# Josephine Greensill Was Wrongly Convicted Of Assaulting Her Students

An episode of [True Crime Conversations](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1469153910), 30 Sep 2026, 1 h 05 min.

Audio: https://traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/3ea926be-9be7-482a-8ac3-a44f016e43d1/abaa347e-8ac5-454e-85f9-aa64005c285f/675566b3-e9d8-44a2-8909-b4d3006609f7/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=6d9fdc19-147e-4f77-8d3f-aa64005e5923

In March 2008, 57-year-old semi-retired schoolteacher Josephine Greensill opened her front door in suburban Melbourne to find three detectives waiting to arrest her. Two men had accused her of sexually abusing them at a backyard sleepover almost 30 years earlier, when they were eight-year-old boys in her class. No medical experts were ever called, and the jury believed them. Jo spent two and a half years in prison as a convicted child sex offender before her conviction was quashed. The court found the men had colluded and had a financial motive, and that what they described was physically impossible. Award-winning crime reporter Neil Mercer investigated her case, along with eight others, for his book Falsely Convicted. In this episode he tells Gemma about the common sense failures that sent an innocent woman to jail and what her life looked like once she was released. Neil also looks at the cases of Eric Honeysett framed by NSW police in 1983, and Gene Gibson's case. LINKS Purchase Falsely Convicted by Neil Mercer here. We want to hear from you! Take our quick 3-minute survey for your chance to win a $1,000 gift card. GET IN TOUCH Follow us on Instagram and TikTok @truecrimeconversations Want us to cover a case on the podcast? Email us at truecrime@mamamia.com.au or send us a voice note. MAMAMIA OFFERS: • Get access to Very Peri, Mamamia's exclusive perimenopause series, for just $59. 25 world-leading experts, over 20 on-demand sessions, available now. We’ve sorted through the noise so you don't have to. Go to veryperi.com.au today. You hot? Same. Make sure to leave us a rating and review on Apple & Spotify to let us know how you're liking the episodes. CREDITS Host & Executive Producer: Gemma Bath Guests: Paul Warren Produced by Ella Maitland Video Editor: Artemi Kokkaris Audio Design: Tegan Sadler Mamamia acknowledges the traditional owners of the land on which we have recorded this podcast. Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribe See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

## Transcript

[0:01] Speaker 1: It's just after midday on a March day in 2008,
[0:04] Speaker 1: and still in her pyjamas, Josephine Greensill is sipping on
[0:08] Speaker 1: a cup of coffee in the lounge room of her
[0:10] Speaker 1: Melbourne home. After losing her husband a couple of years
[0:14] Speaker 1: ago in a tragic accident, the 57-year-old semi-retired schoolteacher is
[0:19] Speaker 1: still dealing with her grief. But as her thoughts wander
[0:22] Speaker 1: to him, as they often do, they are interrupted by
[0:26] Speaker 1: a knock on the door. she opens it to find
[0:30] Speaker 1: three detectives on her doorstep. We're here to arrest you,
[0:34] Speaker 1: one of them tells her. What for, she asks, shocked.
[0:39] Speaker 1: Josephine is about to find herself in a police station,
[0:43] Speaker 1: sitting across from a detective, accusing her of doing horrendous
[0:47] Speaker 1: things to two little boys who were students of hers
[0:50] Speaker 1: more than 30 years ago. She'll go to prison for
[0:54] Speaker 1: the allegations. She's innocent, but no-one knows. is listening. I'm
[1:19] Speaker 1: Gemma Bath and you're listening to True Crime Conversations, a
[1:22] Speaker 1: podcast exploring the world's most notorious crimes by speaking to
[1:26] Speaker 1: the people who know the most about them It's the
[1:29] Speaker 1: stuff of nightmares, to be wrongly convicted of a crime
[1:33] Speaker 1: you didn't do. But that's exactly what happened to Josephine Greenshill,
[1:38] Speaker 1: and it destroyed her life. In 2026, she's still dealing
[1:43] Speaker 1: with the ramifications. You'll have heard of some of the
[1:46] Speaker 1: more famous cases of injustice in Australia, like Lindy Chamberlain,
[1:50] Speaker 1: and more recently, Kathleen Folbig. But our guest today has
[1:54] Speaker 1: revisited some of the cases you might not know by name.
[1:59] Speaker 1: In his book, Falsely Convicted, award-winning crime reporter Neil Mercer
[2:03] Speaker 1: turned his investigative skills towards the most chilling crimes of all,
[2:08] Speaker 1: the ones committed by the system itself. He joins us now. Neil,
[2:20] Speaker 1: thank you for joining us on True Crime Conversations. Miscarriages
[2:24] Speaker 1: of justice, why this topic?
[2:27] Speaker 2: I guess I've been a journalist for a very, very
[2:29] Speaker 2: long time now, and I've been covering crime, courts, royal commissions,
[2:34] Speaker 2: judicial inquiries, that sort of thing. And over the years,
[2:38] Speaker 2: there's been a lot of cases where you go, oh,
[2:41] Speaker 2: this doesn't sound right. The evidence doesn't sound right. Whether
[2:44] Speaker 2: you're talking about corruption back in the bad old days
[2:48] Speaker 2: of the New South Wales police force in the 80s
[2:51] Speaker 2: and early 90s, or in other cases where the evidence
[2:55] Speaker 2: just doesn't add up. So I've always had that interest
[2:59] Speaker 2: and I thought, you know, I should put something down.
[3:02] Speaker 1: After so many years working in and around this beat,
[3:06] Speaker 1: what concerned you the most about the way our justice
[3:10] Speaker 1: system works?
[3:12] Speaker 2: I think it's the reluctance to admit mistakes. I think
[3:17] Speaker 2: the justice system works generally. You know, I think the
[3:23] Speaker 2: jury system works generally, but Mistakes are made. And, you know,
[3:28] Speaker 2: we've all heard the stories about people in jail where,
[3:32] Speaker 2: you know, half the people in jail are innocent, quote unquote.
[3:38] Speaker 2: I don't believe that. But some are. Some are definitely innocent.
[3:42] Speaker 2: Some have been wrongly convicted. And in many cases, they've
[3:48] Speaker 2: got no recourse. It's very, very hard to, if you
[3:52] Speaker 2: are wrongly convicted, in many cases, it's very hard to
[3:56] Speaker 2: get that overturned.
[3:59] Speaker 1: Delving into wrongful convictions in detail for your book, were
[4:04] Speaker 1: you surprised by what you uncovered? Was it even worse
[4:06] Speaker 1: than you thought?
[4:07] Speaker 2: I was surprised by some things and in some cases
[4:11] Speaker 2: what appears to be, and this is, you know, I'm
[4:15] Speaker 2: looking at these cases with the benefit of hindsight, which
[4:17] Speaker 2: is always good, but I think sort of a lack
[4:20] Speaker 2: of common sense in a couple of cases where you
[4:23] Speaker 2: just went, that That evidence just can't be right. No,
[4:29] Speaker 2: I'm not shocked because I've been around a long time
[4:31] Speaker 2: and I've covered a lot of court cases or inquiries.
[4:35] Speaker 2: I've met a lot of police officers, lawyers, crooks, and
[4:40] Speaker 2: you get to know the system. But I think a
[4:44] Speaker 2: couple of things struck me that the authorities are reluctant
[4:48] Speaker 2: to admit they've made mistakes. As I say, common sense
[4:52] Speaker 2: in one or two cases seems to have flown out
[4:54] Speaker 2: the door. Yeah, there's a whole, the nine cases I'm
[5:00] Speaker 2: looking at, there's different reasons for each one of them miscarrying.
[5:05] Speaker 1: I feel like that common sense factor is going to
[5:08] Speaker 1: be big in the case we're about to discuss. Josephine Greensill,
[5:12] Speaker 1: has that case always been on your radar or when
[5:15] Speaker 1: did you come to know about her?
[5:17] Speaker 2: Only when I really started looking into cases of people
[5:21] Speaker 2: who'd been falsely convicted or had been exonerated by the courts.
[5:26] Speaker 2: All these people in the book have been exonerated either
[5:29] Speaker 2: by the State Court of Criminal Appeal or by the
[5:32] Speaker 2: High Court. And her case came onto the radar. She was,
[5:38] Speaker 2: at the time of her arrest, she's a 57-year-old semi-retired schoolteacher.
[5:45] Speaker 2: Never been in trouble. with the law in her life.
[5:49] Speaker 2: A year or so earlier, her husband had been killed
[5:53] Speaker 2: in a level crossing accident, and she received a considerable
[5:57] Speaker 2: sum of money, some $ 600, 000. So on this particular day,
[6:03] Speaker 2: she's at home. She's semi-retired. She's still dealing with some issues.
[6:09] Speaker 2: She's in her pajamas. Her son's on his exercise bike.
[6:13] Speaker 2: They're in the middle of Melbourne. It's modest suburbia. Knock
[6:16] Speaker 2: on the door. Knock, knock, knock. Opens the door. There's
[6:19] Speaker 2: three detectives there. You're under arrest for historical child sex offences.
[6:27] Speaker 2: And she goes, what? She's a retired school teacher or semi-retired.
[6:33] Speaker 2: She's just totally gobsmacked. And they say, well, you're under arrest.
[6:36] Speaker 2: You have to come with us to the station. Which
[6:39] Speaker 2: she does. They do allow her to have a shower
[6:41] Speaker 2: and get changed. Very nice. She goes to the station.
[6:46] Speaker 2: The cops say, look, you're entitled to a lawyer. The
[6:50] Speaker 2: only lawyer Josephine Greensill knows is the one who did
[6:54] Speaker 2: her will. And she thinks, look, I don't really need
[6:59] Speaker 2: a lawyer anyway because I haven't done anything wrong. I
[7:02] Speaker 2: haven't done anything wrong. I'll be able to handle this.
[7:05] Speaker 2: Over the next hour or two at the police station,
[7:07] Speaker 2: I think she answers 351 questions. And she answers, you know, without...
[7:13] Speaker 2: you know, saying, I don't want to talk anymore. Nothing
[7:15] Speaker 2: like that answers every single question. At the centre of
[7:18] Speaker 2: this case are allegations by two men, now in their
[7:23] Speaker 2: late 30s, who say that almost 30 years earlier, when
[7:28] Speaker 2: Jo Greensill was their schoolteacher, primary schoolteacher, she molested them,
[7:34] Speaker 2: sexually assaulted them. And there's a variety of allegations, but
[7:38] Speaker 2: basically the main one is that I think in 1979,
[7:43] Speaker 2: certainly when they were eight years old, they had a
[7:46] Speaker 2: sleepover at her home in a tent in the backyard.
[7:50] Speaker 2: It sounds a bit maybe weird now, but back then,
[7:53] Speaker 2: not so. And Joe Greensill knew their families, had met
[7:58] Speaker 2: their parents. The two eight-year-old boys have the sleepover. They
[8:04] Speaker 2: allege that Joe Greensill assaulted them, that they... had sexual
[8:10] Speaker 2: intercourse with her on multiple occasions and that they obtained
[8:17] Speaker 2: erections and produced semen. Joe Greensill had to listen to
[8:25] Speaker 2: all this evidence when she was on trial. It's extremely difficult.
[8:32] Speaker 2: I can't imagine how she dealt with it. But these
[8:34] Speaker 2: two boys say the tents were in the backyard of
[8:37] Speaker 2: her home. Her husband was home, by the way. The
[8:41] Speaker 2: tents were only a few metres from the back door.
[8:45] Speaker 2: The allegations sound fantastic. And her barrister says, look, don't worry,
[8:49] Speaker 2: nobody's going to believe these blokes. They go to trial.
[8:56] Speaker 2: The jury does believe them. She's sent to jail as
[8:59] Speaker 2: a child molester. I mean, she is absolutely stunned. She
[9:05] Speaker 2: doesn't know what to do.
[9:06] Speaker 1: The main allegation is... that the men were kind of
[9:10] Speaker 1: talking about is this tent incident. Can you explain exactly
[9:14] Speaker 1: what they say happened?
[9:16] Speaker 2: What they say happened is that they were going to
[9:19] Speaker 2: have this sleepover in the tent. In the tent, Josephine
[9:23] Speaker 2: Greensill comes out in a nightie and initiates sex with them.
[9:28] Speaker 2: And both boys say that they had penetrative sexual intercourse.
[9:35] Speaker 2: These are eight-year-old boys. They say, I got an erection,
[9:39] Speaker 2: my penis went into her vagina and I produced semen
[9:45] Speaker 2: because at one stage we both went outside the tent
[9:49] Speaker 2: and because we had to do a wee and our
[9:52] Speaker 2: wee was all gooey and that's the initial allegation It's
[9:57] Speaker 2: backed up when they give evidence. And one of them says,
[10:01] Speaker 2: I produced semen.
[10:02] Speaker 1: Didn't they also say that they had multiple rounds of
[10:07] Speaker 1: sex intercourse as eight-year-olds?
[10:09] Speaker 2: As eight-year-olds. In the tent. Repeated instances of sex, not
[10:14] Speaker 2: just once. This is not just one case of sexual intercourse.
[10:18] Speaker 2: of penetration by the eight-year-old boys.
[10:20] Speaker 1: On that one night?
[10:21] Speaker 2: On that one night. There are other allegations in other places,
[10:26] Speaker 2: but this is the central part of the case. Yeah,
[10:30] Speaker 2: they say they achieved directions, that they had sexual intercourse
[10:38] Speaker 2: with her. One of the boys says, I left the
[10:40] Speaker 2: tent at one stage and saw her husband in the
[10:44] Speaker 2: house a few metres away, bizarrely. And then I went
[10:48] Speaker 2: back to the tent and I was still at it.
[10:51] Speaker 2: So it's prolonged sexual intercourse.
[10:55] Speaker 1: So many question marks there, isn't there?
[10:57] Speaker 2: Well, even the Crown, I think, even the Crown in
[11:00] Speaker 2: the end said, the Crown prosecutor said, you look at
[11:05] Speaker 2: some of this evidence and you go, oh, come on,
[11:08] Speaker 2: this can't be real. And you know what? It wasn't.
[11:12] Speaker 1: What does Joe remember about that night? Because there was
[11:14] Speaker 1: a sleepover, wasn't there?
[11:16] Speaker 2: There was a sleepover. She just went indoors and went
[11:19] Speaker 2: to bed. Her husband was there. And there's no doubt
[11:22] Speaker 2: about any of this. Her husband was there. There's no dispute.
[11:25] Speaker 2: And he's in the kitchen, which is at the back
[11:27] Speaker 2: of the house, I think. So he's sort of overlooking
[11:30] Speaker 2: the garden. It's sort of bizarre to think that he
[11:34] Speaker 2: would just be standing there watching this go on.
[11:39] Speaker 1: The part that does jump out at me is why
[11:42] Speaker 1: are two eight-year-old boys having a sleepover at their school
[11:45] Speaker 1: teacher's house? Do we know why?
[11:48] Speaker 2: There was apparently some sort of event at a local
[11:54] Speaker 2: park that night where there was a bonfire and a
[11:57] Speaker 2: lot of kids were going to it. And it was
[12:00] Speaker 2: just the parents of the two boys knew Joe Greensill.
[12:05] Speaker 2: They knew a husband. They'd been out to dinner. The
[12:08] Speaker 2: boys said, can we have a sleepover? And everybody said, yes,
[12:13] Speaker 2: sleep in the tent. It's all very exciting. Sleep outdoors.
[12:17] Speaker 1: It's definitely not something that would happen today.
[12:19] Speaker 2: No, it's not. And, you know, not with the school teacher. No.
[12:24] Speaker 2: I mean, if you're close friends, your kids might go
[12:28] Speaker 2: for a sleepover. I mean, kids have sleepovers.
[12:31] Speaker 1: But not with their teacher.
[12:32] Speaker 2: Not with their teacher. No, not now. I think it
[12:35] Speaker 2: was a different era. Those things were like, oh, yeah.
[12:39] Speaker 2: I mean, I'm old enough to remember the 60s and 70s. And, yeah,
[12:45] Speaker 2: you did have sleepovers and and those sort of things.
[12:49] Speaker 2: And sleeping out in a tent was like a big adventure.
[12:52] Speaker 2: It was really exciting. So yeah, these days that would
[12:57] Speaker 2: not happen. But back then, nobody questioned it.
[13:00] Speaker 1: The other part that frustrates me about this case is
[13:03] Speaker 1: that it gives an example to question other victims, if
[13:11] Speaker 1: you see what I mean there. Because most of the time,
[13:13] Speaker 1: victims of sexual assault, as we've discussed, are telling the truth.
[13:17] Speaker 1: But you've got this case. Look, they made it up.
[13:21] Speaker 1: People make it up. But most of the time they're not. So,
[13:25] Speaker 1: you know, it adds that other layer of complexity.
[13:29] Speaker 2: Maybe. I don't think people should take this case as, oh, see,
[13:34] Speaker 2: I told you.
[13:35] Speaker 1: I hope they don't.
[13:36] Speaker 2: Women make it up. Well, in this case it's a
[13:39] Speaker 2: couple of blokes. But in this case it did happen.
[13:46] Speaker 2: But I don't think. people should extrapolate that out and go, oh,
[13:49] Speaker 2: you know, people who say these things happened when I
[13:54] Speaker 2: was a child or when I was going to church
[13:58] Speaker 2: or whatever. I think the vast majority of people are
[14:02] Speaker 2: believed and I think rightly so. I think the instances
[14:07] Speaker 2: of people completely fabricating stuff are pretty rare.
[14:12] Speaker 1: If we kind of go back a bit into Joe's history,
[14:18] Speaker 1: How did she grow up? What was her story?
[14:22] Speaker 2: She was one of four sisters who were all adopted by,
[14:28] Speaker 2: by all accounts, a loving family. Her dad was a
[14:31] Speaker 2: school teacher. Her mum did home duties. Her mother and
[14:36] Speaker 2: father were teetotalers. Never been in trouble with the law.
[14:41] Speaker 2: The four sisters were very, very close and are very,
[14:46] Speaker 2: very close. And Jo followed in the footsteps of her
[14:51] Speaker 2: father and became a schoolteacher, primary schoolteacher. And that's where
[14:58] Speaker 2: the allegations stem from, that she did certain things to
[15:02] Speaker 2: these boys.
[15:03] Speaker 1: Were you able to ascertain what kind of teacher she was?
[15:06] Speaker 1: Was she well liked? Was she good at her job?
[15:08] Speaker 2: I think she was well liked. There was nothing to
[15:12] Speaker 2: indicate anything untoward. She was leading a normal life, apart
[15:22] Speaker 2: from the fact that her husband was killed in a
[15:25] Speaker 2: train accident.
[15:26] Speaker 1: And that was a tragic accident, wasn't it?
[15:27] Speaker 2: Yeah, it was an accident. And she received compensation for that.
[15:31] Speaker 2: Interestingly enough, one of her accusers also worked in the railways.
[15:37] Speaker 2: And the $ 600, 000 payment was reasonably well known. That brought...
[15:45] Speaker 2: That boy, the main accuser, I'd call him, denies he
[15:48] Speaker 2: knew about that $ 600, 000 or that he was after money.
[15:52] Speaker 1: It's an interesting detail, isn't it? She was also a mum.
[15:57] Speaker 1: She obviously really liked kids. She had five of them.
[16:00] Speaker 2: Yes, yes. Look, she had lots of kids and that's,
[16:04] Speaker 2: you know, one of the interesting things about this case that,
[16:09] Speaker 2: you know, when the police do arrest her on the
[16:12] Speaker 2: day on these historical... child sex offence charges they ask
[16:18] Speaker 2: her during the interview after they take her to the
[16:21] Speaker 2: station this is one of the 350 questions or so
[16:24] Speaker 2: oh do you still have an interest in children you
[16:27] Speaker 2: know what do you think about people molesting children and
[16:30] Speaker 2: she's horrified so they're clearly sort of intimating that she
[16:34] Speaker 2: might have an ongoing interest in children but they don't
[16:37] Speaker 2: seize her phone they don't seize her computer they don't
[16:40] Speaker 2: seize anything to see if there's any evidence there and
[16:46] Speaker 2: there is none, as far as we, well, not as
[16:49] Speaker 2: far as we know, we know there is none. It's
[16:53] Speaker 2: a very curious case that these two boys have come forward.
[16:58] Speaker 2: On the one hand, the police have to take the
[17:00] Speaker 2: allegations seriously. We've seen and heard, we all know the
[17:05] Speaker 2: allegations that have emerged in the last 10, 20 years
[17:08] Speaker 2: in particular. They have to take these allegations seriously. Where
[17:13] Speaker 2: it seems to me to have fallen down, and this
[17:16] Speaker 2: goes back to our common sense thing, these two boys
[17:21] Speaker 2: say we had prolonged sexual intercourse at the age of
[17:26] Speaker 2: eight in this tent in the backyard. And they say
[17:32] Speaker 2: certain other things. It seems to me that the Director
[17:35] Speaker 2: of Public Prosecutions and most certainly the Defence failed Joe
[17:39] Speaker 2: Greensill utterly. by saying, hang on, does that sound real?
[17:48] Speaker 1: It wasn't really interrogated, was it?
[17:50] Speaker 2: No medical evidence was called. No experts were called. No, say,
[17:55] Speaker 2: paediatric doctors. No endocrinologists. There was no expert evidence at all,
[18:02] Speaker 2: which is, again, with the benefit of hindsight, staggering. Because
[18:07] Speaker 2: when it finally was gathered, the experts said... This can't
[18:15] Speaker 2: happen in eight-year-old boys. Or at least what they described
[18:21] Speaker 2: to the police and what they said in their evidence
[18:24] Speaker 2: in the trial. Eight-year-old boys, they're pre-puberty.
[18:30] Speaker 1: It would be sexually impossible for them.
[18:32] Speaker 2: Sexually impossible. And those were some of the words used
[18:36] Speaker 2: by some of the experts, and that's never been challenged.
[18:41] Speaker 2: Words like... impossible, producing semen unlikely, so unlikely as to
[18:48] Speaker 2: be incredible. And these are both, one was a professor,
[18:54] Speaker 2: one's a doctor with a long history of study in
[18:57] Speaker 2: this area. Nobody's challenged this. If before she'd been charged
[19:05] Speaker 2: or after she'd been charged, somebody had called for the
[19:08] Speaker 2: expert evidence, I don't think she'd ever gone to would
[19:12] Speaker 2: ever have gone to trial because the experts say what
[19:15] Speaker 2: these two boys are alleging is impossible. It is not
[19:19] Speaker 2: recorded anywhere in the literature that eight-year-old boys will sustain erections,
[19:26] Speaker 2: produce semen. And they're saying we had repeated sexual intercourse.
[19:30] Speaker 1: Do we know what age, the youngest age, that those
[19:34] Speaker 1: two things combined would happen in a young boy?
[19:37] Speaker 2: It's generally around the age of 12.
[19:40] Speaker 1: So that's a fairly big gap, 8 to 12.
[19:43] Speaker 2: There's a very big gap. And apparently, and I'm only
[19:47] Speaker 2: reading the reports of the experts, but apparently this is
[19:50] Speaker 2: well settled. There's not any dispute that, oh yeah, an eight-year-old,
[19:55] Speaker 2: it's possible. The experts say, no, this is an invention
[20:01] Speaker 2: of enormous proportions.
[20:04] Speaker 1: It is interesting, that common sense factor that you mentioned,
[20:07] Speaker 1: because there were a lot of men... grown men that
[20:10] Speaker 1: were part of this trial that had been eight-year-old boys.
[20:14] Speaker 2: Presumably.
[20:15] Speaker 1: That didn't kind of question it either.
[20:19] Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. Neither the prosecutor nor the defence, and
[20:23] Speaker 2: I guess really both are to blame because the Director
[20:28] Speaker 2: of Public Prosecutions is supposed to, you know, approach it
[20:32] Speaker 2: on a fair basis. I know that these allegations, when
[20:36] Speaker 2: they're made, most people believe them. And I'm in that.
[20:40] Speaker 1: Yeah. Belief the victim.
[20:42] Speaker 2: Yeah, of course. Of course. But, you know, what this
[20:45] Speaker 2: case proves is that occasionally, you know, sometimes it's just unbelievable.
[20:53] Speaker 2: Jo's sent to jail for five years. She's a child molester.
[20:59] Speaker 2: She goes to, I think it's Dame Phyllis Frost prison
[21:03] Speaker 2: in Melbourne. She's the lowest of the low. She's maligned.
[21:09] Speaker 2: Every time she has a visitor, she's strip searched before
[21:14] Speaker 2: and after. She's really, her world is turned upside down.
[21:20] Speaker 2: And interestingly, she said, I just had to adapt very
[21:23] Speaker 2: quickly because in there it's like a mini city and
[21:27] Speaker 2: the prison officers are in total control. And if they
[21:31] Speaker 2: say you have to do something, you do it. And
[21:34] Speaker 2: all of a sudden, well, not all of a sudden,
[21:35] Speaker 2: but after a while, You tend to just not have
[21:39] Speaker 2: to think about things. You've got a routine and you
[21:42] Speaker 2: obey it and you do it.
[21:44] Speaker 1: Did her family, did her kids stand by her?
[21:48] Speaker 2: Her family stood by her. Her three other sisters, in
[21:52] Speaker 2: particular one, Annette, stood by her and fought on. They
[21:57] Speaker 2: didn't believe it for a second. They were stunned when
[21:59] Speaker 2: the guilty verdict came down and she was carted off
[22:02] Speaker 2: to jail.
[22:03] Speaker 1: Because that was the first time she was in jail, right?
[22:05] Speaker 1: She got bail after the charges?
[22:07] Speaker 2: Oh yes, she got bail. So she's just, when the
[22:10] Speaker 2: guilty verdict's announced, she's taken down to the cells and
[22:14] Speaker 2: she remembers it was freezing, freezing cold and she hadn't
[22:18] Speaker 2: brought any warm clothing. She thought she was going to
[22:22] Speaker 2: lunch with her sisters. They'd booked a restaurant. The sisters
[22:26] Speaker 2: thought this is going to get thrown out. The jury
[22:28] Speaker 2: will not believe these guys. Not only the fact that
[22:31] Speaker 2: it's eight-year-old boys, and it's physically, sexually impossible, but also
[22:37] Speaker 2: that they've colluded, and this was one of the other
[22:40] Speaker 2: main points in the defence, that these two boys had
[22:43] Speaker 2: colluded to get money from Josephine Greensill, maybe part of
[22:48] Speaker 2: the $ 600, 000 that was the compensation for the death of
[22:52] Speaker 2: her husband, or victims of crime compensation money. And as
[22:59] Speaker 2: it turns out, the first bloke, had gone to a
[23:05] Speaker 2: specialist lawyer, a lawyer who deals primarily with compensation for
[23:12] Speaker 2: child sex victims, before he went to the police. And
[23:17] Speaker 2: during the trial, he says, I'm not interested in money.
[23:20] Speaker 2: I don't want your client's money. I don't want Joe
[23:23] Speaker 2: Greensell's money. I just want the truth to come out.
[23:26] Speaker 2: Eight days after he's sentenced, off he trots to get
[23:30] Speaker 2: an expert opinion as to how he's been abused. And
[23:33] Speaker 2: he sets in train his victims of crime compensation claim. Right.
[23:38] Speaker 2: And for which he's paid, well, he's not paid, he's
[23:40] Speaker 2: awarded $ 60, 000. So having completely denied in the witness box
[23:45] Speaker 2: that he's interested in money, eight days after she, Josephine Greensill,
[23:49] Speaker 2: is sent to jail, he sets in process the motion,
[23:54] Speaker 2: the motions of getting money, the very thing he's denied.
[23:58] Speaker 2: And the second man does exactly the same thing.
[24:02] Speaker 1: Did Jo remember these men? Well, she would have known
[24:06] Speaker 1: them as boys.
[24:07] Speaker 2: She did. She remembered them because, and she remembered the
[24:10] Speaker 2: night when they slept over in the tent. She knew
[24:13] Speaker 2: their parents, not particularly well, but I think that on
[24:16] Speaker 2: one or two occasions she'd been to dinner with her
[24:20] Speaker 2: husband and the parents of these two boys. Yeah, she
[24:27] Speaker 2: knew them well.
[24:29] Speaker 1: And hadn't heard from them since they were eight?
[24:33] Speaker 2: No. One of the fascinating things about this particular case
[24:39] Speaker 2: is that the lead boy, because I'll call him that
[24:43] Speaker 2: because these two men can't be named. Jo Greensill wants
[24:46] Speaker 2: them named. After she was cleared, she wanted the Victoria
[24:50] Speaker 2: Police to investigate them for possible perjury or conspiracy to
[24:55] Speaker 2: pervert the course of justice. I think the Victoria Police
[25:00] Speaker 2: did a sort of perfunctory investigation and said, no, it's
[25:04] Speaker 2: too hard. So they've never been named. She's never had
[25:10] Speaker 2: the satisfaction of seeing them in court. But just going
[25:16] Speaker 2: back a bit to when she was teaching them, one
[25:20] Speaker 2: of the boys said I was the teacher's pet until
[25:23] Speaker 2: one day, Josephine notices there's $ 10 missing from her purse,
[25:29] Speaker 2: which she keeps on her desk in the classroom. And
[25:32] Speaker 2: she searches the bags of the kids. It turns up
[25:37] Speaker 2: in the bag of the man known only as RS,
[25:41] Speaker 2: the initials that were given to him in court. It's
[25:46] Speaker 2: a relatively minor thing. He's eight years old.
[25:48] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[25:49] Speaker 2: Maybe he's nicked it. It's certainly in his bag. This...
[25:54] Speaker 2: turns into a lifelong grudge against Jay Greensill. And this
[25:58] Speaker 2: emerges during the trial. He's the wife of RS. By now,
[26:08] Speaker 2: she's the ex-wife. Remembers him talking about a primary school
[26:13] Speaker 2: teacher he had and saying he'd been, you know, he'd
[26:18] Speaker 2: been accused of taking the $ 10 out of her purse.
[26:21] Speaker 2: She'd accused him. He'd never done it. Maybe I should
[26:24] Speaker 2: take her to court and sue her. This is the
[26:28] Speaker 2: evidence of the ex-wife.
[26:29] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[26:31] Speaker 2: The man, R.S., says, yeah, I probably did say that,
[26:35] Speaker 2: but I didn't take the $ 10. It wasn't me. So
[26:40] Speaker 2: it appears that this minor incident, which would have been
[26:45] Speaker 2: forgotten by everybody else, has stayed with this man for decades,
[26:50] Speaker 2: and it's been at least in part forgotten. the reason
[26:53] Speaker 2: why he's taken this action that he did.
[26:57] Speaker 1: It's such a big decision, though, for these two men
[27:00] Speaker 1: to make a decision to accuse someone 30 plus years
[27:04] Speaker 1: after the fact, go through all the court processes, make
[27:07] Speaker 1: sure they've got watertight. Like, why? It wasn't even that
[27:10] Speaker 1: much money that they ended up getting.
[27:12] Speaker 2: Part of it might have been greed. Maybe they were
[27:14] Speaker 2: thinking they could sue her, Josephine, personally for part of
[27:18] Speaker 2: the $ 600, 000. It's just an extraordinary case. And the boys,
[27:26] Speaker 2: the men, colluded. They denied they'd colluded in court. They said,
[27:32] Speaker 2: we haven't spoken to each other since we were in
[27:34] Speaker 2: primary school, essentially. And then the defence lawyer reads out
[27:39] Speaker 2: the statement of, I'll call him boy two or the
[27:43] Speaker 2: second man, where he says in his very first paragraph
[27:48] Speaker 2: of his own statement that after being contacted by the police,
[27:52] Speaker 2: I spoke to my old mate before I made a
[27:57] Speaker 2: statement to the police. And he then says in court, oh,
[28:01] Speaker 2: I never said that. And the defence lawyer goes, but
[28:04] Speaker 2: this is your statement. It's in the first paragraph that
[28:06] Speaker 2: you spoke to boy one, that you had a long
[28:09] Speaker 2: chat about it. And he says, oh, I didn't read
[28:13] Speaker 2: my statement. I didn't, but you signed it. Yeah, I
[28:16] Speaker 2: signed it, but I didn't read it. We never colluded.
[28:19] Speaker 2: There was other evidence that they had potentially colluded as well.
[28:23] Speaker 2: They'd used similar phrases in their statements. They'd both named
[28:30] Speaker 2: a teacher, a Mrs Bailey, they said, had walked in
[28:35] Speaker 2: on Josephine Greensill and one of the boys at one
[28:38] Speaker 2: stage and been shocked. Mrs Bailey is still alive. She's called.
[28:44] Speaker 2: She says she never saw any such thing, and if
[28:47] Speaker 2: she had, she would have reported it. But the key
[28:50] Speaker 2: fact here is Mrs Bailey is not actually her name.
[28:55] Speaker 2: It's Mrs Bailo, B-A-I-L-O-H, I think. They're both. They say independently.
[29:03] Speaker 1: Misspelt it.
[29:04] Speaker 2: Misspelt it and given exactly the same spelling.
[29:07] Speaker 1: After the break, Neil tells us about what it was
[29:09] Speaker 1: like for Josephine to re-enter society. The thing that I
[29:13] Speaker 1: find hard to grapple with is we know that Child
[29:18] Speaker 1: sexual abuse convictions in Australia, all over the world really,
[29:22] Speaker 1: are so rare.
[29:24] Speaker 2: I think there's a desire by the part of the
[29:26] Speaker 2: police and the prosecution to, obviously, to believe people and
[29:32] Speaker 2: to push these prosecutions through. And here, again, it comes
[29:36] Speaker 2: back to common sense, failure of lawyers. men to ask
[29:40] Speaker 2: themselves a basic question. And I have to say that
[29:44] Speaker 2: when I first heard about this case, I sort of thought,
[29:47] Speaker 2: I sort of vaguely remember when I was eight and
[29:49] Speaker 2: I don't know, this is not sounding right. And that
[29:54] Speaker 2: was my first reaction. And indeed, when Josephine She's in jail.
[30:01] Speaker 2: She appeals her conviction. They go to the appeals court.
[30:04] Speaker 2: The Crown, the Crown, who's opposing her appeal, by the way,
[30:09] Speaker 2: says something like, oh, you know, no one can say
[30:14] Speaker 2: they're not deeply troubled by this case, Your Honour. You
[30:19] Speaker 2: read some of the evidence and you just go, oh,
[30:22] Speaker 2: come on, that can't be for real. This is the Crown,
[30:26] Speaker 2: the Chief Crown Prosecutor in Victoria. Come on, this can't
[30:30] Speaker 2: be for real. But he then argued that the jury
[30:34] Speaker 2: had heard both men. They'd had the benefit of hearing
[30:36] Speaker 2: their evidence and assessing their credibility, so the conviction should stand.
[30:41] Speaker 2: He didn't, because the judges went, eight-year-old boys? Was any
[30:47] Speaker 2: medical evidence called? Chief Crown Prosecutor goes, no, no, that
[30:51] Speaker 2: was the first thing I thought of, Your Honour. The
[30:55] Speaker 2: DPP never thought to call any paediatricians.
[30:59] Speaker 1: So that easily it was quashed, like thrown out.
[31:02] Speaker 2: They threw it out on a, on a number of grounds.
[31:04] Speaker 2: One was that the two boys had clearly colluded. They said, um,
[31:09] Speaker 2: that there was a financial incentive. They both made similar
[31:13] Speaker 2: mistakes in their statements, but also because of the unlikelihood
[31:19] Speaker 2: of what they'd alleged, uh, producing semen at the age
[31:24] Speaker 2: of eight years old. It's just not possible. Um, She'd
[31:29] Speaker 2: also been unfairly denied because she was, by the time
[31:35] Speaker 2: the court case came around, the husband who'd been there
[31:39] Speaker 2: on the night, bear in mind her husband's in the
[31:41] Speaker 2: house three metres from the tent where this is all
[31:44] Speaker 2: allegedly happening. And we know that for sure because one
[31:48] Speaker 2: of the boys, you know, when he's eight, says, oh,
[31:52] Speaker 2: at one stage I left the tent and wandered into
[31:54] Speaker 2: the house and her husband was there. you know, in
[31:58] Speaker 2: the kitchen doing various things. And you could see out
[32:01] Speaker 2: from the kitchen into the backyard. You know, there's this...
[32:08] Speaker 2: I think there's this desire to do the right thing,
[32:10] Speaker 2: which is obviously the right thing to do, given what
[32:13] Speaker 2: we know now about what's gone on over many, many,
[32:15] Speaker 2: many years in churches, institutions and so on. But I
[32:20] Speaker 2: think there was an essential failure on the part of
[32:24] Speaker 2: the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Defence Department to
[32:29] Speaker 2: ask some common sense questions and to get an expert opinion.
[32:33] Speaker 1: But how did it get.
[32:35] Speaker 2: Across?
[32:36] Speaker 1: Were they just really, were they really good at giving evidence,
[32:40] Speaker 1: these men? Because it was a jury trial.
[32:43] Speaker 2: Yes.
[32:44] Speaker 1: So there must have been something really compelling about their
[32:47] Speaker 1: evidence or the way they delivered it or I'm just
[32:50] Speaker 1: trying to understand how.
[32:52] Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, that's the thing. I mean, and that's what the,
[32:55] Speaker 2: Chief Crown Prosecutor said when the appeal came around, you
[33:00] Speaker 2: look at some of the evidence and you say it
[33:01] Speaker 2: can't be real. I can't explain that. I wasn't in
[33:05] Speaker 2: the courtroom. I think there's a desire to believe people.
[33:11] Speaker 1: Because the instances of children or even adults alleging something
[33:18] Speaker 1: that happened in their childhood, it's very rare that you
[33:20] Speaker 1: make that up, isn't it?
[33:22] Speaker 2: I think the evidence is not just in child sexual
[33:26] Speaker 2: cases but in most sexual assault cases the evidence is
[33:30] Speaker 2: it's rare that somebody has completely fabricated something. So these
[33:36] Speaker 2: two boys did that. The court found that they did that.
[33:43] Speaker 2: The expert opinion says what they alleged to have happened
[33:48] Speaker 2: could not have happened. No ifs, buts or maybes. It's
[33:51] Speaker 2: like this is not possible and the medical literature, which
[33:57] Speaker 2: goes back decades, says that eight-year-old boys just can't do
[34:02] Speaker 2: the things they claim they did.
[34:05] Speaker 1: So when Jo is told that she's going to be released,
[34:10] Speaker 1: she's already been in prison for two and a half years.
[34:12] Speaker 2: Yes.
[34:12] Speaker 1: Does she remember being told? How was she told?
[34:16] Speaker 2: She knew the appeal was on in the Court of
[34:20] Speaker 2: Criminal Appeal in Victoria, but If she wanted to actually
[34:23] Speaker 2: go to the courtroom and watch it in person, she
[34:26] Speaker 2: was told by prison officers that she would not only
[34:29] Speaker 2: be handcuffed, but she would be shackled, which is slightly
[34:34] Speaker 2: 18th century to me. And she didn't want to do that.
[34:39] Speaker 2: So they said, well, you can watch it all on
[34:41] Speaker 2: audio-visual link, you know, on a screen in a small room.
[34:46] Speaker 2: So there's a table, a couple of chairs. She sits down,
[34:50] Speaker 2: looks up at the screen. It's blank. doesn't work, which
[34:55] Speaker 2: is not, I have to say, certainly back then, uncommon.
[34:58] Speaker 2: So she's sitting there for two days not knowing anything
[35:02] Speaker 2: that's being said. She's not watching her own appeal. Her
[35:06] Speaker 2: family doesn't know this. But on the second day, she's
[35:09] Speaker 2: booked a call to her son, you know, just in
[35:14] Speaker 2: case there's been a decision or to find out what's happened.
[35:16] Speaker 2: And he goes, mum, you're free. The conviction's quashed. And
[35:21] Speaker 2: she goes, oh, my God. All the prison officers knew
[35:25] Speaker 2: before that, but didn't tell her.
[35:26] Speaker 1: What?
[35:27] Speaker 2: Yeah, they'd known for several hours. She told me in
[35:30] Speaker 2: this interview, because we sat down for some hours and
[35:33] Speaker 2: had a long chat about it. She said, I asked,
[35:36] Speaker 2: could I say goodbye to the girls? You know, the
[35:39] Speaker 2: fellow prisoners said, no, no, get your stuff, you're out.
[35:44] Speaker 2: She said, it was like I got kicked out. Not
[35:47] Speaker 2: that she was complaining about that at the time, but.
[35:52] Speaker 2: People sort of go, oh, well, you know, justice has
[35:56] Speaker 2: been done. She's free. She's had an unblemished record. And
[36:01] Speaker 2: the experts say, and the Crown pretty much concedes, you know,
[36:05] Speaker 2: this is not real. But she then finds herself completely discombobulated,
[36:14] Speaker 2: I guess. She gets panic attacks in crowds. She can't
[36:19] Speaker 2: remember the layout of her own house. She can't remember
[36:22] Speaker 2: simple things like what's in her wardrobe. She said, when
[36:27] Speaker 2: I went to the supermarket just to buy, say, a
[36:30] Speaker 2: simple thing like milk, there were all these varieties. In prison,
[36:34] Speaker 2: it was just full cream or skim. Decision was made
[36:37] Speaker 2: for you. I just couldn't cope. And I've heard that
[36:42] Speaker 2: from a number of people who had similar experiences. I
[36:46] Speaker 2: think everybody thinks, oh, once you're out of jail, everything's OK.
[36:51] Speaker 2: But for a lot of people, and I'm suspecting, and
[36:54] Speaker 2: I'm not saying this is a case in Josephine Greensill's case,
[36:57] Speaker 2: but I'm suspecting PTSD, if people are innocent in particular.
[37:03] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[37:04] Speaker 2: You know, one minute you're in there, next minute you're
[37:06] Speaker 2: back out in the world and there's a lot of
[37:09] Speaker 2: people and there's a lot of decisions you've got to
[37:11] Speaker 2: make and which you haven't had to make for two
[37:14] Speaker 2: and a half years.
[37:16] Speaker 1: Well, you met her last year, so 2025.
[37:17] Speaker 2: Yes.
[37:18] Speaker 1: What was she like as a person?
[37:21] Speaker 2: She was quiet. She describes herself as shy, and I
[37:27] Speaker 2: think that's right. She's softly spoken. She had her sister
[37:30] Speaker 2: Annette there as support. She struck me as the sort
[37:35] Speaker 2: of person who probably had never had a parking ticket.
[37:41] Speaker 2: You know, I mean, she just struck me as an upright,
[37:44] Speaker 2: normal citizen who'd been a schoolteacher had never been in
[37:50] Speaker 2: trouble with the law. None of her sisters had. Her
[37:54] Speaker 2: parents had been fine, upstanding citizens. They'd come from a
[37:57] Speaker 2: fine family. Mum and dad had adopted four sisters, which
[38:02] Speaker 2: is quite an extraordinary story in itself. And all the
[38:05] Speaker 2: sisters had remained close. You know, I can understand why she's...
[38:12] Speaker 2: I'm not even sure she's angry, but she would like to...
[38:17] Speaker 2: She would like some compensation, but she says, look, money's
[38:20] Speaker 2: not the thing. Right towards the end of our conversation
[38:25] Speaker 2: last year, she said, you know what, what I'd really
[38:29] Speaker 2: like to do is to sit down with these two
[38:31] Speaker 2: men and just say, why? Why did you do it?
[38:37] Speaker 2: What was the reason?
[38:38] Speaker 1: But I do want to touch on that compensation bit
[38:41] Speaker 1: for a second because she's had no compensation for what
[38:45] Speaker 1: she's been put through.
[38:46] Speaker 2: No, her lawyer, Peter Gordon from Gordon Legal in Melbourne,
[38:51] Speaker 2: a very prestigious firm, the firm has written to successive
[38:58] Speaker 2: attorney generals and they've basically come back and said, well,
[39:02] Speaker 2: tough luck, sister. Compensation's usually only paid when someone has
[39:06] Speaker 2: incurred financial loss or where the state is at fault,
[39:14] Speaker 2: which seems sort of bizarre She's outlaid hundreds and hundreds
[39:18] Speaker 2: of thousands in legal fees. And the state, I think
[39:22] Speaker 2: the director of public prosecutions and the police are part
[39:25] Speaker 2: of the state.
[39:26] Speaker 1: Counters the state. But what about psychological trauma, taking two
[39:30] Speaker 1: and a half years of her life?
[39:32] Speaker 2: Yeah.
[39:32] Speaker 1: The fact that she had to go through a trial.
[39:34] Speaker 1: To me, it's not just about those things. What about
[39:36] Speaker 1: what they actually did to her?
[39:38] Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. I mean, she was the lowest of the
[39:41] Speaker 2: low in jail, as pedophiles tend to be in male
[39:45] Speaker 2: or female prisons. She was maligned. She was isolated from
[39:50] Speaker 2: the main population. She said for the first few days
[39:56] Speaker 2: or the first week, I just cried. But then I
[40:02] Speaker 2: realized I had to get into a routine to survive.
[40:06] Speaker 2: And I treated all the other women, no matter what
[40:09] Speaker 2: they were being accused of doing, you know, as I
[40:13] Speaker 2: met them. You know, she read a lot of books,
[40:20] Speaker 2: which the prison officers then came around and said, oh,
[40:22] Speaker 2: you've got to get rid of all the books out
[40:24] Speaker 2: of your cell. And Jo said, why? And they said,
[40:27] Speaker 2: it's a fire hazard. Because if a prisoner's smoking, Jo
[40:31] Speaker 2: didn't smoke, but other prisoners did. If they flicked a
[40:33] Speaker 2: cigarette butt into her cell and this big pile of
[40:36] Speaker 2: books was there, they might catch fire. She wasn't allowed
[40:39] Speaker 2: to have a photo of her family in her cell
[40:44] Speaker 2: because the photo was of her parents. and of herself
[40:47] Speaker 2: and her three sisters as very young kids. Because as
[40:51] Speaker 2: a child molester, she was not allowed to have photos
[40:54] Speaker 2: of children, even though it's herself and her family.
[40:57] Speaker 1: This poor woman. Is there any other avenues that she
[41:00] Speaker 1: can take? Or has she exhausted them all in terms
[41:02] Speaker 1: of getting... Because it's not just about the compensation. It's
[41:07] Speaker 1: the fact that someone should say sorry to her.
[41:10] Speaker 2: Yeah, no, they've not said sorry. They've basically said, you know,
[41:14] Speaker 2: as I said, bad luck. Peter Gordon, her solicitor, Gordon Legal,
[41:21] Speaker 2: have been writing to successive attorney generals. I think Jo has...
[41:28] Speaker 2: I wouldn't say she's given up. There's just been a
[41:32] Speaker 2: change in government in Victoria.
[41:33] Speaker 1: There might be a.
[41:34] Speaker 2: New attorney general. It's just wrong. And this comes to
[41:37] Speaker 2: the other question, which arises in these nine cases of
[41:41] Speaker 2: people getting falsely convicted. If a court says... you're exonerated,
[41:47] Speaker 2: or if indeed evidence comes to light that you're actually
[41:50] Speaker 2: the wrong person, who decides on compensation for your time
[41:56] Speaker 2: in jail? Well, it's the government of the day.
[41:59] Speaker 1: The state government.
[42:01] Speaker 2: The state government of the day. You're at the whim
[42:03] Speaker 2: of the state government. And there's no difference between Labor
[42:07] Speaker 2: and Liberal governments. They've all made, in my opinion, terrible
[42:12] Speaker 2: or bad decisions or delayed and denied and deferred and
[42:16] Speaker 2: tried to extend cases over many years. The attorney general
[42:20] Speaker 2: of the day, he or she is basically the one
[42:24] Speaker 2: who has to recommend a payment. And if they don't
[42:27] Speaker 2: want to make a payment, tough luck. I mean, people
[42:31] Speaker 2: have been paid compensation in Victoria and other states, but
[42:36] Speaker 2: many people have not. It's like a lottery, you know,
[42:40] Speaker 2: or a game of two up. You win, tails, bad luck,
[42:44] Speaker 2: you lose.
[42:46] Speaker 1: Has Jo been able to enjoy her life, build her
[42:49] Speaker 1: life back up again since getting out of prison?
[42:52] Speaker 2: I think so. I think so. I think the support
[42:55] Speaker 2: of her sisters and her kids, you know, I think
[42:58] Speaker 2: she has. But I don't think she's, you know, it's
[43:05] Speaker 2: a hard thing to shake. No matter what, how clear
[43:12] Speaker 2: the evidence is that she did not do it. You know,
[43:15] Speaker 2: there's always people who go, oh, you know, where there's smoke,
[43:18] Speaker 2: there's fire or something like that. You know, it's something
[43:22] Speaker 2: you've got to live with forever. And she's just been
[43:27] Speaker 2: wronged and the Victorian government refuses to set it right.
[43:32] Speaker 1: Up next, Neil is detailing more cases that ended in
[43:36] Speaker 1: wrongful convictions. I want to get to some of the
[43:38] Speaker 1: other cases that you looked into. I couldn't help but notice...
[43:43] Speaker 1: an over-representation of First Nations Australians?
[43:47] Speaker 2: Yes.
[43:47] Speaker 1: Tell me about that. I'm not wrong, am I?
[43:49] Speaker 2: No, you're not wrong. I think First Nations people make
[43:53] Speaker 2: up about 3% of the population. And on the statistics
[43:58] Speaker 2: that I think I read last year, they make up 35%
[44:03] Speaker 2: to 37% of the prison population. So it's vastly, vastly
[44:05] Speaker 2: out of whack. I mean, there are so many Indigenous
[44:13] Speaker 2: or First Nations people in jail. And it sort of
[44:19] Speaker 2: happened because, you know, people would come to me and say,
[44:24] Speaker 2: you should look at this case. This is a really
[44:26] Speaker 2: interesting case. There's a number of cases. There's one in
[44:30] Speaker 2: WA of a young Indigenous bloke who lived in a
[44:33] Speaker 2: very remote community, was charged with the murder of a
[44:38] Speaker 2: young white man. It's a tragic case. and he was
[44:43] Speaker 2: charged with the murder in Broome. He came from an
[44:46] Speaker 2: incredibly remote community, barely spoke English, went to jail, wasn't him.
[44:53] Speaker 2: And there's cases in Queensland, and there's a case in Sydney,
[44:59] Speaker 2: New South Wales, of a bloke called Eric Hunnisett. And
[45:03] Speaker 2: of the nine cases in the book, I think Eric
[45:06] Speaker 2: Hunnisett's case is probably the only one where you can
[45:09] Speaker 2: say he was absolutely, completely and utterly framed. And he
[45:14] Speaker 2: was framed by the police way back in 1983. But
[45:19] Speaker 2: he eventually, he gets some compensation in 2024, I think
[45:24] Speaker 2: it was.
[45:25] Speaker 1: Why was Eric framed?
[45:28] Speaker 2: Eric had a tough childhood. He was in trouble at
[45:33] Speaker 2: a very early age, like early teens, in and out
[45:37] Speaker 2: of institutions. graduated the big time round about the time
[45:44] Speaker 2: he's 17, 18 when he goes on a break and
[45:47] Speaker 2: enter spree with a mate of his in the Blue
[45:49] Speaker 2: Mountains just outside Sydney and one of the things they
[45:53] Speaker 2: do is they break into a gun shop. They do
[45:57] Speaker 2: multiple break and enters. The cops from the Blue Mountains
[46:00] Speaker 2: are sort of chasing them all over the place and
[46:03] Speaker 2: during one of the chases Eric's mate decides he's going
[46:07] Speaker 2: to start shooting at the police. This is generally not
[46:11] Speaker 2: a good idea because the boys in blue, and they
[46:13] Speaker 2: mostly were boys in blue back when this happened, take
[46:18] Speaker 2: a very dim view of that. So I think Eric's
[46:19] Speaker 2: card was marked from a very young age, but he
[46:23] Speaker 2: did continue on a life of crime in heroin dealing.
[46:28] Speaker 2: He was associated with, at one point, with Nettie Smith,
[46:33] Speaker 2: one of Sydney's, probably Australia's most notorious criminals. criminals. Nettie
[46:40] Speaker 2: Smith's partner was a guy called Graham Henry. Graham Henry
[46:42] Speaker 2: wrote a book, and he spoke about Eric, and he
[46:45] Speaker 2: said he was a tough, violent criminal. He'd pick up
[46:49] Speaker 2: a block of wood or a knife in a fight,
[46:53] Speaker 2: and he would not back down if somebody called him
[46:56] Speaker 2: a black so-and-so. He would stand on his own two feet.
[47:01] Speaker 2: So short story is that Eric engaged in a life
[47:06] Speaker 2: of crime. The cops... charged him in the number of
[47:09] Speaker 2: matters which he got off. Around 1983, they believe he's
[47:14] Speaker 2: dealing in heroin. A task force is watching him one night,
[47:19] Speaker 2: two days before Christmas. He's outside a pub in inner Sydney.
[47:24] Speaker 2: He meets with a bloke. The cops have got him
[47:25] Speaker 2: under surveillance. They see him meet with a bloke. And
[47:29] Speaker 2: the cops say, oh, he did a heroin deal. They
[47:33] Speaker 2: yell out, stop, honey set, police. Eric bolts down a laneway.
[47:38] Speaker 2: Cops chase him. One cop says, I grabbed him by
[47:42] Speaker 2: the shirt. He turned around, screamed at me and stabbed
[47:45] Speaker 2: me in the arm. Eric then escaped briefly over a
[47:49] Speaker 2: corrugated iron fence before being detained. Eric then apparently makes confessions,
[47:57] Speaker 2: and I put confessions in inverted commas because he's pretty
[48:01] Speaker 2: hardened by this stage. He confesses that he did stab
[48:04] Speaker 2: the cop, that he was dealing heroin, so on and
[48:07] Speaker 2: so on. This is according to the police. So do you.
[48:11] Speaker 1: Think that was coerced because he, spoiler, didn't stab the
[48:15] Speaker 1: police officer?
[48:16] Speaker 2: He did not stab the police officer.
[48:18] Speaker 1: Which the police admitted later.
[48:20] Speaker 2: Much, much, much later. The thing is, when this gets
[48:24] Speaker 2: to trial back in the 80s, Eric pleads not guilty.
[48:29] Speaker 2: He denies he's made any confessions. He denies he's dealt
[48:32] Speaker 2: any heroin. He denies not only stabbing the copper, he
[48:36] Speaker 2: denies he even had a knife. First day of the
[48:39] Speaker 2: trial happens, the police start to go through the witness
[48:42] Speaker 2: box and give their version of events, which is that
[48:46] Speaker 2: he did all these things. He did stab him. He
[48:49] Speaker 2: was dealing heroin, blah, blah, blah. Overnight, Eric, as he
[48:54] Speaker 2: said later, I did some arithmetic because the charge he
[48:58] Speaker 2: was facing, the maximum sentence, was life imprisonment. But if
[49:02] Speaker 2: he pleaded guilty, if he did a plea deal, he
[49:05] Speaker 2: would get a lesser charge with a maximum of 10 years.
[49:09] Speaker 2: And he said, I did some arithmetic. I figured there
[49:12] Speaker 2: were probably eight to 10 cops prepared to perjure themselves.
[49:16] Speaker 2: And so I just thought, I've got no hope in this.
[49:20] Speaker 2: Puts his hand up and says, I done it. And
[49:24] Speaker 2: he's convicted. More than a decade later, one of the
[49:30] Speaker 2: police is called before the Wood Royal Commission into Police Corruption.
[49:36] Speaker 2: So this is now in 1995. Eric is charged with
[49:40] Speaker 2: all this stuff back in 1983. Twelve years later, one
[49:44] Speaker 2: of the cops gets into the witness box and says,
[49:49] Speaker 2: Eric was telling the truth. This police officer has become
[49:52] Speaker 2: an informant for the Royal Commission. He's, what we said
[49:55] Speaker 2: back in those days, rolled over and he's cooperating. He's
[49:58] Speaker 2: telling the truth about police corruption. He said what actually
[50:02] Speaker 2: happened that night was they did see Eric outside the pub.
[50:06] Speaker 2: He was meeting with a bloke. called Terry, but he
[50:08] Speaker 2: didn't have any heroin. They did take him back to
[50:11] Speaker 2: the CIB. The police officer did have a wound on
[50:15] Speaker 2: his arm, but he tried to climb over the corrugated
[50:19] Speaker 2: iron fence and he'd cut himself on the fence trying
[50:23] Speaker 2: to chase Eric, who was a bit more nimble. The
[50:26] Speaker 2: cops go, we'll say, they scrum down, as we say.
[50:30] Speaker 2: We'll scrum down. We'll get our story straight. Eric stabbed
[50:35] Speaker 2: Sergeant so-and-so. But of course, then they need a knife
[50:38] Speaker 2: because Eric didn't have a knife. So somebody goes to
[50:44] Speaker 2: some part of the CIB, finds a knife. They smear
[50:48] Speaker 2: the knife on the arm of the injured sergeant, the
[50:52] Speaker 2: one who's cut his arm on the corrugated iron fence.
[50:55] Speaker 2: They take the knife back to the premises through which
[50:59] Speaker 2: Eric has tried to escape, where he's jumped over the fence.
[51:02] Speaker 2: They drop it in the backyard and then they call
[51:05] Speaker 2: the scientific squad. who know nothing about any of these events.
[51:10] Speaker 2: And the scientific squad discovers the knife with the blood
[51:15] Speaker 2: of the police officer on it. And that's, this only
[51:20] Speaker 2: comes out because one of the police officers there that
[51:24] Speaker 2: night has rolled over and has told this story. And
[51:28] Speaker 2: he said, no, he never had any heroin, never had
[51:30] Speaker 2: a knife. The stabbing never occurred. About eight or 10
[51:33] Speaker 2: of us just scrummed down and decided we were going
[51:35] Speaker 2: to make up this story and they go to court.
[51:37] Speaker 2: And start telling it.
[51:42] Speaker 1: I know there was a period of quite a bit
[51:45] Speaker 1: of police corruption. I mean, we're talking about the 80s.
[51:48] Speaker 2: Yes.
[51:48] Speaker 1: Just to make us feel a bit better.
[51:50] Speaker 3: This isn't happening now. As far as we know, there's
[51:55] Speaker 3: a lot more kind of stringent kind of things in
[51:58] Speaker 3: place to stop stuff like this happening, right?
[52:00] Speaker 2: I think there's a lot more supervision. I think what
[52:02] Speaker 2: happened in 1995 when this all came out during the
[52:06] Speaker 2: Royal Commission into Police Corruption in New South Wales, there
[52:09] Speaker 2: was a lot of revelations of what many people had
[52:13] Speaker 2: suspected for a long time. A lot of corruption around
[52:16] Speaker 2: King's Cross, the old red light area, lots of bars
[52:20] Speaker 2: and so on, corruption in licensing. I think it's changed immensely,
[52:25] Speaker 2: which is not to say that corruption can't happen or
[52:27] Speaker 2: won't happen. We've seen some examples, but compared to what
[52:32] Speaker 2: happened in the seventies, sixties, seventies, eighties, and even into
[52:38] Speaker 2: the nineties. No, I think it has changed and it's
[52:40] Speaker 2: changed for the better.
[52:42] Speaker 1: The other case you've mentioned about the young Indigenous boy
[52:46] Speaker 1: that didn't speak a lot of English, charged with the
[52:49] Speaker 1: murder of a white boy.
[52:51] Speaker 2: Yes.
[52:52] Speaker 1: That was a completely different case, wasn't it? There was
[52:54] Speaker 1: no corruption there. You describe it as just like a
[52:57] Speaker 1: perfect storm.
[52:58] Speaker 2: Yeah.
[52:59] Speaker 1: A lot to do with the fact that this boy
[53:01] Speaker 1: couldn't understand what was happening.
[53:03] Speaker 2: No, that's right. He was charged with the murder of
[53:09] Speaker 2: a young white man who'd been walking home after a
[53:13] Speaker 2: night out in Broome. And yeah, he'd had a few
[53:16] Speaker 2: drinks and so on. But, you know, there's stories starting
[53:20] Speaker 2: to float around that he's been hit by a car
[53:22] Speaker 2: or a whole range of things. The police know that
[53:26] Speaker 2: the white boy who's dead, Josh Warnecke, has probably been
[53:32] Speaker 2: killed with a either a tomahawk or a machete. But anyway,
[53:37] Speaker 2: the investigation takes two or three years before they actually
[53:42] Speaker 2: start to get anywhere, primarily because of Josh Warnecke's mother,
[53:47] Speaker 2: Ingrid Bishop, who would not let her son's death go.
[53:51] Speaker 2: She said, what's happening? She really pushed the police. Death
[53:55] Speaker 2: of Joshua Warnecke is in 2010. 2012, they zero in
[53:57] Speaker 2: on this teenage Aboriginal man from one of the most
[54:04] Speaker 2: remote communities in Australia. His name is Gene Gibson. His
[54:08] Speaker 2: first language is Pintupi. It's a Western dialect. His second
[54:11] Speaker 2: language is also a dialect. His third language is English.
[54:16] Speaker 2: They decide that he needs to be interviewed. Cops fly
[54:19] Speaker 2: to this remote community. Neither of the police officers had
[54:24] Speaker 2: ever dealt with First Nations people from remote communities or
[54:28] Speaker 2: people who had had substance abuse. Gene had had a
[54:31] Speaker 2: very hard upbringing. There was petrol sniffing, there was alcohol,
[54:36] Speaker 2: and so on. He was, in fact, cognitively impaired, as
[54:41] Speaker 2: we discover later. But they interview him, and at first
[54:44] Speaker 2: he denies anything. He says, yeah, I was out on
[54:48] Speaker 2: the old Broome Road that night. I was driving a car.
[54:52] Speaker 2: I was with a couple of mates. We saw a
[54:53] Speaker 2: white boy walking along the road, and we went out
[54:58] Speaker 2: to visit some friends. On the way back, we saw
[55:00] Speaker 2: him lying by the side of the road, Well, we
[55:03] Speaker 2: just thought he was drunk. We didn't stop. Nobody got out.
[55:06] Speaker 2: We're not involved in the murder. At one point during
[55:10] Speaker 2: the interview, one of the police officers shows Gene Gibson
[55:14] Speaker 2: a photograph of Josh Warnecke, the dead boy. And he says,
[55:17] Speaker 2: the cop says, it changed everything. And Gene Gibson then
[55:21] Speaker 2: says something like, mistake, hit him with car. The cop goes, what?
[55:28] Speaker 2: He said, I hit him with my car. And then
[55:32] Speaker 2: He sort of says, oh, no, that's not right. I
[55:35] Speaker 2: hit him with a rock. The cops know this is
[55:39] Speaker 2: not right because they've had the forensics from the day
[55:43] Speaker 2: of Josh Warnecke's death. And it's come back to them
[55:47] Speaker 2: that he's been struck with a sharp instrument like a
[55:51] Speaker 2: tomahawk or a machete. And so they introduce that to
[55:56] Speaker 2: the conversation. And Gene Gibson then says, oh, I hit
[56:01] Speaker 2: him with a pole. which is about as close as
[56:04] Speaker 2: they could get to a sharp instrument. He's charged with murder.
[56:10] Speaker 2: Why did he confess to that? He's a young Aboriginal man.
[56:18] Speaker 2: He's probably never been spoken to by the police. He's
[56:23] Speaker 2: cognitively impaired. I think he just felt he should say
[56:29] Speaker 2: what they wanted to hear.
[56:30] Speaker 1: He was trying to please them.
[56:31] Speaker 2: He was trying to please them, yeah. And there was,
[56:34] Speaker 2: a lot of this was never recorded on video, by
[56:36] Speaker 2: the way. But he does at one point have a
[56:40] Speaker 2: interview friend there. It's an older man from his community,
[56:44] Speaker 2: from his remote community. But it turns out the older
[56:47] Speaker 2: man is a relative in a kinship sense. He's something
[56:53] Speaker 2: like a grandfather to Jean. The interview friend is talking
[56:56] Speaker 2: to Jean in Pintupi. So the cops ask a question
[56:59] Speaker 2: in English. I'll call him the grandfather. He translates Pintupi
[57:05] Speaker 2: to Gene. Gene speaks in Pintupi to him. So the
[57:07] Speaker 2: cops have got no idea what's being said. Transpires later
[57:12] Speaker 2: that the older bloke, and this was not out of malice,
[57:16] Speaker 2: he's just saying to Gene Gibson, you've got to tell
[57:18] Speaker 2: them the truth. You've got to speak. If you hit
[57:20] Speaker 2: this man, rather than telling him, you don't have to
[57:23] Speaker 2: say anything, you don't have to speak. So Gene Gibson feels,
[57:28] Speaker 2: I think, overwhelmed by the fact that there's police there.
[57:32] Speaker 2: And this sort of elder figure who, you know, he
[57:36] Speaker 2: feels that he should, you know, he should obey, he
[57:41] Speaker 2: starts saying these things. It's just not right.
[57:45] Speaker 1: Because he was about 18, wasn't he? He was quite young.
[57:47] Speaker 2: He was a teenager. He was 18. He'd had a
[57:51] Speaker 2: couple of minor brushes with the law before this, but
[57:54] Speaker 2: it was for alcohol-related offences like, You know, they jumped
[57:58] Speaker 2: behind the bar of a pub and stole a bottle
[57:59] Speaker 2: of scotch.
[58:00] Speaker 1: Yeah, not murder.
[58:01] Speaker 2: No, no, definitely not murder. And Jean says, you know,
[58:08] Speaker 2: I did it. And a couple of the other blokes
[58:11] Speaker 2: in the car that I was in incited me to
[58:14] Speaker 2: do it. The cops interview them. It's the same deal.
[58:19] Speaker 2: They get confessions. And the same thing happens. It transpires
[58:25] Speaker 2: later that They just made it up. And there's some
[58:30] Speaker 2: great quotes there. One guy just says, one of the
[58:32] Speaker 2: Gene's friends says, you just kept pushing me, pushing me,
[58:36] Speaker 2: pushing me, pushing me, pushing me. I just gave up.
[58:41] Speaker 2: I just said, all right. I saw him do it.
[58:43] Speaker 2: I saw him hit him with a pole. And later
[58:47] Speaker 2: he says, no, it wasn't true. Of course it wasn't true.
[58:49] Speaker 2: But I just, I felt I had to say it. Yeah. Yeah.
[58:54] Speaker 1: It's sad. That case is really sad.
[58:57] Speaker 2: Well, it remains. Gene Gibson was eventually, the conviction was quashed,
[59:02] Speaker 2: but the case remains unsolved. Really? Yeah. Yeah. And no
[59:08] Speaker 2: interpreters were used. half the time. Even his own legal
[59:12] Speaker 2: aid lawyers from the Aboriginal Legal Service on a number
[59:16] Speaker 2: of occasions did not have an interpreter. His barrister said
[59:21] Speaker 2: later in court, I'm not sure he understood the instructions
[59:24] Speaker 2: I gave him. And one of the other legal aid solicitors,
[59:28] Speaker 2: a woman, said something like, On the occasions that I
[59:31] Speaker 2: met him, he mostly just sat there in silence and
[59:35] Speaker 2: stared at the wall, which is pretty bleak.
[59:39] Speaker 1: I know Gene received compensation.
[59:42] Speaker 2: Yes.
[59:43] Speaker 1: About $ 1. 3 million.
[59:44] Speaker 2: I think so, yes.
[59:46] Speaker 1: Which he deserves.
[59:47] Speaker 2: Yes.
[59:47] Speaker 1: I should say. But once again, it brings me back
[59:50] Speaker 1: to Joe.
[59:51] Speaker 2: Yes.
[59:52] Speaker 1: Where both of the other cases we've talked about, Eric
[59:55] Speaker 1: and Gene, both received money, compensation.
[59:57] Speaker 2: Eventually.
[59:58] Speaker 1: Eventually. And yet Joe is still waiting, still hasn't received any.
[1:00:03] Speaker 1: It really, it's just like it beggars belief, doesn't it?
[1:00:07] Speaker 2: I can't believe it. I just cannot believe the Victorian
[1:00:09] Speaker 2: government is so mean-spirited or unwilling to look at the evidence.
[1:00:17] Speaker 2: This is one of the themes that runs through the book,
[1:00:19] Speaker 2: that governments are very often, not always, but mostly very
[1:00:26] Speaker 2: unwilling to admit that a mistake might have been made.
[1:00:29] Speaker 2: But in Jo's case, yes, she deserves it. But it's
[1:00:32] Speaker 2: just you run into this brick wall. The Attorney General
[1:00:36] Speaker 2: takes a year to write back to her lawyers, literally.
[1:00:39] Speaker 2: Took a year to write. Yeah. And said, no, nothing's changed.
[1:00:44] Speaker 2: Not getting any compensation. There's a feeling that the issue
[1:00:50] Speaker 2: of compensation should be taken out of the hands of
[1:00:53] Speaker 2: state governments.
[1:00:54] Speaker 1: There should be some kind of federal.
[1:00:56] Speaker 2: Some sort of body that says, oh, well, yep. In
[1:01:00] Speaker 2: Jo's case, yes, what they were alleging was impossible. You
[1:01:04] Speaker 2: deserve to be compensated rather than leave it to a
[1:01:06] Speaker 2: politician because some of these things obviously can become very political.
[1:01:10] Speaker 2: I hope that maybe she'll write again to the next
[1:01:14] Speaker 2: Attorney General and you never know your luck in the
[1:01:16] Speaker 2: big city, you know, but she certainly deserves it. She's
[1:01:20] Speaker 2: been through a terrible ordeal.
[1:01:22] Speaker 1: What do you want listeners to take from hearing these
[1:01:26] Speaker 1: stories of injustice, apart from outrage?
[1:01:31] Speaker 2: I guess, I hope, this probably sounds weird, but some
[1:01:36] Speaker 2: sort of better understanding of the legal system, how it
[1:01:40] Speaker 2: works or how it doesn't work on occasions. As I said,
[1:01:43] Speaker 2: I think at the beginning, I'm a believer in our
[1:01:46] Speaker 2: system of justice. I think it mostly gets things right.
[1:01:50] Speaker 2: But there's an unwillingness or an inability to say, we
[1:01:57] Speaker 2: got it wrong. And you look at all these cases.
[1:02:01] Speaker 2: And there are different reasons. One guy was convicted on
[1:02:06] Speaker 2: DNA evidence alone, nothing else. As it turned out, the
[1:02:11] Speaker 2: DNA had been contaminated. I mean, and that case, again,
[1:02:17] Speaker 2: defied common sense. I mean, you can read about it
[1:02:20] Speaker 2: in the book, but seriously defied common sense because that
[1:02:24] Speaker 2: was the only evidence was DNA. Other identification, other... Cases
[1:02:31] Speaker 2: involve defence lawyers not doing their job. The director of
[1:02:37] Speaker 2: public prosecutions in one case withholding evidence from the jury.
[1:02:41] Speaker 1: Which I've heard about happening quite a lot even today.
[1:02:43] Speaker 2: Crucial, crucial evidence. This is in a murder case.
[1:02:46] Speaker 1: So maybe it's about like knowledge is power. Like the
[1:02:48] Speaker 1: more we know, even as listeners, because what I took
[1:02:52] Speaker 1: from hearing Joe's story is it could be any of us.
[1:02:54] Speaker 1: Like really, any of us could be convicted of a
[1:02:57] Speaker 1: crime if Joe can be convicted of a crime.
[1:03:00] Speaker 2: Absolutely.
[1:03:01] Speaker 1: So we need to have our wits about us, about
[1:03:02] Speaker 1: what can happen in the justice system.
[1:03:05] Speaker 2: Absolutely. And I hope this book gives people that idea
[1:03:08] Speaker 2: of how things go wrong. She was a 57-year-old woman
[1:03:11] Speaker 2: at home in suburban Melbourne, in her pyjamas, knock on
[1:03:17] Speaker 2: the door, and her life is turned upside down. The
[1:03:19] Speaker 2: government goes bad luck. I hope what people would take
[1:03:21] Speaker 2: out of the book is, you know, they can see
[1:03:25] Speaker 2: how things do go wrong, that people, some people in
[1:03:28] Speaker 2: jail are innocent. there have been miscarriages of justice. Governments
[1:03:34] Speaker 2: have been incredibly tardy in coming around and saying, oh yeah,
[1:03:40] Speaker 2: maybe we did get it wrong. People don't like to
[1:03:43] Speaker 2: admit mistakes. Governments don't like to admit mistakes. They don't
[1:03:46] Speaker 2: want to have things like Royal Commissions. Royal Commissions cost money. And,
[1:03:52] Speaker 2: you know, people don't like to be embarrassed.
[1:03:54] Speaker 1: But these people matter.
[1:03:56] Speaker 2: Yeah, they do. That's the thing. They're not just, cases.
[1:04:00] Speaker 2: You're talking about people's lives. You know, you look at Joe,
[1:04:05] Speaker 2: you look at Jean Gibson in Western Australia, the young
[1:04:10] Speaker 2: bloke who had such a tough upbringing. You know, Terry Irving,
[1:04:15] Speaker 2: another Indigenous bloke up in Cairns. He was one of
[1:04:20] Speaker 2: the lucky ones. He had a really good solicitor who
[1:04:24] Speaker 2: stuck by him and worked for him for free for many,
[1:04:28] Speaker 2: many years by the name of Michael O'Keefe, the good
[1:04:32] Speaker 2: solicitor I call him in the book. But if it
[1:04:35] Speaker 2: wasn't for Michael O'Keefe, he would have done all these
[1:04:38] Speaker 2: years and nobody would have given a rats because, you know,
[1:04:44] Speaker 2: he did have a record way back for armed robbery.
[1:04:46] Speaker 2: So he's obviously done it again. You know, who cares? Well,
[1:04:52] Speaker 2: people should care. And I think people should care about injustice.
[1:04:58] Speaker 2: And I hope the book makes a bit of a
[1:04:59] Speaker 2: contribution to that.
[1:05:01] Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining us, Neil. We appreciate
[1:05:03] Speaker 1: your insights.
[1:05:05] Speaker 2: Thank you for having me.
[1:05:07] Speaker 1: Thank you to Neil for joining us on this episode.
[1:05:09] Speaker 1: You'll find his book in our show notes. Make sure
[1:05:13] Speaker 1: you're following our show on Apple Podcasts and Spotify and
[1:05:16] Speaker 1: leave us a review. Thanks so much for listening. I'll
[1:05:19] Speaker 1: be back next week with another True Crime Conversation.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.