# ‘They told me Celeste’s death wouldn't be in vain. So far, it has been’: Aggie Di Mauro Pt. 2

An episode of [I Catch Killers with Gary Jubelin](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1506667049), 1 Jun 2026, 56 min.

Audio: https://p.podderapp.com/2544644999/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/2fb3740d-3436-44af-8cc0-a91900716aa5/5bc8c2ed-b718-4f44-beb3-ac2a005246cc/b7910149-659f-4d13-b4a0-b45c006932cf/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=786928c3-10c1-4cef-a7bf-ac2a005246d0

What’s been done in the 5 and half years since 23 year old Celeste Manno was brutally murdered in her bedroom by a man she barely knew? According to Celeste’s mum, Aggie Di Mauro, not much. In part two of Aggie’s chat with Gary, Aggie lays out in forensic detail why the Victorian Government's response to the Victorian Law Reform Commission's 45 stalking recommendations has been nothing but "lip service." Aggie makes a compelling case for the mandatory electronic monitoring of stalkers who breach intervention orders, dismantling every official excuse offered against it, and exposes the dangerous gap in Victoria's justice system where stalking charges are routinely pleaded down to lesser offences. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

## Transcript

[0:01] Speaker 1: The public has had a long held fascination with detectives.
[0:05] Speaker 1: Detective sy aside of life, the average person is never
[0:08] Speaker 1: exposed her I spent thirty four years as a cop.
[0:11] Speaker 1: For twenty five of those years I was catching killers.
[0:14] Speaker 1: That's what I did for a living. I was a
[0:16] Speaker 1: homicide detective. I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead,
[0:20] Speaker 1: I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated.
[0:23] Speaker 1: The guests I talk to each week have amazing stories
[0:26] Speaker 1: from all sides of the law. The interviews are raw
[0:28] Speaker 1: and honest, just like the people I talk to. Some
[0:31] Speaker 1: of the content and language might be confronting. That's because
[0:34] Speaker 1: no one who comes into contact with crime is left unchanged.
[0:38] Speaker 1: Join me now as I take you into this world.
[0:46] Speaker 1: If part one of my conversation with Aggie Demorrow left
[0:49] Speaker 1: you outrage, good it should have. It was meant to.
[0:53] Speaker 1: Aggie is the mother of Celeste, a twenty three year
[0:55] Speaker 1: old brutally murdered in their own home by a relentless
[0:58] Speaker 1: stalk as she hardly knew. In this episode of VI
[1:01] Speaker 1: Catch Killers, we're going to talk about what's happened since
[1:04] Speaker 1: the less horrific murder, or more accurately what hasn't happened.
[1:09] Speaker 1: Aggie and I also discussed what should be done to
[1:12] Speaker 1: prevent this kind of senseless, predictable violence from destroying another family.
[1:17] Speaker 1: Now we make no apologies for what we're calling for.
[1:20] Speaker 1: Have a listen, and you tell me if we're wrong.
[1:24] Speaker 1: Aggy tomorrow, Welcome back Part two of I Catch Killers.
[1:28] Speaker 2: Thank you, Gary.
[1:29] Speaker 1: I was worried that the conversation that we were having
[1:34] Speaker 1: would get you cranky, but I should have worried about
[1:37] Speaker 1: it getting myself cranky because it's frustrating. It's frustrating, and
[1:44] Speaker 1: with all the paperwork that you sent to me about
[1:48] Speaker 1: your daughter's case and the long, numerous conversations we've had,
[1:53] Speaker 1: I can understand why. Yeah, you feel frustrated with the
[1:57] Speaker 1: fact that people don't seem to be list because what
[2:01] Speaker 1: we're talking about seems like common sense.
[2:05] Speaker 2: It does, and we're also talking about saving lives. The
[2:11] Speaker 2: violence against women issue has been an issue for years,
[2:15] Speaker 2: for years, and we see our politicians marching at rallies,
[2:22] Speaker 2: the big one a couple of years ago, you know,
[2:25] Speaker 2: saying things like enough is enough. I'm so sick and
[2:29] Speaker 2: tired of it. Seriously, if you truly believe enough is enough,
[2:33] Speaker 2: and I remember saying this on an interview on the project.
[2:37] Speaker 2: You know, they were still trying to work out what
[2:39] Speaker 2: they could do, but they're saying enough is enough, and
[2:42] Speaker 2: they're marching. And then we had actually your part of town,
[2:47] Speaker 2: Chris Min's talking about maybe a review that they were
[2:50] Speaker 2: going to do, and I remember saying, don't stop wasting money.
[2:54] Speaker 2: We've done one here in Victoria. It's come up with
[2:57] Speaker 2: some recommendations, implement them and reconsider that electronic monitoring because
[3:04] Speaker 2: without it you won't prevent this from happening again. And
[3:07] Speaker 2: I one hundred percent feel that way. Yeah, So you
[3:12] Speaker 2: know they've been sitting the recommendations have been sitting in
[3:15] Speaker 2: parliament for since September of twenty two. I was told
[3:20] Speaker 2: every single one of them would be implemented. I was told,
[3:24] Speaker 2: actually that Celeste was going to be so proud of
[3:27] Speaker 2: the legacy she'd left behind as such rubbish that five
[3:32] Speaker 2: and a half years later, we're still pushing for this.
[3:35] Speaker 1: That was you're talking about the Victoria Law Reform Commission
[3:40] Speaker 1: when I dug up an article from February this year,
[3:44] Speaker 1: and in the article, this is what they say. And
[3:48] Speaker 1: we'll talk more on this following Celeste killing. The Victoria
[3:52] Speaker 1: Law Reform Commission probe gaps in stalking legislation, tabling a
[3:57] Speaker 1: final report in September twenty twenty two. As you just said,
[4:01] Speaker 1: it included forty five recommendations, of which thirty four called
[4:05] Speaker 1: on the Victorian government to take direct action. Laws set
[4:09] Speaker 1: to be debated in Parliament this week with address just
[4:12] Speaker 1: three of the recommendations, including clarifying the definition of stalking
[4:16] Speaker 1: and giving courts tougher powers to clamp down on stalkers.
[4:19] Speaker 1: They would also allow courts to issue intram personal safety
[4:22] Speaker 1: intervention orders on their own initiative, limit unnecessary cross examination
[4:27] Speaker 1: of the victims, and more clearly define the offense. Okay,
[4:31] Speaker 1: So that's February two thousand and six, forty five recommendations
[4:37] Speaker 1: and how many have been implemented?
[4:40] Speaker 2: Well, it was initially we were told two. You've just
[4:43] Speaker 2: read three from the article. I believe it's about three
[4:45] Speaker 2: or four because they've combined a couple of them together.
[4:48] Speaker 2: But they're little administrative tweaks. They don't go to any
[4:53] Speaker 2: of what was recommended for Victoria Police to change. They
[4:57] Speaker 2: don't go to any of the SASH recommendation.
[5:00] Speaker 1: What were some of the recommendations you think were valid
[5:04] Speaker 1: and the appropriate.
[5:06] Speaker 2: I don't have them in front of me. But when
[5:08] Speaker 2: we consider preventing preventative measures, So again the SASH pilot
[5:15] Speaker 2: that is supposed to be training police officers, I mean,
[5:18] Speaker 2: we're still trying to clarify the definition of stalking. Seriously,
[5:23] Speaker 2: the training frontline police officers, the screen assessment tool that
[5:28] Speaker 2: they're going to use, so called SASH, definitely goes to
[5:32] Speaker 2: prevention because they're trying to identify the level of risk
[5:36] Speaker 2: that the perpetrator poses to me. The ones specific to
[5:42] Speaker 2: Victoria police would be what would prevent this from happening? Again,
[5:48] Speaker 2: an called bracelets, which was not a recommendation, and I
[5:53] Speaker 2: still insist that they reconsider that would go to prevention.
[5:59] Speaker 2: You know, there was recommends in there specific to the
[6:03] Speaker 2: court's prosecutors, defense lawyers. Very important. Now this is not
[6:09] Speaker 2: to this is not for prevention. This goes more to
[6:14] Speaker 2: the rehabilitation side of it, I suppose, But it would
[6:19] Speaker 2: prevent re offending if they did put these measures in place,
[6:24] Speaker 2: because one of the biggest problems with stalking is because
[6:27] Speaker 2: here in Victoria the maximum is ten years, which is
[6:31] Speaker 2: never actually handed down, but that is what the maximum is,
[6:35] Speaker 2: then you have defense lawyers and prosecutors pleading the charges down.
[6:41] Speaker 2: So they're actually not going ahead with stalking charges because
[6:45] Speaker 2: the maximum is so high. And so you know the
[6:48] Speaker 2: perpetrator is not going to play guilty to stalking. But
[6:51] Speaker 2: if we plead it down to maybe use carriage service,
[6:55] Speaker 2: you know they'll consider pleading guilty because they plead charges down.
[7:00] Speaker 2: And what that means is regardless of what their sentence
[7:03] Speaker 2: will be, whether it's community corrections, whether it's whatever it is.
[7:08] Speaker 2: The courts don't impose a men's behavioral program, so again
[7:14] Speaker 2: you're not addressing in them in your term of sentence
[7:21] Speaker 2: that you're going to hand out because it wasn't stalking
[7:24] Speaker 2: because it was pled down. The men's behavioral program is
[7:28] Speaker 2: not one of those things that the courts will impose. Therefore,
[7:32] Speaker 2: you're not going to address the problem with the offender.
[7:37] Speaker 2: It's like a domino effect.
[7:40] Speaker 1: I'm hearing what you say, and that makes a lot
[7:42] Speaker 1: of sense. You've got to address it, but dropping it
[7:45] Speaker 1: down to stalking, and I can imagine how the courts
[7:47] Speaker 1: would maneuver their way around that. And no stalking will
[7:51] Speaker 1: use carriage service, and that's contacting people inappropriately or harassment type,
[7:59] Speaker 1: but we're talking stalking and that's where the focus should be.
[8:03] Speaker 2: Gary. Just so we're clear, by the way, in Celester's case,
[8:07] Speaker 2: in the end, he was never charged with stalking. Yep,
[8:10] Speaker 2: he was only charged with used carriage service. One hundred
[8:13] Speaker 2: and fifty or so messages later, it still didn't constitute stalking.
[8:20] Speaker 1: And that's the ridiculous part of it, the recommendation on
[8:25] Speaker 1: the SASH, and I think that's if they have a
[8:28] Speaker 1: system that helps educate, and that's what I'm seeing, like
[8:31] Speaker 1: an assessment tool, the screening assessment of stalking and harassment,
[8:35] Speaker 1: a triarche tool used help frontline professionals quickly identify cases
[8:39] Speaker 1: that need more urgent or comprehensive response. I don't have
[8:43] Speaker 1: a problem with that. I think that's a step in
[8:45] Speaker 1: the right direction. And Laura Richards that I was talking
[8:48] Speaker 1: about in part one, the World's Expert on It introduced
[8:52] Speaker 1: something similar that's been used in the UK. I think
[8:55] Speaker 1: that's a step in the right direction, but I'm not
[8:58] Speaker 1: sure if it's the trial period that was tested in
[9:02] Speaker 1: I'm referring to Victoria here in three police stations or
[9:06] Speaker 1: three area commands, but hasn't been implemented across the state.
[9:10] Speaker 1: Is that your understanding of it.
[9:12] Speaker 2: Not only has it not been implemented, we still have
[9:16] Speaker 2: to date victims of stalking turning up at a police
[9:21] Speaker 2: station reporting the stalking been told to just ignore it.
[9:27] Speaker 2: There's nothing they can do about it.
[9:29] Speaker 1: Right.
[9:31] Speaker 2: I've had a couple of victims contact me direct message
[9:34] Speaker 2: me on our Facebook group to let me know do
[9:39] Speaker 2: you know if anything has changed since Celeste? Because when
[9:42] Speaker 2: they've walked into the police station, they've actually asked the question.
[9:47] Speaker 2: They've asked two questions, do you know Celeste Manno's case? Yes?
[9:52] Speaker 2: And so what happened with SASH? And the reply from
[9:56] Speaker 2: police officers has been what's SASH?
[9:58] Speaker 1: Right? Okay?
[10:00] Speaker 2: What does that tell us?
[10:02] Speaker 1: Well, it hasn't been implemented and put out there at all. Well, okay,
[10:07] Speaker 1: let's we want to try and step forward. People aren't
[10:13] Speaker 1: doing it, but we can make the suggestion and hopefully
[10:15] Speaker 1: people are listening to what we're saying here that it
[10:18] Speaker 1: should be implemented. I think it's a no brainer. If
[10:21] Speaker 1: police can't see the risk associated with stalking, we need
[10:25] Speaker 1: a system like SASH. So it sort of makes it
[10:29] Speaker 1: easier to identify what the concerns are. I see benefits
[10:32] Speaker 1: in that the legislation. We should have clear definition of
[10:36] Speaker 1: what stalking is. And you made the point that your
[10:40] Speaker 1: daughter was contacted one hundred and fifty times, Well, yeah,
[10:43] Speaker 1: that's getting into the stalking stalking realm. I would suggest
[10:48] Speaker 1: the ankle bracelets, and let's just call them. You and
[10:51] Speaker 1: I both refer to them as ankle bracelets, and we
[10:53] Speaker 1: all think ankle bracelets. Someone been released from prison and
[10:56] Speaker 1: they've got an ankle bracelet on, they're basically tracking device
[11:00] Speaker 1: that they don't have to even be of technology. Now
[11:04] Speaker 1: we don't have to have a strapped around their ankle.
[11:06] Speaker 1: It could look like a watch on their wrists exactly.
[11:10] Speaker 1: I am such a big fan of the use of
[11:13] Speaker 1: that technology to address situations like happen to your daughter,
[11:18] Speaker 1: horrendous murders that have occurred that could have been prevented
[11:22] Speaker 1: if we implemented that. If someone just wants to make
[11:24] Speaker 1: a change, let's do that. Let's break down what we're
[11:28] Speaker 1: talking about here. My thought would be that if I
[11:32] Speaker 1: was stalking someone and it's been reported to the police,
[11:37] Speaker 1: the mambe that's reported to the police and an order's
[11:40] Speaker 1: taken out, and I can contest the order like that
[11:44] Speaker 1: is available to it if it's some founded. But if
[11:47] Speaker 1: the INTRAM orders in place and I breach that order,
[11:51] Speaker 1: I've forgotten my rights to have freedom just to go
[11:54] Speaker 1: wherever I want, because I've shown that the order that's
[11:57] Speaker 1: been in place is not something that's going to contain
[12:00] Speaker 1: my actions. So then I get a tracking device issued
[12:04] Speaker 1: through the courts. It's not that hard the legislation to
[12:07] Speaker 1: bring the legislation in issued through the courts. I'm wearing
[12:11] Speaker 1: a tracking device. The person that I'm stalking has a
[12:14] Speaker 1: device also that would be notified if I came in
[12:17] Speaker 1: let's say five kilometers of that person, or we can
[12:20] Speaker 1: set the distance, but say five kilometers of that person.
[12:24] Speaker 1: If I come within five kilometers of that person, the
[12:27] Speaker 1: person knows that they're potentially at risk, as would have
[12:31] Speaker 1: helped you and your daughter.
[12:34] Speaker 2: As would have absolutely given us an opportunity that night, Gary,
[12:38] Speaker 2: we would have at least gotten out of that house.
[12:42] Speaker 1: You could also have the police notified that the person
[12:45] Speaker 1: that's wearing the tracking devices come within certain distance of
[12:50] Speaker 1: the victim. I just see it as a no brainer,
[12:53] Speaker 1: and technology is available to do that and During COVID,
[12:57] Speaker 1: we could track where everyone was going in COVID, and
[13:00] Speaker 1: we're saying now years down the track that we can't
[13:04] Speaker 1: track people. I've heard people say to me because I
[13:06] Speaker 1: bring this up a lot, But what happens if the
[13:10] Speaker 1: device fails, Well, if the device fails, the monitor goes off.
[13:15] Speaker 1: You can set it up so if the power is
[13:17] Speaker 1: killed or the person takes the tracking device off their
[13:20] Speaker 1: wrist or off their ankle, the device goes off, they're
[13:24] Speaker 1: no the fight. Oh yeah, but what happens if they
[13:26] Speaker 1: forget to charge their charge their tracking device, Well, they've
[13:31] Speaker 1: breached their conditions. Then they go into jail. They've had
[13:34] Speaker 1: their opportunity, They've been given their opportunity. Just to stop
[13:38] Speaker 1: stalking and harassing this person. I just see no brainers.
[13:43] Speaker 1: Then I've also people say, well, it's an invasion of
[13:46] Speaker 1: their liberties, Like hello, we're not saying anyone from a
[13:51] Speaker 1: first complaint. It's very easy if someone puts a complaint
[13:54] Speaker 1: in on you that you're harassing them or stalking them.
[13:57] Speaker 1: If that's not true, just stay away from the person
[14:00] Speaker 1: and then there's no problems. That's my view view and
[14:04] Speaker 1: not Aggie. I know you you're strong on, let's break
[14:07] Speaker 1: it down, because I just don't see any legitimate arguments
[14:10] Speaker 1: not to implement this sooner rather than later.
[14:13] Speaker 2: Gary, there are no legitimate arguments. I am sick and
[14:18] Speaker 2: tired of the excuses I've been given from day one,
[14:21] Speaker 2: excuses like from the moment I brought it up, which
[14:24] Speaker 2: was at the very first meeting with that then Attorney
[14:27] Speaker 2: General and Secretary of the Department of Justice. The first
[14:31] Speaker 2: thing that came out about ankle bracelets was, Aggie, they
[14:34] Speaker 2: don't the technology is not right that I don't work
[14:37] Speaker 2: on live time? Are you joking?
[14:40] Speaker 1: So?
[14:41] Speaker 2: Can we just decide here then? A My response to
[14:45] Speaker 2: that was that the technology is not right. I've been
[14:49] Speaker 2: using an app called Live three sixty with my kids
[14:52] Speaker 2: since they started driving, so I know where they are
[14:54] Speaker 2: at at all times. Okay, and that's free to me.
[15:00] Speaker 2: Five percent accuracy because it's free. If I paid for it,
[15:04] Speaker 2: I'm sure it'll be one hundred percent. B If the
[15:07] Speaker 2: technology is not quite right, They're not reliable, is what
[15:10] Speaker 2: I'm getting told. Then how are you using this unreliable
[15:15] Speaker 2: technology on murderers that you are parolling? How are you
[15:20] Speaker 2: doing that? Other?
[15:21] Speaker 1: Good point?
[15:22] Speaker 2: So again I'm going to say, I am sick and
[15:26] Speaker 2: tired of the public being gas slighted. When I met
[15:31] Speaker 2: with the Chairman of the Victorian Law Reform Commission when
[15:34] Speaker 2: they were taking me through the final report before it
[15:37] Speaker 2: was going to be tabled in Parliament, of course I
[15:41] Speaker 2: stated how disappointed I was that electronic monitoring was not
[15:46] Speaker 2: one of the recommendations in the report, because I've already
[15:48] Speaker 2: been through it. And the reply I got at the
[15:52] Speaker 2: time was Aggie, the community don't want it. Oh my god.
[15:56] Speaker 2: It was a big mistake because I said, oh no, no,
[15:58] Speaker 2: I'm not listening to this. Let's go to that page,
[16:01] Speaker 2: because you've given us a great report. Here, let's see
[16:05] Speaker 2: from what I read, fifty percent for it, fifty percent
[16:09] Speaker 2: are against it. Who are they? Well, the fifty percent
[16:13] Speaker 2: were community members. The fifty percent against it were legal
[16:19] Speaker 2: services and lo and behold Victoria police. And what were
[16:25] Speaker 2: their reasons? It would impede on their freedom of movement?
[16:32] Speaker 2: Their civil liberties? I said, I couldn't give a damn
[16:35] Speaker 2: about their freedom of movement. My daughter is six feet
[16:39] Speaker 2: under I don't give a damn about his freedom of movement.
[16:43] Speaker 2: Victoria Police's other reason was it would be too difficult
[16:49] Speaker 2: in rural areas. Are we serious? In other words, you know,
[16:54] Speaker 2: maybe what the kilometers or or the distances not to
[16:57] Speaker 2: go to in rural areas make it a live bit.
[17:02] Speaker 2: They're just not good enough excuses. A person has breached
[17:07] Speaker 2: an interim intervention order or an intervention order. They are
[17:12] Speaker 2: showing you they do not give a damn about the law.
[17:16] Speaker 2: No piece of paper is going to stop them. Right,
[17:19] Speaker 2: They're telling you that by breaching it, that should automatically
[17:24] Speaker 2: forfeit any human rights, they have any freedom of movement
[17:29] Speaker 2: because the alternative is putting the victim at risk, leading
[17:35] Speaker 2: to exactly what happened to Celeste. So again, the gas
[17:40] Speaker 2: lighting I refer to is telling the public something that
[17:46] Speaker 2: they don't really realize. It's not quite true. So telling
[17:49] Speaker 2: the public that the technology is not quite right, it
[17:52] Speaker 2: doesn't run on live Are you serious? Well, which community
[17:55] Speaker 2: members are aware of the fact that when they're putting
[17:58] Speaker 2: ankle bracelets on parole please, they're not reliable, none of them.
[18:03] Speaker 2: Or to say to the public the community don't want them.
[18:07] Speaker 2: That's not true. I'm taking you through this report, you're
[18:11] Speaker 2: telling me who wanted it and who didn't want it.
[18:14] Speaker 2: So you're lying.
[18:17] Speaker 1: Every point you bring up in the arguments for I
[18:21] Speaker 1: agree with, and I just don't think there's any validity
[18:25] Speaker 1: to the arguments against it breaching their human rights. Like
[18:30] Speaker 1: we're not saying anyone can walk into the police station.
[18:33] Speaker 1: I can walk into a police station and say Aggie's
[18:37] Speaker 1: stalking me, she's annoying me, and the police come around
[18:39] Speaker 1: and whack a bracelet on you to attrack your movements. No,
[18:43] Speaker 1: but if you're continually contacting me and I go, I've
[18:48] Speaker 1: been harassed, I fear for my safety and the protection
[18:52] Speaker 1: orders put in place, and you breach that order. So
[18:54] Speaker 1: you're very clear on what your restrictions are. Just don't
[18:58] Speaker 1: contact me and you can tactomy. Well, there you've foregone,
[19:02] Speaker 1: And I don't see it. The greatest infringement on human
[19:06] Speaker 1: rights just being told to stay away from someone because
[19:08] Speaker 1: that's all you've been asked to do, stay away from
[19:11] Speaker 1: an area where this person might be technology. I just
[19:15] Speaker 1: say bullshit on that, Like, the technology is there, we
[19:19] Speaker 1: can can use that. Well, what about the rural areas? Okay,
[19:23] Speaker 1: if it come if that person's not allowed to go
[19:26] Speaker 1: into that town, it's the technology would work out there.
[19:30] Speaker 1: There's ways of dealing with every single issue you know.
[19:33] Speaker 2: They're going to come back with. But the perpetrator might
[19:36] Speaker 2: be living in the same town, yes, of course, but
[19:39] Speaker 2: he wouldn't be allowed anywhere near her home for example.
[19:43] Speaker 1: Would he know? And what sort of comfort would that
[19:47] Speaker 1: give what you were going through with your daughter, when
[19:49] Speaker 1: you were starting to have legitimate concerns and quite rightly
[19:54] Speaker 1: concerns that if you had a monitor with you that
[19:58] Speaker 1: Celeste knew when he he was within five kilometers of
[20:02] Speaker 1: any location she was, she'd be notified and that the
[20:05] Speaker 1: police would be notified. Also, how much comfort would have
[20:08] Speaker 1: that bought for you?
[20:10] Speaker 2: Well, it would have been some comfort because regardless of
[20:15] Speaker 2: where Celeste was at, whether it was her driving home
[20:20] Speaker 2: from work, whether it was I don't know, for a
[20:23] Speaker 2: walk with to the park, whether it was the situation
[20:28] Speaker 2: we were in that night, just fast asleep in bed,
[20:32] Speaker 2: something like a device that's going to sound off, whether
[20:36] Speaker 2: it vibrates on your body, whether it sounds an alarm,
[20:40] Speaker 2: it is going to alert you that that person that
[20:43] Speaker 2: you're fearing is nearby. So it would have absolutely given
[20:46] Speaker 2: us some peace of mind. Like this we were, like
[20:49] Speaker 2: Celeste was literally a sitting duck. It was just I mean, admittedly,
[20:55] Speaker 2: at the time my biggest fear with this beast. You
[21:00] Speaker 2: don't think that anybody that doesn't even know her is
[21:06] Speaker 2: actually going to commit murder. I had other fears, you know,
[21:10] Speaker 2: because of the sexually explicit messages. My fear at the time,
[21:14] Speaker 2: I thought this was a person that was quite capable
[21:16] Speaker 2: of rapeh So my fears were around, you know, on
[21:21] Speaker 2: her way home, making sure she wasn't being followed, knowing
[21:25] Speaker 2: the closest police stations if she felt she was, and
[21:28] Speaker 2: to ring me instantly because I would be meeting her there.
[21:32] Speaker 2: You know, I didn't think murder. What was I supposed
[21:35] Speaker 2: to be thinking putting bars to the bedroom window for
[21:39] Speaker 2: crying out loud? I didn't. Especially the silence fooled us. Okay,
[21:43] Speaker 2: that three months of silence, we thought it was over.
[21:49] Speaker 2: But regardless of what he did and his silence, if
[21:52] Speaker 2: he had been monitored, if there had been some sort
[21:55] Speaker 2: of device on him, doesn't matter that we'd let our
[21:59] Speaker 2: guard down that night. Something would have gone off to
[22:02] Speaker 2: alert us that he was nearby. So of course it's
[22:07] Speaker 2: going to give us peace of mind, you know, to
[22:09] Speaker 2: hear a premier say the words an ankle bracelet or
[22:15] Speaker 2: an electronic device would give victims a false sense of security. Again, outright, bull,
[22:25] Speaker 2: that is what that is. And I continue to feel
[22:28] Speaker 2: this way and say it every opportunity. This is because
[22:33] Speaker 2: it is not happening to them. I would love to
[22:36] Speaker 2: hear her say exactly that give us that excuse. If
[22:39] Speaker 2: this was happening to her daughter, I am sure she
[22:43] Speaker 2: would want some monitor in place, something that would alert
[22:48] Speaker 2: her daughter and herself. I don't think she would be
[22:53] Speaker 2: satisfied with extending the intervention order. I don't think the
[23:00] Speaker 2: worthless piece of paper and extending it would satisfy her
[23:04] Speaker 2: would comfort her.
[23:06] Speaker 1: Yeah, the term the worthless piece of paper is you
[23:09] Speaker 1: hear it in so many, so many times in the
[23:12] Speaker 1: context of domestic situations and situations like you've found yourself in,
[23:17] Speaker 1: Like what's it going to do? What we're offering not
[23:20] Speaker 1: with a monitoring device is a solution, it's the next
[23:24] Speaker 1: level that's okay, the piece of paper. I dare say
[23:29] Speaker 1: most people that get all the served on them abide
[23:32] Speaker 1: by it. I don't know statistics, but I'm thinking probably
[23:35] Speaker 1: the majority do. So there's only a small percentage that
[23:39] Speaker 1: still doesn't change their behavior, So you're narrowing it down.
[23:43] Speaker 1: They're the ones that the fourth of that. They're right,
[23:45] Speaker 1: they're the ones that should be having monitors on them.
[23:48] Speaker 2: That's right. But not to mention Gary that that if
[23:53] Speaker 2: if electronic monitoring was to become legislation, yeah, it would
[23:57] Speaker 2: be known out there, right, So for any perpetrator, you
[24:01] Speaker 2: know how you said, would like to believe that most
[24:04] Speaker 2: of them do abide by conditions, right, But once it
[24:08] Speaker 2: was implemented, any perpetrator will know that if they breach
[24:13] Speaker 2: that intervention order, they will have a monitor on them,
[24:18] Speaker 2: they will be electronic. So, if anything, I think the
[24:22] Speaker 2: outcome would be many of them being aware of that,
[24:27] Speaker 2: would absolutely abide by the conditions. Unless they are intent
[24:32] Speaker 2: on killing. Well then we know what we're dealing with, right,
[24:35] Speaker 2: Unless they're intent on killing, they would abide by those conditions.
[24:40] Speaker 2: When this happened to Celeste, there was a report on
[24:43] Speaker 2: a Current Affairs that in Tasmania they had trialed and
[24:48] Speaker 2: called bracelets and electronic monitoring and they found that for
[24:52] Speaker 2: the offensive stalking, stalking had decreased by one hundred percent,
[24:58] Speaker 2: one hundred percent for the that were being electronically monitored.
[25:03] Speaker 2: So you know, I remember raising that at the time
[25:07] Speaker 2: with the Secretary of the Department of Justice, and of
[25:12] Speaker 2: course what am I told And this is another thing.
[25:15] Speaker 2: Sick and tired of the smoke mirrors, Oh, Aggie, that's
[25:20] Speaker 2: you know, they're just saying that they're not really working.
[25:23] Speaker 1: Though there does need to be outrage on this issue.
[25:26] Speaker 1: I've just I've talked about it for years and I'm
[25:29] Speaker 1: gobsmack that we just haven't sort of Okay, technology is
[25:34] Speaker 1: now available. We didn't have it twenty years ago, we've
[25:36] Speaker 1: got it now. Technology is available that we could make
[25:39] Speaker 1: this work. I was speaking to Hannah Clark's parents and
[25:44] Speaker 1: that was a tragedy where their grandchildren and daughter were
[25:46] Speaker 1: set alight, and I asked the very question, if a
[25:52] Speaker 1: tracking device was in place, like a monitor, do you
[25:54] Speaker 1: think it would have made the world of difference, because
[25:56] Speaker 1: they had concerns they could see it building up, and
[25:59] Speaker 1: they said most definitely, absolutely, how many people in this
[26:04] Speaker 1: situation could be saved by simple technology? And then the
[26:08] Speaker 1: next step, because where we're at now, if someone breaches
[26:12] Speaker 1: their order, we've got the option of putting them in custody.
[26:17] Speaker 1: So that's going from there straight to custody. This just
[26:20] Speaker 1: gives another step before they go into custody.
[26:22] Speaker 2: Before they go into custody, exactly.
[26:25] Speaker 1: If they've got and the jails are full, if we've
[26:28] Speaker 1: got the monitors in place, that's the second stage. If
[26:33] Speaker 1: they breach that, well, okay, everything that's been done can
[26:36] Speaker 1: be done. They deserve to be in jail, and they
[26:39] Speaker 1: get put in the custody. But it's frustrating, Aggie. I
[26:43] Speaker 1: get frustrated thinking about it. I can only imagine how
[26:46] Speaker 1: you feel, given what you've been through.
[26:49] Speaker 2: And you mentioned Hannah Clark. I still recall the afternoon
[26:53] Speaker 2: that Celeste walked home from work, was something like four
[26:56] Speaker 2: o'clock in the afternoon, and she found me in tears
[26:58] Speaker 2: because I was watching the news where they were reporting
[27:02] Speaker 2: Hannah Clark and her children, and I was devastated. And
[27:06] Speaker 2: she's come in seeing me like that, and she's sat
[27:08] Speaker 2: down and she's following the news herself, and she's really
[27:11] Speaker 2: upset by it, and I'll see her get emotional. We
[27:15] Speaker 2: had no idea that just a few months later it
[27:18] Speaker 2: would be her. Yeah, you know, in Hannah Clark's case,
[27:23] Speaker 2: it was an ex partner. In Celeicster's case, you just
[27:29] Speaker 2: we had no idea. Again, you know, how many times
[27:32] Speaker 2: do we hear the comment if it saves one person?
[27:38] Speaker 2: So far it's failed hundreds hundreds of women. I go
[27:45] Speaker 2: back to November of twenty twenty, if I just go
[27:48] Speaker 2: back to there, when this happened and when we started
[27:51] Speaker 2: fighting for this. Add up. Cherrelle Moody has the Australian
[27:58] Speaker 2: Femicide Watch. I think site add up the numbers since
[28:03] Speaker 2: twenty twenty, hundreds of women, and then we've got to
[28:07] Speaker 2: keep hearing, you know, if it saves one person, but
[28:09] Speaker 2: they refuse to do anything.
[28:13] Speaker 1: Well, all the promises seem to be very short term,
[28:16] Speaker 1: don't they. They ride on the back of the publicity.
[28:19] Speaker 2: All the promises were simply lip service. That is what
[28:23] Speaker 2: it was.
[28:23] Speaker 1: That's how you felt you've been played.
[28:26] Speaker 2: Absolutely, you know, Gary, at the time, I met with
[28:30] Speaker 2: two Attorney generals because the first one I met with
[28:33] Speaker 2: resigned after a week, so then I was introduced to
[28:36] Speaker 2: her replacement. All of the discussions, you know, two years
[28:41] Speaker 2: of meetings back and forth all around the electronic monitoring
[28:45] Speaker 2: but also the VLS recommendations, and of course I wanted
[28:49] Speaker 2: to have discussions with her on other issues for example,
[28:54] Speaker 2: which obviously we won't cover today, But loophole's in the
[28:56] Speaker 2: Crime's Mental imperman Act because we would be before the
[28:59] Speaker 2: courts for so long because of that act, a review
[29:02] Speaker 2: of the Sentencing Act for the crime of murder. Those
[29:05] Speaker 2: were things she didn't really want to discuss. But what
[29:08] Speaker 2: I'm saying is she was Attorney General at the time.
[29:10] Speaker 2: Now she was Attorney General when I was told by her,
[29:15] Speaker 2: just because the ankle bracelet was not one of the
[29:18] Speaker 2: LC recommendations. You could see how upset I was did
[29:22] Speaker 2: not mean she wasn't willing to do further research on
[29:26] Speaker 2: some other device. I'll help you, I said to her.
[29:29] Speaker 2: Never heard from her again. Now what I'm saying is,
[29:32] Speaker 2: at the time my last meeting with her, she's promised
[29:37] Speaker 2: further research on some other device, if not electronic monitoring,
[29:42] Speaker 2: and I've been told that the forty five recommendations would
[29:46] Speaker 2: be implemented, no time wasted. Right we are five and
[29:50] Speaker 2: a half years down the line. That same woman is
[29:54] Speaker 2: now our treasurer. I asked a question a couple of
[29:59] Speaker 2: years ago. I will ask it again now. What is
[30:03] Speaker 2: she allocated in the budget to implement those forty five recommendations?
[30:09] Speaker 2: What further research has been done? On the electronic monitoring
[30:13] Speaker 2: that I said I would help with nothing.
[30:18] Speaker 1: That's they're good questions and maybe we should ask them too, please.
[30:23] Speaker 2: Do It's not good enough to just appear on national
[30:30] Speaker 2: television saying that family was failed, but then add the
[30:38] Speaker 2: police did respond appropriately. They have been working on SASH
[30:44] Speaker 2: and no one knows what SASH is, including the police.
[30:48] Speaker 2: That's not good enough. That is gaslighting the public.
[30:54] Speaker 1: I can see why you're angry, and I've got to
[30:57] Speaker 1: say too, your anger is very balance. It's easy to
[31:01] Speaker 1: write off people if they're emotional. This has happened, but
[31:05] Speaker 1: you're very logical in your arguments, very logical in your discussions.
[31:09] Speaker 1: And I know there's things that you've said to me
[31:11] Speaker 1: that we haven't discussed here. But you're giving the names
[31:14] Speaker 1: of people in the specific conversations that you've had had
[31:18] Speaker 1: with people, and your frustrations that, yeah, it's just lip
[31:23] Speaker 1: service they're giving you.
[31:25] Speaker 2: I keep saying, it's not them, it hasn't happened to them.
[31:33] Speaker 2: I recently went through my sixth Mother's Day without Celeste,
[31:41] Speaker 2: as have hundreds of other mothers.
[31:44] Speaker 1: We need to keep talking about it to make people
[31:47] Speaker 1: sit up and do something. But I hope people that
[31:50] Speaker 1: are listening to this podcast start to think, Okay, this
[31:55] Speaker 1: is outrageous. Why isn't things being done? What would you say,
[32:00] Speaker 1: just to anyone sitting there listening or that are going
[32:02] Speaker 1: through similar situation you were going through before the murder
[32:05] Speaker 1: and the build up to the murder, how do you
[32:07] Speaker 1: think you could have done something different? Or what advice
[32:10] Speaker 1: would you give to people who find themselves in the
[32:13] Speaker 1: same situation as you've found yourself.
[32:15] Speaker 2: The way I'm going to answer your question, Gary is
[32:19] Speaker 2: like this, I can't give advice to people who would
[32:24] Speaker 2: be finding themselves in the situation Celesta and I were in.
[32:29] Speaker 2: What would because and I can't give that advice because
[32:32] Speaker 2: it would be outright irresponsible.
[32:35] Speaker 1: Yep.
[32:36] Speaker 2: What would I have done differently? See hindsight gives you
[32:40] Speaker 2: twenty twenty Gary, What would I have done differently? Well,
[32:44] Speaker 2: I would have known that police were not monitoring anything.
[32:48] Speaker 2: Police we're not keeping an eye on his movements. Celeste
[32:54] Speaker 2: was not going to be safe.
[32:56] Speaker 1: Yep.
[32:58] Speaker 2: I would have had to find a way to track
[33:00] Speaker 2: him down. Yes, I did make a suggestion to my daughter.
[33:04] Speaker 2: She thought I'd lost my mind because the only way
[33:06] Speaker 2: I could possibly we could possibly find out where we lived.
[33:09] Speaker 2: Was I needed to use so Leicester's bait yep okay,
[33:12] Speaker 2: which she thought Mum's lost her mind. But that would
[33:15] Speaker 2: have been the only way meet with him. Agree to
[33:18] Speaker 2: meet with him, your father, and I will be right
[33:21] Speaker 2: beside you. He won't even know where there. I needed
[33:24] Speaker 2: to find out where the hell he lived, and then
[33:28] Speaker 2: I needed to I realize now commit the unthinkable. I
[33:34] Speaker 2: would be willing to do the mandatory life sentence that
[33:39] Speaker 2: I've been fighting for, but my daughter would be safe
[33:42] Speaker 2: and sound living her life. That's what I would have
[33:46] Speaker 2: done differently. I cannot give that advice to others.
[33:50] Speaker 1: No, I understand where you're coming from.
[33:52] Speaker 2: I've been saying from day one, and I've said it
[33:54] Speaker 2: to many of our bureaucrats. If you don't change things,
[34:02] Speaker 2: if you don't put preventative measures in place and when
[34:07] Speaker 2: it can't be prevented, if you don't hand out, if
[34:12] Speaker 2: you don't start focusing more on punishment, we're talking about
[34:16] Speaker 2: murder rather than rehabilitation. You are going to turn Laura
[34:23] Speaker 2: binding citizens into something else. That's how I feel. I
[34:29] Speaker 2: have to be honest about that. But it's not advice
[34:31] Speaker 2: I can give people.
[34:33] Speaker 1: I don't think anyone that's seeing here listening to you,
[34:36] Speaker 1: given what you've been through, don't understand where you're coming from.
[34:41] Speaker 1: You say inappropriate to give advice. I'd give some advice
[34:46] Speaker 1: because I quite often get asked questions where people are
[34:48] Speaker 1: getting frustrated about the assistance they're getting from police. The
[34:53] Speaker 1: thing that I tell people if they gave the police
[34:55] Speaker 1: stations and they don't think they're getting the appropriate response
[35:00] Speaker 1: and getting fobbed off the moment I walk into the
[35:03] Speaker 1: police station, I'd take a notepad and pen, and I'd
[35:06] Speaker 1: ask who am I speaking to, Get the name of
[35:08] Speaker 1: the officer that you're speaking to, and then start asking
[35:12] Speaker 1: the questions because that comes with accountability. Being anonymous allows
[35:17] Speaker 1: a degree of wiggle room to get out of well
[35:21] Speaker 1: who did they report it to? I don't know. I
[35:23] Speaker 1: don't know. So many times I've had people come to
[35:26] Speaker 1: me and say I've reported this to the police, but
[35:31] Speaker 1: I go, well, who did you speak to? I don't know.
[35:34] Speaker 1: I'd advise everyone just a simple little thing, simple little thing,
[35:37] Speaker 1: get a name, and that makes people feel more accountable
[35:41] Speaker 1: and sorry because I just clarify it with that. That's
[35:44] Speaker 1: another criticism of you because that's how most people go
[35:47] Speaker 1: into the police station, because good people don't spend a
[35:52] Speaker 1: lot of time in police stations. It might be once
[35:54] Speaker 1: or twice they've got to go into report something stolen.
[35:57] Speaker 1: They don't know how to deal with police, so they
[35:59] Speaker 1: put police on a pedestal and they walk into the
[36:01] Speaker 1: police station and they're almost in awe of speaking to
[36:04] Speaker 1: the police officer. So it's not a criticism of you
[36:09] Speaker 1: if you didn't get the name of the police officer.
[36:11] Speaker 1: That is the nature of things. But I think we've
[36:13] Speaker 1: got to change it, and I want to when I
[36:16] Speaker 1: say to you about yeah, it's understandable not asking for
[36:21] Speaker 1: a police officer's name. I see that so many times
[36:25] Speaker 1: because people just think that the police, they'll know what
[36:28] Speaker 1: to do. Police are there to help us when we're
[36:30] Speaker 1: in trouble. We go there and we respect whatever they
[36:33] Speaker 1: tell us, and we walk out and think, Okay, well
[36:36] Speaker 1: I've done the right thing. What more does the law
[36:38] Speaker 1: abiding citizen do to fight something than to report it
[36:42] Speaker 1: to the police. I just think a little tool, a
[36:46] Speaker 1: little tool that everyone should have, is get the name
[36:49] Speaker 1: of the police officer you're speaking to, record the time
[36:52] Speaker 1: and date, and make contemporaneous notes, as in the notes
[36:56] Speaker 1: at the time that you're speaking to the officer on
[36:59] Speaker 1: what they tell you. Because that makes people, makes people accountable.
[37:03] Speaker 1: And if people are fobbing off work because it's too difficult,
[37:07] Speaker 1: or maybe they don't think it's a concern, maybe they've
[37:12] Speaker 1: said that many a time and they've been shown that
[37:14] Speaker 1: it was the right advice. But make them accountable.
[37:18] Speaker 2: Yes, I think there's a lot of people we need
[37:20] Speaker 2: to make accountable, Gary, a lot, starting with politicians who
[37:27] Speaker 2: have refused to implement recommendations that have been tabled for
[37:35] Speaker 2: years now that could provide victims with support. There's a
[37:41] Speaker 2: lot of recommendations in there for victims. There's you know,
[37:44] Speaker 2: surveillance for victims, checking their phones to see if they've
[37:47] Speaker 2: been tracked. There's lots, there's lots in those recommendations. Why
[37:53] Speaker 2: aren't they employed?
[37:54] Speaker 1: Do you think they're reluctant?
[37:55] Speaker 2: Why do I think they're reluctant. I think money. They've
[38:02] Speaker 2: got to find the money in the budget. Well, they
[38:04] Speaker 2: seem to find money for lots of things, especially statues.
[38:08] Speaker 2: Look what I would like to see, you know here
[38:11] Speaker 2: in Victoria we have an election coming up. Okay, I'm tired.
[38:17] Speaker 2: I wasted my time with the current government for two years,
[38:24] Speaker 2: and after that I decided that I needed to turn
[38:28] Speaker 2: to the opposition. I've met with one to two opposition leaders,
[38:37] Speaker 2: have not met the last one. There's only one woman
[38:41] Speaker 2: that's been helping me fearlessly consistently. She's amazing, rede Heats.
[38:47] Speaker 2: She's a member of Parliament for the Liberal Party. But
[38:52] Speaker 2: I've not met the new opposition leader. I really don't
[38:55] Speaker 2: need to meet anybody else. What we need is for
[38:59] Speaker 2: the opposite is leader right now to absolutely support this,
[39:05] Speaker 2: should have bipartisan support. Make it a part of your
[39:09] Speaker 2: election platform. Seriously, say you will implement every single one
[39:15] Speaker 2: of those recommendations and the ankle bracelet. Why is it
[39:21] Speaker 2: that we hear politicians make all sorts of promises, especially
[39:26] Speaker 2: leading up to elections, if it's going to get them
[39:29] Speaker 2: their votes. You know, we heard it with the what
[39:32] Speaker 2: was it the a few months ago, the levy on
[39:38] Speaker 2: fire services I think, or the farmers whatever. We saw
[39:41] Speaker 2: the opposition leader get up there and say that if
[39:44] Speaker 2: they got elected, they would scrap that, and they make
[39:47] Speaker 2: all sorts of promises leading up to elections. This here
[39:51] Speaker 2: will save women. Michael O'Brien, who I believe is retired
[39:56] Speaker 2: from politics, but he was the shadow Attorney general when
[40:00] Speaker 2: happened to Celeste, and he stood in front of the
[40:02] Speaker 2: media saying a piece of paper couldn't keep Celeste safe.
[40:08] Speaker 2: He was going on about how useless it was. Yeah, right,
[40:14] Speaker 2: what have they done? What are they helping us? With?
[40:18] Speaker 2: One woman alone can't do it. She needs the backing
[40:23] Speaker 2: of her leadership. So I want to see what they're
[40:28] Speaker 2: going to do. I believe that it's one of those
[40:32] Speaker 2: things in the too hard basket. This is what it is.
[40:36] Speaker 2: I even have to wonder if it's all about money.
[40:39] Speaker 2: I think it's just the too hard basket for them.
[40:42] Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm confused with the money aspect of it. Or
[40:46] Speaker 1: a couple of points from what you've said, you would
[40:50] Speaker 1: think an issue about safety women's safety would be a
[40:54] Speaker 1: bipartisan approach to it. I can't see how politics. Possibly
[40:59] Speaker 1: this party says one thing, so the other party's going
[41:02] Speaker 1: to say the opposite. Wouldn't you have respect for both
[41:04] Speaker 1: parties more if they could come together on this and okay,
[41:08] Speaker 1: we'll work on this together, like we've actually got politicians
[41:11] Speaker 1: doing what politicians should be doing and working for the
[41:14] Speaker 1: people they represent. Exactly on the fiscal, the monetary side
[41:18] Speaker 1: of things, the cost of crime is dealing with crime
[41:23] Speaker 1: at the taile end of it, when you're putting people
[41:25] Speaker 1: in custody is huge. You've got trials, you've got everything.
[41:30] Speaker 1: Prevention of crime is fiscally the best way to deal
[41:34] Speaker 1: with crime. Not only fiscally, less victims, better society. You
[41:39] Speaker 1: prevent crime. It's not about the state elections, whether it's
[41:43] Speaker 1: Victoria and New South Wales or any state in the country.
[41:47] Speaker 1: Invariably it whips up about a law and order issue
[41:50] Speaker 1: and we're going to get more police, We're going to
[41:52] Speaker 1: get tough legislation, We're going to do this, We're going
[41:54] Speaker 1: to do that. It's about prevention, like if we can
[41:57] Speaker 1: prevent the crime. And what we're talking about with the
[42:01] Speaker 1: implementations from the recommendations, the majority I can't say because
[42:07] Speaker 1: I don't know them all, but the forty three recommendations
[42:10] Speaker 1: of them, a large portion of them is about preventing
[42:13] Speaker 1: the crime. And that's why it should be.
[42:16] Speaker 2: Exactly and it shouldn't be taking five and a half years.
[42:21] Speaker 2: When I was told that they'd be implemented, no time wasted,
[42:25] Speaker 2: I did ask for a timeline. She struggled in giving
[42:29] Speaker 2: me a reply that day. I wanted some indication and
[42:34] Speaker 2: then I was told, Aggie, legislation doesn't just change overnight.
[42:38] Speaker 2: Look again, I'm going to say rubbish. I don't think
[42:43] Speaker 2: I need to remind anybody we were put in house
[42:47] Speaker 2: arrest with no notice whatsoever, all of US law abiding
[42:52] Speaker 2: citizens under house arrest. As far as legislation doesn't change overnight,
[43:00] Speaker 2: I reminded that person that here the former premiere kept
[43:07] Speaker 2: them all in chambers twenty five hours to pass him
[43:13] Speaker 2: the emergency powers that he wanted overnight. So they change
[43:18] Speaker 2: legislation overnight when they care to. It's just I'm done
[43:25] Speaker 2: with the rubbish excuses because that's what they are.
[43:29] Speaker 1: There is no excuse for the amount of time it takes,
[43:32] Speaker 1: and it's just there's not a desire there. If there
[43:35] Speaker 1: was a desire there, as you pointed out, it could
[43:38] Speaker 1: have been implemented years ago. That's right on the back
[43:41] Speaker 1: of it. It could have been sorted out straight away.
[43:44] Speaker 1: I don't see as that complicated. I've been involved in
[43:48] Speaker 1: legislation being changed in New South Wales and I understand
[43:52] Speaker 1: how difficult it is and the efforts that people have
[43:55] Speaker 1: got to make inform legal people looking at Okay, what's
[43:58] Speaker 1: the impact of legislation changes? How is it going to impact?
[44:03] Speaker 1: Is the skygain the fall if we bring this legislation in.
[44:06] Speaker 1: I understand it takes time, but it's possible. And it's
[44:10] Speaker 1: only it only becomes difficult when everyone not everyone, when
[44:14] Speaker 1: people are resisting, making ridiculous comments and theorizing about what
[44:19] Speaker 1: might happen if we are civil liberties, if we put
[44:23] Speaker 1: monessores on people that are breaching.
[44:24] Speaker 2: And that's what it is. It's about them trying to
[44:27] Speaker 2: counteract arguments from all your human rights advocates.
[44:32] Speaker 1: So are they okay? So if it's political, because I'm
[44:35] Speaker 1: still trying to work out why why it doesn't serve them.
[44:39] Speaker 1: I would have thought it would be the popular approach too.
[44:43] Speaker 1: I think most people would like to see prevention. I
[44:46] Speaker 1: can't see that people would be saying, get it in
[44:49] Speaker 1: up in arms about it? So why is it so difficult?
[44:53] Speaker 2: Gary? You said they don't seem to have the desire.
[44:59] Speaker 2: That's what I think. I don't understand it. You would
[45:02] Speaker 2: think anybody would have the desire to prevent murders, okay,
[45:10] Speaker 2: And that is why it literally sickens me when I
[45:13] Speaker 2: see them or hear them, or you know, whether I
[45:15] Speaker 2: see them march with the crowd or whether I hear
[45:18] Speaker 2: them say enough is enough, and it sickens me. It
[45:23] Speaker 2: sickens me. It needs to be done. They made promises,
[45:28] Speaker 2: they made commitments. They told me Celester's death wouldn't be
[45:34] Speaker 2: in vain. So far it has been haggy.
[45:39] Speaker 1: Have you been given an indication when an inquest will
[45:42] Speaker 1: be held or if an inquest is going to be held?
[45:44] Speaker 2: That look, I haven't been given any indication as to
[45:49] Speaker 2: when the if Well, to me it was it was
[45:53] Speaker 2: never an if. I was told from day one that
[45:57] Speaker 2: I needed to wait until after the coronal inquest to
[46:02] Speaker 2: have certain answers, whether that was the internal investigation that
[46:05] Speaker 2: Victory Police did, and I was told that when I
[46:09] Speaker 2: met with them the second time to see where they
[46:11] Speaker 2: were at with the internal investigation, again I was told, Aggie,
[46:14] Speaker 2: we won't be able to give you anything until after
[46:16] Speaker 2: the coronal inquest. So it's never been a question on
[46:19] Speaker 2: my mind as if, you know, if it was going
[46:22] Speaker 2: to happen. It was just a matter of when. I
[46:25] Speaker 2: just don't understand what is the hold up? He was
[46:30] Speaker 2: sentenced two years over two years ago February of twenty four.
[46:37] Speaker 2: So that's done and dusted. What are they waiting for?
[46:42] Speaker 2: The whole point of the coronal inquest is to see
[46:45] Speaker 2: where they missed opportunity. This is the one mechanism that
[46:50] Speaker 2: we have to see whether there were missed opportunities, whether
[46:56] Speaker 2: it can be prevented, to see what findings the court
[46:59] Speaker 2: would be, whether there were mistakes made. This is what
[47:03] Speaker 2: would look I suppose it would look into why it
[47:08] Speaker 2: wasn't the first time recorded, Why were we told to
[47:11] Speaker 2: take out the personal Intervention order ourselves? I mean I
[47:15] Speaker 2: did research after this happened. I realized and found out
[47:18] Speaker 2: that actually that could have been done on so Lester's behalf.
[47:22] Speaker 2: It would have taken the onus off her. Who knows,
[47:25] Speaker 2: maybe he would have blamed her less, Maybe he would
[47:28] Speaker 2: have hated her less.
[47:29] Speaker 1: In a situation like that, I can understand how that
[47:33] Speaker 1: would have been beneficial. Like it, Yes, it's not even
[47:36] Speaker 1: in my hands. So when you got the three and
[47:38] Speaker 1: a half page threatening and pleading.
[47:42] Speaker 2: Maybe he would not have hated her as much as
[47:44] Speaker 2: he did to want payback because we didn't drop it right.
[47:50] Speaker 2: There are so many things that the coronial inquest is
[47:53] Speaker 2: supposed to be looking into. There's so many things, and
[47:56] Speaker 2: without me going into my legal teams submissions, was everything
[48:03] Speaker 2: done right? You know? I'm pretty sure you would have
[48:07] Speaker 2: seen in the opening summary that at one stage he
[48:09] Speaker 2: was going to he threatened to throw himself under a train.
[48:14] Speaker 2: Was he assessed? What happened there? We weren't told anything.
[48:20] Speaker 1: There's a lot.
[48:21] Speaker 2: We weren't given anything, Celeste. And I, even if I
[48:24] Speaker 2: removed I was with Celeste at all stages, if I
[48:28] Speaker 2: removed myself from that, Celeste was never given anything, any
[48:34] Speaker 2: anything you might say to a victim about what to
[48:36] Speaker 2: do to keep her safe.
[48:38] Speaker 1: I see failings, failings all the way through. But failings
[48:43] Speaker 1: could could have been addressed without much effort. Without much effort,
[48:48] Speaker 1: the fact that this person had carried on with that
[48:51] Speaker 1: type of behavior, And why weren't the police going around
[48:54] Speaker 1: and checking him, checking him constantly, And they'll say, well,
[48:59] Speaker 1: we don't don't have the resources. Well, look at what's happened.
[49:03] Speaker 2: Look at what's happened, Celeste. I keep asking myself, how
[49:13] Speaker 2: long can I keep doing this? When I don't even
[49:19] Speaker 2: I don't It's not like I get you back Sweetie. Right,
[49:23] Speaker 2: But if I don't, if I don't persist with this,
[49:28] Speaker 2: I feel like I not only let her down that night,
[49:34] Speaker 2: but I'm letting her down miserably by absolutely allowing her
[49:41] Speaker 2: death to be in vain. This they promised me change.
[49:46] Speaker 2: It has to bring about change. It has to prevent
[49:51] Speaker 2: murders that are preventable.
[49:54] Speaker 1: Aggie. I say to you, and I've seen a lot
[49:57] Speaker 1: of people in your situation, you're not letting your daughter down.
[50:01] Speaker 1: In one way. You're fighting for your campaigning. You're doing
[50:05] Speaker 1: everything humanly possible. You're trying to take on town hall
[50:09] Speaker 1: and it's hard sometimes. But yeah, I hope you hope
[50:13] Speaker 1: you're looking after yourself. I really do. But I know
[50:18] Speaker 1: Solice would be proud of you and in the fight
[50:21] Speaker 1: that you're doing in her memory. I'm just so sorry
[50:25] Speaker 1: you're going through this. That's what you're dealing with is
[50:29] Speaker 1: hard enough, and this is just adding on to the
[50:32] Speaker 1: pain and suffering. But you should be very proud of
[50:35] Speaker 1: what you're doing. And I hope if people have been
[50:38] Speaker 1: listening to this podcast right to your politicians campaign push,
[50:44] Speaker 1: you've heard arguments, You've heard us talk about what's happened.
[50:49] Speaker 1: Are we going to wait till this happens again before
[50:51] Speaker 1: we get outraged.
[50:52] Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, Gary, you mention the pain of going
[50:59] Speaker 2: through this, but the system and how it continues to
[51:04] Speaker 2: beat you down, how things can take this long.
[51:09] Speaker 1: It just.
[51:11] Speaker 2: I remember saying at the start of this to Celeste Sweety,
[51:19] Speaker 2: if your death didn't kill me, this system will. It's
[51:24] Speaker 2: just too it's too unfair, it's too harsh, it's too uncaring.
[51:31] Speaker 2: I continue to repeat myself. Victims don't choose to be victims,
[51:37] Speaker 2: and there should be a lot more there four victims
[51:44] Speaker 2: to keep them safe, but when they're not able to
[51:46] Speaker 2: be kept safe, certainly to validate that their life was
[51:50] Speaker 2: worth something.
[51:52] Speaker 1: I hear, and I think you have the points that
[51:57] Speaker 1: you're arguing, and the way that you've you've conducted yourself
[52:01] Speaker 1: is outstanding and it's something that you should be should
[52:05] Speaker 1: be proud of. And you're driven by anger and the motion,
[52:09] Speaker 1: but you're very clinical in the way that you're saying
[52:12] Speaker 1: these things, and what you're saying makes sense, and you're
[52:15] Speaker 1: backing up all the things that you want done, and
[52:19] Speaker 1: surely a system that is in place can at least
[52:23] Speaker 1: provide the answers that you're looking for and I don't
[52:26] Speaker 1: think it's a big ass five and a half years
[52:28] Speaker 1: down the track, when's the inquest or people at least
[52:32] Speaker 1: notify you that the inquest is set down for this date.
[52:36] Speaker 1: And the politicians that make promises to people, they should
[52:38] Speaker 1: back up those promises. Yeah, because it's more harmful. Don't
[52:43] Speaker 1: promise something you're not going to not going to deliver.
[52:46] Speaker 2: They never should have said. They never should have said
[52:48] Speaker 2: a damn thing.
[52:49] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[52:50] Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I was even aware to you know,
[52:53] Speaker 2: are we entitled to anything? You know when this first happens.
[52:57] Speaker 2: To remember, you don't go into the just it's a
[53:00] Speaker 2: system understanding or knowing anything about it. I didn't know
[53:04] Speaker 2: that there was a Aviatorian Law Reform Commission that could
[53:09] Speaker 2: do an inquiry into what could be changed. We didn't
[53:12] Speaker 2: know the public. In fact, I remember doing something or
[53:15] Speaker 2: Current Affairs because I wanted the public to be aware
[53:18] Speaker 2: that you could make submissions to these commissions that would
[53:22] Speaker 2: apparently be considered and taken seriously. That's how the recommendations
[53:27] Speaker 2: came about why make promises you're not going to keep.
[53:35] Speaker 1: I know, I was surprised when we first started speaking
[53:38] Speaker 1: and we're talking about the inquest, and I was asking you,
[53:41] Speaker 1: why are you pushing so hard to the inquest, and
[53:43] Speaker 1: you said, I didn't even know what an inquest was
[53:46] Speaker 1: at the time, and they told you that the answers
[53:49] Speaker 1: will be at the inquest. I just hope they're not
[53:51] Speaker 1: using a delayed in quest just to hide behind because
[53:55] Speaker 1: we can't give answers. And I hear that too often
[53:58] Speaker 1: in cases that we're waiting for the coroner, and if
[54:02] Speaker 1: it just gets delayed and delayed, no one gets answers,
[54:05] Speaker 1: and it's almost like they're hoping that you just move
[54:10] Speaker 1: on with your life.
[54:10] Speaker 2: And that's just not going to happen. I know that
[54:14] Speaker 2: I was promised it too many times, explained what it was,
[54:19] Speaker 2: told what it would unveil, and to me, as nice
[54:25] Speaker 2: as the police commissioner was, police investigating themselves, that's not
[54:29] Speaker 2: good enough. It just isn't.
[54:31] Speaker 1: No. I hear a lot of people, a lot of
[54:34] Speaker 1: people say that, and I do understand it. Wrapping up
[54:39] Speaker 1: what we've talked about, I think we've got to have
[54:44] Speaker 1: an understanding. These are the things and the understanding of
[54:48] Speaker 1: what stalking is all about. See, there's a red flag
[54:51] Speaker 1: that it is and the behavior that things that are
[54:55] Speaker 1: put in place. Please, if people are reporting these type
[54:59] Speaker 1: of situations to police, they need to take it seriously.
[55:02] Speaker 1: That's something that's definitely needed. Let's consider the education of
[55:09] Speaker 1: police in regards to the nature of stalking. I think
[55:13] Speaker 1: that's reasonable. And for the life of me and for
[55:15] Speaker 1: the life of you, why aren't we bringing in monitors
[55:19] Speaker 1: like it just seems such a simple, simple solution.
[55:22] Speaker 2: Ultimately, that is what's going to save women's lives.
[55:25] Speaker 1: Yeah, I thought that would be the one thing that
[55:29] Speaker 1: we'd all have to just agree on and go, hey, yeah,
[55:31] Speaker 1: we've got the technology, now let's use that. It just
[55:34] Speaker 1: seems to be no brain. But look, we'll stay in touch.
[55:39] Speaker 1: And I hope people are as fired up about this
[55:43] Speaker 1: as you've made me, because you've made me read through
[55:47] Speaker 1: all the stuff sitting down and talking with you, not
[55:49] Speaker 1: just here, but in the conversations that we've had. I'm
[55:52] Speaker 1: frustrated for you, and I can see the toile that's
[55:56] Speaker 1: taking on you. You hang in there and look after yourself,
[55:58] Speaker 1: and you're doing your daughter priota.
[56:01] Speaker 2: Thanks Gary, mm hmm.

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.