acknowledgment.
Accordingly, I request reconsideration of the decision that no further action is warranted, formal acknowledgment that the AFP complaint was lodged on 27th May 2024, clarification of how the contrary conclusion was reached, and a substantive explanation for the handling of this matter, including delay and assessment process.
Given the seriousness of the matters raised, the prolonged absence of substantive accountability, and the significant public interest issues concerning institutional transparency and oversight, I have copied this correspondence together with supporting material to the AFP Commissioner, Australian Attorney-General, DFAT, Australian Government representatives and multiple Australian media organisations.
This has not been done lightly. However, after approximately two and a half years of engagement with Commonwealth agencies without substantive resolution, Elly’s family believes there is now a clear public interest in ensuring independent public scrutiny of the matters raised.
This matter extends beyond Elly’s case alone. It raises broader concerns regarding whether Australian families confronting suspicious deaths overseas can have confidence that serious complaints involving Commonwealth law enforcement agencies will be properly assessed, independently scrutinised and transparently addressed.
In circumstances involving allegations concerning withheld evidence, disclosure failures and unresolved accountability issues, the continuing absence of substantive answers is deeply concerning.
The Australian public is entitled to expect that serious concerns involving Commonwealth agencies, particularly in matters involving the murder of an Australian citizen overseas, are properly examined and subject to independent review.
After years of unanswered questions, repeated referrals between agencies and the absence of meaningful accountability, Elly’s family believes other Australian families should not be placed in a position where they are left navigating prolonged institutional processes without transparency, resolution or confidence that critical concerns are being independently addressed.
If oversight mechanisms fail to properly respond to serious complaints involving evidentiary disclosure, investigative integrity and institutional accountability in matters of this gravity, it risks undermining public confidence not only for Elly’s family, but for other Australian families who may one day find themselves seeking answers and accountability following the death of a loved one overseas.
Yours sincerely,
Paul Warren
June 2026 Update – Outcome and Systemic Accountability Concerns Raised
If the Commonwealth Ombudsman maintains a position that no complaint was made to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) prior to its involvement in this matter, despite documentary evidence indicating that a formal complaint was lodged, acknowledged, referred between Commonwealth agencies, and repeatedly followed up over an extended period, then a serious question arises as to whether the oversight process is functioning effectively in relation to matters of significant public interest.
In practical terms, such a position has the effect of removing the matter from substantive independent review, notwithstanding that the underlying issues concern the death of an Australian citizen overseas, alleged failures in evidentiary disclosure, investigative handling, and complaint response by the AFP.
Where a complaint has been formally lodged with the AFP Commissioner, acknowledged in writing by the AFP, referenced and redirected by multiple Commonwealth agencies including the Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and repeatedly followed up without substantive response, yet is later treated as if it did not exist for the purposes of oversight assessment, this creates a material accountability gap in the Commonwealth complaints framework.
The consequence of this gap is not procedural inconvenience. It is that serious allegations concerning law enforcement conduct may not receive independent examination on their merits, even where there is documented evidence of engagement with the agency concerned.
For members of the public, this raises a broader and more fundamental concern: whether there exists an effective and reliable pathway for independent scrutiny when complaints involve Commonwealth law enforcement agencies and complex overseas deaths, particularly where jurisdictional referral processes result in matters being returned to the very agency whose conduct is in question.
In circumstances of this nature, the absence of clear, transparent and final determination risks creating a system in which complaints are acknowledged but not substantively resolved, responsibility is repeatedly referred back to the subject agency, and oversight bodies are unable or unwilling to make findings on contested factual records.
If this outcome is correct, it would not only affect this case, but would also raise broader questions about public confidence in the effectiveness of Commonwealth oversight mechanisms in cases involving the deaths of Australian citizens overseas.
Accordingly, the central issue is not solely the factual dispute as to whether a complaint was made, but whether the oversight framework is capable of independently testing and determining serious allegations once raised, or whether procedural classification issues can prevent substantive review from occurring at all.
In matters of this gravity, the public interest lies in ensuring that serious complaints concerning investigative integrity, disclosure, and agency accountability are independently assessed and transparently resolved, rather than being left without definitive determination due to jurisdictional or procedural interpretation.
The question therefore remains:
Who holds the Australian Federal Police accountable for its actions?
Note: It is critically important that anyone reading this updated flow chart fully understands that I am in possession of all verified official documents and records that substantiate the matters outlined above. Accordingly, everything referred to in this updated flow chart is based entirely on factual information drawn directly from official sources, including material contained within the coronial brief of evidence, court transcripts and recordings. My above statements are not assumptions, opinion, or speculation, but are grounded in documented and verifiable evidence. It is essential that the seriousness and significance of these circumstances are fully understood in that context.
Paul Warren

Updated flow chart, Elly’s Murder investigation over a decade

ELLY WARREN – MURDER INVESTIGATION FLOW CHART (2016–2026)

Table of Contents – Systemic Flow Chart (Chronological Structure)

Elly’s murder investigation – Complete Chronological Timeline (2016–2026)

2016 – 2017, Initial Investigation and AFP/DFAT Engagement

9th November 2016 – Death

12-13-14th November 2016 – Autopsy

20–22 November 2016 – Dr Klepp’s Findings, Embassy Notification, and the Melbourne Autopsy

25TH- 19th November/december 2016 – Crime Scene Photo

Nov–Dec 2016 summary –AFP is allowed on the gRound to provide assistance to the coroner

2017 – Mozambique police Reports and AFP Inaction

7th September 2017 – Family Recorded Meeting with Melbourne Pathologist, AFP, and Coroner’s Assistant Raises Serious Questions

AFP Oversight, Disclosure Failures and Inconsistencies in the Evidentiary Record

February 2021 – Coroner Bracken Orders the AFP to send official request

‘It was always possible for the AFP to have a joint operation’”

2021–2023 – SERNIC Re-opens Homicide Investigation and Vital Information Emerges Before the Inquest

11th December 2023 – Family and AFP Commissioner Submissions to Coroner Cain (Final Inquest Hearing)

Key Issues Raised

AFP Commissioner Submissions

Witness Issues

Outcome

2024 – Official Closure of Mozambique Case

27th May- October 2024

20 November 2024

4 December 2024

2025 – Public Updates & Government Correspondence brick-wall!

7 February 2025

22 January 2025

16 June 2025

22 July 2025-2026

Commonwealth Ombudsman decision 14/05 2026

Key Evidence

The Website update was LAST UPDATED on 24/05/2026.

Critical Failures

Latest SERNIC Operation in Tofo Involving Independent Investigator Mr Roos

Comwonwealth decision email below

Re: Commonwealth Ombudsman - 2024-705934 - Paul Warren CRM:0459003 [SEC=OFFICIAL:Sensitive]

June 2026 Update – Outcome and Systemic Accountability Concerns Raised

Elly Rose Warren