A POA does not need to be witnessed. However most financial institutions wont accept a POA that has not been witnessed simply as it could be challenged as being fraudulent.
The issue here is not the validity of the POA but the fact Julia Gillard claimed to have witnessed Blewitt signing the POA. She did this by signing the POA as a witness. As a lawyer and lest you forget a partner is a major suburban/city firm (even then) she would have known what the effect of witnessing Blewitt's signature would mean. Blewitt claims he was in Perth at the time. Gillard presumably claims she was in Melbourne. If this is correct then Gillard could not have witnessed Blewitt's signature. At this time she was on good terms with Blewitt and Wilson it cant be that difficult to remember when a good friend asks you to witness a POA. But then again Gillard has a problem when $5000 was placed into her bank account.
If Gillard did not witness Blewitt's signature but signed as a witness it is still a fraudulent act. The act of signing the POA gave it a status greater than that it had before. The POA was used to buy a property in Victoria and obtain a mortgage over it from S+G in house financing.
Of course it goes without saying that if Gillard did not witness the document but still signed, then this act is gross professional misconduct.
