# The innocent cop falsely labelled as a serial rapist: Neil Mercer Pt. 2

An episode of [I Catch Killers with Gary Jubelin](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1506667049), 24 Aug 2026, 1 h 06 min.

Audio: https://p.podderapp.com/2544644999/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/2fb3740d-3436-44af-8cc0-a91900716aa5/5bc8c2ed-b718-4f44-beb3-ac2a005246cc/34ed3713-5a01-43d7-a5fe-b4b00053b430/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=786928c3-10c1-4cef-a7bf-ac2a005246d0

Veteran journalist and author Neil Mercer returns to I Catch Killers for part two of his confronting examination of wrongful convictions in the Australian justice system. In this episode, Neil and Gary Jubelin revisit one of the most embarrassing periods in NSW Police history: the case of Harry Blackburn, a former police superintendent publicly branded a serial rapist and paraded before the media before he was ever formally charged. They unravel the extraordinary chain of failures that led to his very public downfall, a saga that only ended when a Royal Commission finally exposed the truth. They also unpack DNA evidence, long considered the gold standard in forensic science, and just how far from infallible it can be, and the broader, systemic issues that allow innocent people to be wrongly convicted: unreliable eyewitness identification, the historical use of "police verbals" and false confessions, inadequate legal representation, and the unique challenges faced by First Nations Australians navigating a justice system not built with their language or culture in mind. Neil Mercer is the author of Falsely Convicted: True Stories of Injustice in Australia. Want to hear more from Neil Mercer? Listen to his other interviews with Gary on I Catch Killers here and here. You can watch I Catch Killers on Youtube here. Follow I Catch Killers: Instagram: @icatchkillers Tiktok: @icatchkillerspodcast Facebook: @icatchkillers Email the show at icatchkillers@news.com.au 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 see aside of life the average persons never exposed
[0:08] Speaker 1: to I spent thirty four years as a cop. For
[0:11] Speaker 1: twenty five of those years, I was catching killers. That's
[0:14] Speaker 1: what I did for a living. I was a homicide detective.
[0:17] Speaker 1: I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead, I'm taking
[0:21] Speaker 1: the public into the world in which I operated. The
[0:23] Speaker 1: guests I talk to each week have amazing stories from
[0:26] Speaker 1: all sides of the law. The interviews are raw and honest,
[0:29] Speaker 1: just like the people I talk to. Some of the
[0:31] Speaker 1: content and language might be confronting. That's because no one
[0:34] Speaker 1: who comes into contact with crime is left unchanged. Join
[0:38] Speaker 1: me now as I take you into this world. When
[0:47] Speaker 1: I was in the police, former Superintendent Harry Blackburn was
[0:50] Speaker 1: wrongfully charged with twenty five serious offenses, including rape and kidnapping.
[0:56] Speaker 1: It was a masterclass in how not to run of
[0:58] Speaker 1: an investigation, and I still shake my head in disbelief
[1:01] Speaker 1: that police even considered charging him. It's just one of
[1:04] Speaker 1: the many devastating cases veteran journalists Neil Mercer examines in
[1:08] Speaker 1: his new book Falsely Convicted. In Part two, of our chat.
[1:12] Speaker 1: We pull apart exactly how wrongful convictions happen. It includes
[1:16] Speaker 1: unreliable memory, false confessions, police and prosecutor's incompetence, and also
[1:21] Speaker 1: the incompetence of defense barristers, forensic failures, and how vulnerable people,
[1:26] Speaker 1: particularly First Nations Australians are too often denied the chance
[1:30] Speaker 1: to properly exercise their right to be presumed innocent. Have
[1:34] Speaker 1: a listen. I think you're going to be fascinated by
[1:36] Speaker 1: what we talk about. Neil Mercer, Welcome back to part
[1:40] Speaker 1: two of I Catchkillers. Thank you for those that listen
[1:44] Speaker 1: to part one. Neil and I had lengthy discussion about
[1:47] Speaker 1: some of the cases that resulted in people being falsely convicted.
[1:51] Speaker 1: And it's quite quite frightening when you think about it,
[1:55] Speaker 1: because the courts are set up, there's a lot of
[1:58] Speaker 1: checks and balances in place.
[2:00] Speaker 2: There are, and look, I think most of the time
[2:04] Speaker 2: it works. I'm not here to pull down or to
[2:08] Speaker 2: argue we need a brand new legal system or anything
[2:10] Speaker 2: like that. Particularly, and it's all relative, particularly when you
[2:13] Speaker 2: look at what's happening in the United States. Say, but
[2:17] Speaker 2: there are times when the system gets it wrong and
[2:20] Speaker 2: people say, oh, you know, half the people in prison
[2:23] Speaker 2: say they're innocent, and I go, yeah, I know, and
[2:26] Speaker 2: that's obviously not true. But occasionally some people are they
[2:31] Speaker 2: are they are innocent and they have been wrongly convicted,
[2:34] Speaker 2: and the nine cases go through. You know, as we
[2:37] Speaker 2: discussed a range of a range of reasons why where
[2:40] Speaker 2: the system fell down. Was it corruption, was it misconduct,
[2:44] Speaker 2: or was it just incompetence?
[2:46] Speaker 1: Quite often and it looks like it's a combination of
[2:50] Speaker 1: all those things. I as a police officer, so I
[2:53] Speaker 1: was frustrated sometimes at the protections that were put in
[2:56] Speaker 1: place to protect the accused person. But having said that,
[3:00] Speaker 1: understood the need for it, so it was just okay,
[3:02] Speaker 1: there's a lot of protections there. With homicide investigations, it's
[3:06] Speaker 1: very rare that you'd have someone played guilty to murder,
[3:09] Speaker 1: so they were quite often contested in the courts and
[3:12] Speaker 1: very rarely when I convicted someone of murder, or someone
[3:17] Speaker 1: was convicted of murder did they not lodge an appeal
[3:20] Speaker 1: at some stage, So that became the norm. My frustration
[3:24] Speaker 1: was that if the courts get it wrong in convicting someone,
[3:28] Speaker 1: they may and this is a flip side, they may
[3:31] Speaker 1: also get it wrong in acquitting people. I put that
[3:35] Speaker 1: to the tests on the back of the Barable case,
[3:38] Speaker 1: with campaigning very publicly for the double jeopardy legislation that
[3:42] Speaker 1: came in, where if someone had been acquitted for a crime,
[3:47] Speaker 1: there was now provision to have that person recharge if
[3:51] Speaker 1: it was fresh and compelling evidence. And then the interests
[3:53] Speaker 1: of justice, which was a high high level to obtain,
[3:58] Speaker 1: and even with the bearable and that was bored in
[4:00] Speaker 1: specifically for the bearable case. We got it to the
[4:04] Speaker 1: high courts, but decisions were made that we couldn't couldn't
[4:07] Speaker 1: prosecute it. So to me, that was a way of
[4:11] Speaker 1: acknowledging that there are failings in the courts, not just
[4:14] Speaker 1: from the prosecution side of things when someone's wrongly convicted,
[4:18] Speaker 1: but when someone might be acquitted where the evidence should
[4:21] Speaker 1: have been to the contrary. So we've got all those
[4:26] Speaker 1: protections in place, but we still stuff it up on occasions.
[4:31] Speaker 2: On occasions, I can understand the frustrations of police officers,
[4:35] Speaker 2: not as well as you or the detectives I've met
[4:38] Speaker 2: over many years. I can understand that that you know,
[4:41] Speaker 2: you can feel constrained by the law, but as you say,
[4:44] Speaker 2: there is that protection there that I don't have to
[4:47] Speaker 2: say anything to you if I don't want to. I
[4:49] Speaker 2: have the right to silence, and I think, you know,
[4:52] Speaker 2: and the presumption of innocence all those things, you know.
[4:58] Speaker 2: The cases I've looked at sort of tried to do
[5:02] Speaker 2: cases that are different and that might inform people as
[5:06] Speaker 2: to how things go wrong, where they go wrong, whether
[5:10] Speaker 2: it's tunnel vision or the use of prison informants. Say,
[5:14] Speaker 2: which was very popular at one stage, particularly by the
[5:18] Speaker 2: then National Crime Authority, was that that that was well,
[5:23] Speaker 2: that all fell in a heap, you know, and embarrassing
[5:27] Speaker 2: to say the least heap.
[5:30] Speaker 3: You know.
[5:30] Speaker 2: There's misidentification evidence. Identification evidence, as you know, as all
[5:36] Speaker 2: detectives and lawyers know, is notoriously unreliable. Or the memory
[5:41] Speaker 2: I can see, I can see something that happened across
[5:44] Speaker 2: the street, and the person next to me might see
[5:46] Speaker 2: something almost completely different, and we're not lying. That's yours,
[5:53] Speaker 2: that's my recollection. So there's cases in there where somebody
[5:57] Speaker 2: has been convicted on identification evidence. And and again the
[6:01] Speaker 2: identification evidence has got a bit better with time as
[6:04] Speaker 2: the months went on, and when they finally impeer in
[6:07] Speaker 2: court rather than sort of perhaps saying as they did originally,
[6:12] Speaker 2: I'm not sure, or yeah, I think that's him. They go, yeah,
[6:16] Speaker 2: that's him, which from a prosecution point of view is great,
[6:21] Speaker 2: but it's not what they said at the beginning.
[6:22] Speaker 1: Again, it's because people that don't understand the system and
[6:25] Speaker 1: they put trust in police safe, trust in the media.
[6:29] Speaker 1: What the media is reporting, Well, it's reported in the media,
[6:31] Speaker 1: so therefore it must be must be true, and then
[6:35] Speaker 1: the legal system. Well, these people are a lot smarter
[6:38] Speaker 1: than I am, so you know, you can see why
[6:40] Speaker 1: it goes wrong. Speaking again, I'm wrong, and I think
[6:43] Speaker 1: this one's an indefensible one. That the Harry Blackburnt case.
[6:48] Speaker 1: I'm an ex New South Wales Police officer. It's not
[6:51] Speaker 1: our proudest moment. It's balanced out by we had someone
[6:54] Speaker 1: that's competent as Clive Small reviewing the case. Do you
[6:57] Speaker 1: want to tell us about that case? Because that I
[6:59] Speaker 1: knew about it. It's folk law in New South Wales Police,
[7:04] Speaker 1: but I got a little bit more understanding of it
[7:06] Speaker 1: from what you covered in the book.
[7:08] Speaker 2: Well, you talk about the role of the media in
[7:12] Speaker 2: some cases, and this is a classic case, Harry Blackburn.
[7:15] Speaker 2: This is nineteen eighty nine in Sydney. Harry Blackburn is
[7:19] Speaker 2: an ex New South Wales Police officer. He raised to
[7:22] Speaker 2: the rank of superintendent. He was in charge of Scientific.
[7:25] Speaker 2: He's left the police force on good terms and gone
[7:27] Speaker 2: to work for the Commonwealth Attorney General's Department in a
[7:31] Speaker 2: particular role. In nineteen eighty nine, one day, the media
[7:36] Speaker 2: is called up to police headquarters. We've got to leave
[7:40] Speaker 2: all your recording devices behind. This is not off the
[7:42] Speaker 2: record briefing. This is a big deal, a straw, a
[7:46] Speaker 2: big story is brewing. And they're then briefed in great
[7:50] Speaker 2: detail about how the New South Wales Police have been
[7:54] Speaker 2: reinvestigating a series of historical rapes. Some occurred in the
[7:59] Speaker 2: late seventies, some around nine to eighty five eighty eight,
[8:04] Speaker 2: so there's two sets of sexual assaults. The reporters are
[8:09] Speaker 2: told they've been done by the same man and they
[8:12] Speaker 2: all occurred south in the southern suburbs of Sydney. The
[8:17] Speaker 2: media is stunned to hear that the person who's alleged
[8:22] Speaker 2: to have done this is Harry Blackburn, the former superintendent
[8:26] Speaker 2: who was in charge of Scientific. It's even more stunning
[8:29] Speaker 2: because of this stage Harry's not been arrested. He's actually
[8:33] Speaker 2: at work oblivious to the fact that happened. As to
[8:37] Speaker 2: what's about to happen. The media has given all the
[8:40] Speaker 2: details so that radio, TV, newspapers are all set to go.
[8:46] Speaker 2: When Harry gets arrested. About an hour or so later,
[8:50] Speaker 2: he comes down in the lift, makes a joke to
[8:53] Speaker 2: his mate because he sees all these blokes in suits
[8:55] Speaker 2: standing around and goes it looks like there's a raid
[8:58] Speaker 2: on and they come up to him and say, mister Blackburn,
[9:02] Speaker 2: you're under arrest. There's no big deal, you're under arrest.
[9:07] Speaker 2: It was rather a big deal. He's taken to a
[9:11] Speaker 2: particular place. The media has been told where he's going
[9:15] Speaker 2: to be taken to. Long and short of it is
[9:18] Speaker 2: he's charged with being a serial rapist. And he is
[9:24] Speaker 2: then and this is probably one of the most shameful
[9:28] Speaker 2: names for the New South Wales Police. He's walked from
[9:32] Speaker 2: where he's been interviewed, where he's sort of denied anything
[9:36] Speaker 2: or not said anything. He's walked in front of multiple
[9:39] Speaker 2: TV cameras, newspapers, media, radio, everybody for a considerable length
[9:45] Speaker 2: of time.
[9:45] Speaker 1: So we the meaning of which would have been given
[9:48] Speaker 1: the heads up. Oh, yeah, it was approved. It was
[9:51] Speaker 1: actually approved by the most senior police in the New
[9:54] Speaker 1: South Wales Police Force. In fact, at the earlier media briefing,
[10:00] Speaker 1: the reporters were told that this whole operation Operation Photo
[10:04] Speaker 1: had been you know, under the close supervision of the Commissioner,
[10:09] Speaker 1: but in particular Assistant Commissioner Tony Lauer. He had something
[10:14] Speaker 1: called executive oversight.
[10:16] Speaker 2: I don't know what that means. Well, that's joined the club.
[10:20] Speaker 2: In the end, nobody knew what that meant and that
[10:23] Speaker 2: therein lies part of the problem. Harry has walked in
[10:25] Speaker 2: front of the media. His vision of him walking out
[10:31] Speaker 2: of the police station after he's been interviewed is all
[10:35] Speaker 2: over the media. The story goes around the world. It
[10:38] Speaker 2: was in I think it was even appeared in a
[10:40] Speaker 2: paper in Istanbul that he is senior cop, former senior cop,
[10:44] Speaker 2: charged with being a serial rapist. You know, it's even
[10:50] Speaker 2: more crazy when you realize that identification evidence in that
[10:56] Speaker 2: case was crucial. On the night of Harry's arrest, two
[11:02] Speaker 2: of the police involved are driving home in the early
[11:05] Speaker 2: hours of the morning and they have a terrible accident.
[11:08] Speaker 2: The officer who was apparently in charge suffers brain damage.
[11:12] Speaker 2: The investigation or the preparation of the brief of evidence
[11:16] Speaker 2: to put Harry Blackburn before the court is in disarray.
[11:21] Speaker 2: They call in a detective by the name of Clive Small,
[11:24] Speaker 2: who at that stage was a detective inspector, and what
[11:28] Speaker 2: he finds is an investigation in disarray because statements have
[11:33] Speaker 2: not been properly taken, you know, things haven't been written down.
[11:40] Speaker 2: He's got to reinvestigate the whole thing because on the
[11:45] Speaker 2: face of it, it looks like Harry might be the
[11:48] Speaker 2: wrong blot. At that stage in nine eighty nine, I
[11:52] Speaker 2: was working as a reporter for ABCTV four Corners and
[11:56] Speaker 2: I remember getting a phone call from somebody who said, oh,
[12:01] Speaker 2: I want to talk to you about the Harry Blackburn case.
[12:04] Speaker 2: And I said, oh, yeah, yeah, I've seen him. He's
[12:06] Speaker 2: obviously I thought he was guilty as hell.
[12:08] Speaker 1: You know, the confidence in which it was played.
[12:11] Speaker 2: Out exactly, the confidence, I mean, the confidence of the police.
[12:15] Speaker 2: They had a press conference on the night of his arrest.
[12:18] Speaker 2: He's walked in front of the cameras We've got him,
[12:21] Speaker 2: and I thought, you know, good work, good work. The
[12:24] Speaker 2: bloke on the other end says he's the wrong man.
[12:28] Speaker 2: I said, well, what do you mean there's not enough evidence,
[12:30] Speaker 2: you know, it's just the brief's a bit shy, have
[12:33] Speaker 2: a gallop, and he said, no, he's the wrong blood group.
[12:37] Speaker 2: And I went, I remember going, that can't be right anyway.
[12:43] Speaker 2: I start making some investigations, and I meet with Harry
[12:49] Speaker 2: Blackburn's lawyers, and I meet with Harry Blackburn and he says,
[12:54] Speaker 2: I'm innocent. This is a shocking mistake. Appeared to do
[13:00] Speaker 2: an interview, you know, if you're prepared to look at
[13:03] Speaker 2: some of the facts in this matter. So I then
[13:06] Speaker 2: went off on an investigation. And I'd been given the
[13:11] Speaker 2: statement of facts in which a lot of the details
[13:14] Speaker 2: of the case had been laid out, had been handed
[13:16] Speaker 2: up in court. And I found a number of the
[13:20] Speaker 2: witnesses who and this includes women who were sexually assaulted them.
[13:27] Speaker 2: Of this offender from the late seventies and eighty five
[13:31] Speaker 2: to eighty eight was he was a sort of a
[13:33] Speaker 2: lover's lane person. He would sneak up on young couples
[13:37] Speaker 2: in cars in isolated areas, grab the bloke, lock the
[13:42] Speaker 2: bloke in the boot, and rape the women. I had
[13:48] Speaker 2: these names of men and women, and I tracked down
[13:53] Speaker 2: and this is when I knew that something was seriously wrong,
[13:56] Speaker 2: not just what I'd been told in that phone call.
[13:59] Speaker 2: I tracked down one of the women who had been
[14:01] Speaker 2: sexually assaulted and she agreed to speak, but not on camera.
[14:05] Speaker 2: So I went to her home and I remember chatting
[14:08] Speaker 2: to her and it's, you know, it's a very difficult conversation.
[14:11] Speaker 2: It's naturally. Towards the end of it, I said something like,
[14:18] Speaker 2: so you think Harry Blackburn's guilty, he's the man, and
[14:21] Speaker 2: she said, oh no, oh no, he's far too old.
[14:25] Speaker 2: The person who assaulted me was much much younger. I said,
[14:30] Speaker 2: did you tell the police that? She said, oh yeah,
[14:32] Speaker 2: And I said did they put that in your statement?
[14:34] Speaker 2: And she said no, no, they left that bit out.
[14:38] Speaker 2: And I remember, I can still remember that moment really clearly.
[14:42] Speaker 2: I just thought, holy shit, you know they've left. How
[14:46] Speaker 2: are they going to jump over that hurdle in court?
[14:49] Speaker 2: I think in the end they were not going to
[14:51] Speaker 2: call her. I found another witness who was an eyewitness.
[14:56] Speaker 2: It was a bloke who'd been in the car with
[14:58] Speaker 2: his girlfriend who had given a positive quote unquote identification
[15:05] Speaker 2: to police. He was interviewed him this is all on
[15:09] Speaker 2: this one was on camera and I said, well, what
[15:14] Speaker 2: did you see and he said, oh, the bloke came
[15:15] Speaker 2: to the side of the car. He had a bala
[15:18] Speaker 2: lava on said don't you know, don't do anything stupid
[15:23] Speaker 2: and it'll all be okay, drags him out, puts him
[15:27] Speaker 2: in the boot. So he's seen a figure in a
[15:30] Speaker 2: balot lava at one o'clock in the morning for about
[15:34] Speaker 2: three seconds. And I said to him, the police say,
[15:37] Speaker 2: you've made a positive identification. He goes, yeah, that's right,
[15:41] Speaker 2: and I'm this is the gist of the conversation.
[15:43] Speaker 1: Gary.
[15:44] Speaker 2: I can't remember the exact words, but I said, you know, hypothetically,
[15:49] Speaker 2: if you were in court now, could you identify Harry
[15:52] Speaker 2: Blackburn as the man? He said no. I said, well,
[15:56] Speaker 2: so how positive were you and he said I was
[16:00] Speaker 2: about seventy five percent and the investigator said, oh, that's
[16:03] Speaker 2: good enough for us, and I just went wow. And
[16:08] Speaker 2: there were a couple more interviews like that. It was
[16:13] Speaker 2: one of the more extraordinary cases and things got even
[16:17] Speaker 2: Things then got really complicated because Detective Inspector Clive Small
[16:21] Speaker 2: has taken over the brief After the investigators had the
[16:24] Speaker 2: car accident, rumors start to circulate that and the rumors
[16:30] Speaker 2: start to circulate. At the same time, I'm preparing a
[16:33] Speaker 2: story for four Corners that Clive Small is corrupt. He's
[16:36] Speaker 2: gutted the brief that you know, in the beginning there
[16:40] Speaker 2: was a really good brief and he's now deliberately making
[16:44] Speaker 2: it poor so that, you know, Harry Blackburn won't be
[16:47] Speaker 2: processed that when the dark well, this is the that's right, absolutely,
[16:51] Speaker 2: this is white knights and black knights.
[16:56] Speaker 1: So you can't make you can't make this.
[17:01] Speaker 2: And you know, as I had to go and see
[17:05] Speaker 2: Clive because I've heard the rumors, and I was saying
[17:07] Speaker 2: at his home and I said, Clive, these these are
[17:11] Speaker 2: the rumors. He was really really upset, as you would be,
[17:14] Speaker 2: and he said, look the brief. I'm preparing this brief.
[17:17] Speaker 2: The brief will stand the test of time. Anyway. I'm
[17:22] Speaker 2: very nervous, and for Corners is very nervous because these
[17:25] Speaker 2: rumors are going around Parliament. They're coming, the ministers are
[17:30] Speaker 2: talking about them, reporters are going, oh Small, Clive Small's corrupt.
[17:37] Speaker 2: But Small presses on with his investigation and finds that
[17:42] Speaker 2: a number of the witnesses, in fact, three of the
[17:45] Speaker 2: women have told police Harry Blackburn was not the man,
[17:50] Speaker 2: and that he's got alibis. On one of them, he's
[17:54] Speaker 2: had a police conference in Darwin.
[17:56] Speaker 1: It's a hard one together.
[17:57] Speaker 2: That's a hard one to get over. On another, he's
[18:00] Speaker 2: got a friend who remembers them being in Newcastle on
[18:03] Speaker 2: a particular race day for particular reasons. And there's another
[18:06] Speaker 2: one where other police officers remember being with him on
[18:09] Speaker 2: that weekend at another police conference. The case was that
[18:14] Speaker 2: one man's done all of these. He's the wrong blood group.
[18:18] Speaker 2: He's got alibis which are rock solid. He's with other
[18:22] Speaker 2: police officers. Clive Small in his report to the hierarchy.
[18:29] Speaker 2: They're not very happy to hear from Clive.
[18:32] Speaker 1: I'm sure they wouldn't be because it was hierarchy that
[18:35] Speaker 1: were blowing.
[18:35] Speaker 2: The hierarchy going, we're capable of catching our own. You know,
[18:41] Speaker 2: we've done a brilliant job. We've used the latest DNA,
[18:44] Speaker 2: we've done this. We've been to London and Tony Laud,
[18:48] Speaker 2: the Assistant Commissioner who was in prime pole position to be.
[18:53] Speaker 1: The next I'm going to have to stop you here.
[18:56] Speaker 1: You alleging that the police would be making operations decisions
[18:59] Speaker 1: based on promotion opportunities.
[19:01] Speaker 2: Outrageous, outrageous, shocking, shocking. They've allied themselves very closely, really closely.
[19:09] Speaker 2: Tony alows down a press conference before he heads off
[19:12] Speaker 2: to the opera. This s inne the opera house. So
[19:15] Speaker 2: they've said this is a brilliant operation. Weeks later, Clive Small,
[19:20] Speaker 2: who's reinvestigated, had gone back to the witnesses and found
[19:25] Speaker 2: all these alibis, all this evidence that says Harry Blackburn
[19:30] Speaker 2: did not do it. Clive goes to the hierarchy. As
[19:33] Speaker 2: I say, they're not very pleased to see him anyway,
[19:37] Speaker 2: he prevails. The brief goes to the DPP Reg Blanche
[19:41] Speaker 2: it was back then who later says of the brief
[19:45] Speaker 2: of evidence prepared by Inspector Small, it was one of
[19:47] Speaker 2: the best briefs I've ever seen. The charges are dropped
[19:52] Speaker 2: and the Government of the day announces an inquiry to
[19:56] Speaker 2: be done behind closed doors. Can't have a royal mission.
[20:01] Speaker 2: As part of the four Corner story, I go to
[20:03] Speaker 2: see John Dowd, the Attorney General, do an interview with
[20:06] Speaker 2: him on camera. Ted Pickering, I think was a police minister.
[20:10] Speaker 2: The interview with Pickering is done on a Friday We're
[20:13] Speaker 2: going to Wear on Monday, and I'm still pretty nervous
[20:16] Speaker 2: about this whole thing because the other journals are going, mate,
[20:20] Speaker 2: you're cruising for a bruising here. This is the smallest corup.
[20:23] Speaker 2: I've got it completely wrong. I'm really nervous. And I
[20:27] Speaker 2: do the interview with Ted Pickering on the Friday, and Pickering,
[20:33] Speaker 2: like Dowd before him, says there's absolutely no need for
[20:35] Speaker 2: a royal commission. Next day, the Saturday, they announce a
[20:39] Speaker 2: Royal commission, which was something of a relief, I guess.
[20:45] Speaker 2: And we go to wear On the Monday, in which
[20:47] Speaker 2: we recount all this evidence that Harry Blackburn is in
[20:50] Speaker 2: fact not just innocent. We've sort of touched on this
[20:55] Speaker 2: earlier that some people get off charges and you still think,
[21:00] Speaker 2: look he's got off, but I still reckon he did it.
[21:04] Speaker 2: This is not one of those cases. All the evidence
[21:06] Speaker 2: was that the New South Wales Police had got the
[21:09] Speaker 2: wrong man, and the Royal Commissioner, just as Jack Lee,
[21:14] Speaker 2: doesn't inquire and very quickly dismisses the Black Knights versus
[21:18] Speaker 2: White Knight's stuff as absolute rubbish. There's no evidence for it,
[21:23] Speaker 2: and it appears that the case against Blackburn had its
[21:30] Speaker 2: beginning twenty years before, with one police officer having quote
[21:35] Speaker 2: a gut feeling that Harry back then looked like one
[21:40] Speaker 2: of the identicate photos, and Harry said to him, well,
[21:43] Speaker 2: if you think that's right, sticking in the running sheets,
[21:45] Speaker 2: you know, the day to day account, nothing's in the
[21:49] Speaker 2: running sheets. But they've got it completely and utterly wrong
[21:55] Speaker 2: on so many levels that you know. It was just extraordinary.
[21:59] Speaker 2: And I was very thankful for the Royal Commission because
[22:04] Speaker 2: the report that I did was right. He was wrongly accused.
[22:11] Speaker 2: He didn't go to jail, so he wasn't ever convicted,
[22:15] Speaker 2: but he was certainly convicted in the court of public opinion.
[22:18] Speaker 2: On the night and in the days after that walk
[22:21] Speaker 2: in front of the cameras, I mean I thought he
[22:24] Speaker 2: was guilty.
[22:25] Speaker 1: Well, I was in the police center. I remember looking
[22:27] Speaker 1: at it going oh got him, yeah, and looking at it.
[22:32] Speaker 1: So the identification Eviden's not right, the blood group's not right,
[22:37] Speaker 1: the alibi.
[22:39] Speaker 2: How do you jump over that? And the detectives doing it.
[22:42] Speaker 2: I think we're from something called the Tactical Intelligence Group, which,
[22:45] Speaker 2: as its name suggests, we're not meant to be investigating.
[22:49] Speaker 2: They were supposed to be gathering intelligence and there were
[22:53] Speaker 2: other detectives involved, and in the end, as it turns out,
[22:56] Speaker 2: nobody knew who was in charge, despite Commissioner Allow having
[23:01] Speaker 2: executive oversight, and even the Royal Commissioner Jack Lee made
[23:06] Speaker 2: a comment about that. He said, whatever that means. Nobody
[23:10] Speaker 2: knew what that meant. Nobody knew who was running the show.
[23:13] Speaker 2: It was a shambles. And one interesting thing here is
[23:20] Speaker 2: that if the two or three police officers who were
[23:26] Speaker 2: leading it, if one in particular had not been involved
[23:30] Speaker 2: in that accident on the night and the brief had
[23:33] Speaker 2: been let run, the Royal Commissioner said, there was every
[23:37] Speaker 2: chance Harry Blackburn might have been found guilty because the
[23:41] Speaker 2: women who said no, it's not him would not have
[23:44] Speaker 2: been witnesses and the defense would not have known that
[23:48] Speaker 2: they'd said that because they weren't called. Yeah, it is frightening.
[23:54] Speaker 2: It was one of the It was not one of
[23:56] Speaker 2: the highlights of the New South Wales Police, I've got
[23:59] Speaker 2: to say. And Tony Lauer, who'd stood up and used
[24:04] Speaker 2: this as an example, I think of how we can
[24:07] Speaker 2: investigate our own and we can do these things brilliantly.
[24:11] Speaker 2: He gets promoted to commissioner.
[24:13] Speaker 1: But on the basis of that, and I think it
[24:15] Speaker 1: was something that shaped Clive Small's career because he had
[24:19] Speaker 1: to stand up to not being the popular person. And
[24:22] Speaker 1: I know when he took over crime agencies, which was
[24:26] Speaker 1: when they bought all the regional crime squads together and
[24:28] Speaker 1: were based in Surrey Hills, Clive headed up that and
[24:32] Speaker 1: the reporting conditions and the way we had to document
[24:35] Speaker 1: the investigations, progress reports and all that. A lot of
[24:39] Speaker 1: it was set up on the basis of Clive seeing
[24:41] Speaker 1: how bad an investigation could go. And I think I'd
[24:44] Speaker 1: like to think it's carried us in a good direction.
[24:47] Speaker 2: In this case. I mean the fact that nobody knew
[24:49] Speaker 2: who was in charge, the fact you had detectives investigating
[24:53] Speaker 2: who should not have been investigating, and the factor had
[24:57] Speaker 2: that hierarchy so heavily invest did improving that this guy
[25:02] Speaker 2: was guilty. Because they've all stood up in front of
[25:04] Speaker 2: the world on camera and said basically said that. It's
[25:09] Speaker 2: still a perplexing case. And I'm not sure if I
[25:14] Speaker 2: just think it was incompetence that there was no chain
[25:17] Speaker 2: of command, nobody knew who was doing what, things weren't
[25:21] Speaker 2: being written down, and they were jumping over hurdles like
[25:26] Speaker 2: being the wrong blood group in one in some of
[25:29] Speaker 2: the attacks, when you're alleging that one man's done all
[25:33] Speaker 2: if you're the wrong blood group on their case, if
[25:36] Speaker 2: you're the wrong blood group in one group of attacks,
[25:38] Speaker 2: you can't have done the others. And I don't know
[25:40] Speaker 2: how they they I think they sort of said they
[25:44] Speaker 2: didn't know he was the wrong blood group, But how
[25:48] Speaker 2: they would not know that over well, I can't now recall.
[25:51] Speaker 1: I'm sorry, but these are the things that need to
[25:54] Speaker 1: be addressed and there needs to be operating procedures set
[25:57] Speaker 1: in place. And I think Clive on the back of
[26:01] Speaker 1: that the progress report. So running the major crime investigation currently,
[26:06] Speaker 1: you're reporting on a monthly basis on all the inquiries
[26:11] Speaker 1: you've done, reviewing, critiquing. That goes up the chain of
[26:15] Speaker 1: command and that keeps a documented so people you know
[26:19] Speaker 1: who's responsible for it. Yeah, so the chain of command
[26:22] Speaker 1: is clearly, clearly stated.
[26:24] Speaker 2: You just think, how could it happen? And again you
[26:27] Speaker 2: go back to that lack of experience, the fact they're
[26:31] Speaker 2: invested in it and the supervision was clearly not there.
[26:35] Speaker 2: Yeah it was. It was a shambles, but I think
[26:38] Speaker 2: you're right. I mean, Clive Small standing up to the hierarchy.
[26:43] Speaker 2: I think, you know, was a very courageous thing to do,
[26:46] Speaker 2: because it's very tough for a police officer to stand
[26:50] Speaker 2: up to the hierarchy and go no, I'm right. All
[26:53] Speaker 2: your blacks that went on TV, you're all now looking
[26:56] Speaker 2: like fools.
[26:58] Speaker 1: I could say, I've probably done it. A few hasn't helped.
[27:02] Speaker 1: It comes to the cost, Yeah, it does step out
[27:05] Speaker 1: of line.
[27:07] Speaker 2: Fortunately for Clive it was such a high profile case
[27:10] Speaker 2: and there was a Royal commissioner, and the Royal Commissioner
[27:13] Speaker 2: found very heavily in Clive Small's favor and said, I
[27:16] Speaker 2: think explicitly the public or the media should watch Clive
[27:20] Speaker 2: Small's career with interest in ie whether it gets promoted.
[27:24] Speaker 2: So I think in that sense that was a changeing.
[27:28] Speaker 2: That was the you know, the good The good thing
[27:32] Speaker 2: was the government did call a royal commission quickly. This
[27:36] Speaker 2: did not linger on for years, you know, in some
[27:40] Speaker 2: sort of secret inquiry in say the Crime Commission or
[27:45] Speaker 2: whatever it is. That's where they were going to have
[27:47] Speaker 2: the original inquiry in the what was then called the
[27:49] Speaker 2: State Drug Crime Commission, which is now the new South
[27:52] Speaker 2: Wales Crime Commission, so it all would have been behind
[27:54] Speaker 2: closed doors. Fortunately that was scrapped at the last minute
[27:59] Speaker 2: and i'd like to think myself and four Corners played
[28:02] Speaker 2: a little role in forcing that role commission well.
[28:06] Speaker 1: Sadly with policing that incompetence can internally can be very
[28:12] Speaker 1: easily swept under the carpet, like if no one's complaining
[28:15] Speaker 1: about being competence, it just goes by the wayside. With
[28:19] Speaker 1: homicide investigation a little bit different in that you're going
[28:23] Speaker 1: to get scrutinized one way or the other because there's
[28:25] Speaker 1: going to be an inquest. If you don't charge someone,
[28:28] Speaker 1: that's going to be contested at the Supreme Court. If
[28:31] Speaker 1: you charge someone, I should say it's going to be
[28:33] Speaker 1: contested at the Supreme Court. If no one is charged,
[28:36] Speaker 1: it's going to be scrutinized at the inquest. So there's
[28:39] Speaker 1: a bit more accountability. But yeah, that wasn't a proud
[28:42] Speaker 1: time in New South Wales history and policing history and
[28:47] Speaker 1: reading it and it's just sort of come back to
[28:49] Speaker 1: me how these things happen.
[28:51] Speaker 2: But yeah, it's.
[28:53] Speaker 1: Well, I won't say it's a mystery, but it's confusing
[28:56] Speaker 1: how it can all happen, all these people come together,
[28:58] Speaker 1: the stuff up something that, yeah.
[29:00] Speaker 2: And it was big. He did receive some compensation, Harry,
[29:07] Speaker 2: that was on a non disclosed basis of not to
[29:10] Speaker 2: be disclosed. It was said to be well over a
[29:13] Speaker 2: million dollars. But you talk about the price of some
[29:16] Speaker 2: of these things. At the time of his arrest, his
[29:20] Speaker 2: wife was pregnant, and a month or so later she miscarried,
[29:24] Speaker 2: and the hospital said they had little doubt that stress
[29:28] Speaker 2: played a part in that. So you talk about the
[29:30] Speaker 2: price on people's lives. That's pretty bad.
[29:34] Speaker 1: Okay, Well, we'll move on from that one. As I
[29:38] Speaker 1: said at the end of part one, I just want
[29:40] Speaker 1: to go through a couple of things or just where
[29:44] Speaker 1: failings of the situations happened. We talked about eyewitness misidentification,
[29:50] Speaker 1: and we're just talking about that in the Harry Blackburn
[29:53] Speaker 1: one highlighted here false false confessions. Now you would have
[29:58] Speaker 1: been around in the day of the well what was
[30:03] Speaker 1: referred to as the police verbal. Yes, that's what it
[30:08] Speaker 1: was said, where someone goes to the court and I'm
[30:10] Speaker 1: sure you sat in courts where, yes, I interviewed the suspect.
[30:14] Speaker 1: He declined to make a statement. But he told me,
[30:17] Speaker 1: Detective Inspector Jubilin, you're too good for me. You've caught me.
[30:22] Speaker 1: I won't sign the.
[30:23] Speaker 2: You blokes are too good for me. That's I've done it,
[30:28] Speaker 2: but I'm not going to sign the statement. And Arre,
[30:32] Speaker 2: there's the seventies and the eighties and look, I mean
[30:36] Speaker 2: this was mostly not done with you a STRAIGHTI one
[30:40] Speaker 2: eighties or clean skins. It was done to serious criminals
[30:44] Speaker 2: or mostly yes. And it was seen it was a
[30:48] Speaker 2: cultural thing, and it was it had grown up over many,
[30:51] Speaker 2: many years, and it was seen as a way of
[30:53] Speaker 2: keeping career criminals, in particular in line. I'm not saying
[30:59] Speaker 2: it was. I'm not saying this.
[31:00] Speaker 1: I understand where you say what you're saying there. And
[31:03] Speaker 1: I think we need to just focus not just on
[31:07] Speaker 1: the police, because the thoughts were accepting that the courts
[31:10] Speaker 1: are sitting there going really but Okay, here's.
[31:13] Speaker 2: A bloke that's been through institution since the age of eleven.
[31:17] Speaker 2: He's been in jail multiple times. He's as hard as nails,
[31:23] Speaker 2: and he's making all these confessions quote unquote, you know,
[31:27] Speaker 2: not long confessions, but just enough. Yeah, and Judge, you're
[31:31] Speaker 2: dead right. I mean, magistrates and judges were accepting. We're
[31:34] Speaker 2: accepting it.
[31:35] Speaker 1: So yeah, and I wonder about that, and society was
[31:39] Speaker 1: different than back in the days. But also, what did
[31:43] Speaker 1: you have for investigations. We've got a lot of forensic
[31:46] Speaker 1: evidence that can support an investigation. There it basically came
[31:50] Speaker 1: down to eyewitnesses going back, and that's probably a little
[31:54] Speaker 1: bit extreme, but it was basically briefs were based on
[31:57] Speaker 1: eyewitness identification and confession. Yeah, and that's all the police
[32:01] Speaker 1: had had to play with. Forensic evidence was rapidly coming in,
[32:06] Speaker 1: but there wasn't a great deal of it. You had fingerprints, yeah,
[32:08] Speaker 1: so the crook's got the way of that by wearing glassoves.
[32:11] Speaker 1: That's all they had to do and put a balaclava on.
[32:14] Speaker 1: So that was the environment. But I because a lot
[32:17] Speaker 1: of people and it said half jokingly, but oh a
[32:21] Speaker 1: police verbal and that. But I always say, yeah, they
[32:25] Speaker 1: went on, they went through the courts, but the magistrates
[32:29] Speaker 1: and the judges and possibly even the jury members were
[32:33] Speaker 1: understanding what was going on. That was accepted, So it
[32:35] Speaker 1: wasn't just police to blame. And that's not condoning what
[32:39] Speaker 1: was done, but that was the that was the world.
[32:42] Speaker 2: I think it was an accepted part of the culture
[32:46] Speaker 2: at that time. I mean it started a change during
[32:49] Speaker 2: the early late seventies early eighties, I think when the
[32:55] Speaker 2: media and the judges and magistrates started to say, look,
[32:59] Speaker 2: you know, hang on, things have got to change. This
[33:03] Speaker 2: is clearly unacceptable. And then sort of electronic recording and
[33:06] Speaker 2: interviews came in, which you know, the old just writing
[33:11] Speaker 2: stuff down in shorthand or just making it up went
[33:15] Speaker 2: out the window because you had an electronic recording of
[33:18] Speaker 2: somebody you know, saying or not saying anything.
[33:24] Speaker 1: And look, from a policing point of view, when the
[33:28] Speaker 1: interview so electronically recorded interview of a suspected person we
[33:32] Speaker 1: referred to as zerisk. When that came in, I was
[33:35] Speaker 1: a detective and we're all mortified. What We've got a camera?
[33:38] Speaker 1: And I remember I put my hand up and went
[33:42] Speaker 1: down to the academy to be trained to train people
[33:45] Speaker 1: about the interview because I thought, well, this is going
[33:47] Speaker 1: to change change the landscape. It's not sitting in an
[33:50] Speaker 1: interview room and doing the type record of interview and
[33:53] Speaker 1: that type of thing. And it was confronting for police
[33:57] Speaker 1: first up when it came in. But I think we've
[33:59] Speaker 1: all seen the benefits of it, and now that unless
[34:02] Speaker 1: the admission is caught recorded, it's inadmissible. I think it's
[34:07] Speaker 1: a better system, and I think ironically it's led to
[34:10] Speaker 1: more people pleading guilty to when it's put to them.
[34:15] Speaker 1: The only changes I'd like is this right to silence.
[34:19] Speaker 1: And before everyone jumps on me, you can't take away
[34:21] Speaker 1: the right the silence over in England. There's the system
[34:25] Speaker 1: there got in place is more. Okay, everyone has the
[34:29] Speaker 1: right to silence, but the inference can be drawn from
[34:32] Speaker 1: your right. You're not giving your alibi evidence straight up.
[34:36] Speaker 1: So if I arrest you and you can prove straight
[34:38] Speaker 1: away that that I was at home with my wife
[34:42] Speaker 1: at the time, blah blah blah, if you don't declare that,
[34:46] Speaker 1: but you declare it after we've sent the brief of
[34:48] Speaker 1: evidence to you and you realize the crucial time that
[34:50] Speaker 1: you have to be away, and then you come back
[34:52] Speaker 1: and go, oh, this is my alibi witness. Because you've
[34:55] Speaker 1: created your alibi witness, more weight would be placed on
[34:59] Speaker 1: it if you spoke up front. So you still have
[35:02] Speaker 1: the right to silence, but there's a varying degree of
[35:07] Speaker 1: weight that's placed on that. If you don't defend yourself
[35:10] Speaker 1: straight away.
[35:11] Speaker 2: Yeah, I can see where I understand exactly where you're
[35:15] Speaker 2: coming from. I'm not in favor of that, mainly because
[35:19] Speaker 2: I think there are many people, particularly First Nations people, yes,
[35:23] Speaker 2: who do not. Maybe they come from remote communities. And
[35:27] Speaker 2: there's an example in the book. A young indigenous bloke
[35:32] Speaker 2: from an extremely remote community, Yeah, does a long interview
[35:35] Speaker 2: with the police. His English is his third language, his
[35:40] Speaker 2: first two western desert dialects. He doesn't understand what's going on.
[35:46] Speaker 2: And the cops, I think tried to do the right thing,
[35:52] Speaker 2: but they just had no experience dealing with people from
[35:58] Speaker 2: remote communities, but people who also had cognitive impairments due
[36:03] Speaker 2: to alcohol, petrol sniffing, marijuana is that sort of thing.
[36:08] Speaker 2: So in those cases, I see, I think there should
[36:11] Speaker 2: be a right to silence, and I don't think that
[36:13] Speaker 2: should be used against you.
[36:15] Speaker 1: Okay, well, so I've got no argument with you on
[36:18] Speaker 1: that one.
[36:19] Speaker 2: But it's an interesting point, and I wasn't fully aware
[36:24] Speaker 2: that that was the case in the UK.
[36:26] Speaker 1: With the indigenous matters. And doctor Diana at Eeds was
[36:31] Speaker 1: mentioned in your book. She's a linguistics expert and I
[36:34] Speaker 1: used her in the Bearable Matter, and she taught me
[36:39] Speaker 1: a lot about investigating matters involving Indigenous witnesses and the
[36:45] Speaker 1: English the way that we misinterpret it and griture this
[36:49] Speaker 1: concurrence like did you do that? And you say yes?
[36:54] Speaker 1: And there was little scientific pieces of information that she
[36:57] Speaker 1: gave me so I could properly understand what was going on.
[37:01] Speaker 1: I tried to have her give evidence at the trial
[37:05] Speaker 1: for one of the Bearable murders, for the murder of
[37:08] Speaker 1: Evelyn green Up, because I think it's in Northern Territory
[37:12] Speaker 1: and maybe Queensland. There might be other states. Now there
[37:14] Speaker 1: was a pre trial warning where a trial had a
[37:18] Speaker 1: heavy amount of Indigenous witnesses to explain to the jury
[37:23] Speaker 1: what these misinterpretations might be. And I bought Diana reads.
[37:27] Speaker 1: I met her after an inquest and she went to
[37:31] Speaker 1: Bearable and prepare the report, but we couldn't get it
[37:34] Speaker 1: get it in there, and the DPP said, if the
[37:38] Speaker 1: miscommunication becomes an issue in the trial, we can then
[37:41] Speaker 1: call her. She sat of her you know, she wasn't
[37:44] Speaker 1: getting paid for it. She did because she was interested
[37:47] Speaker 1: in it, traveled to where the court was sat there
[37:50] Speaker 1: and gave me a whole range of examples where miscommunication
[37:54] Speaker 1: was that that the prosecutor and the defense missed because
[37:57] Speaker 1: of the way that the indigenous witness was answering the questions.
[38:02] Speaker 2: And there's a hole in the case I talk about
[38:05] Speaker 2: in the books. There was no interpreter present. The suspect
[38:13] Speaker 2: as he was then, clearly didn't understand a complex legal language.
[38:19] Speaker 2: And I think the doctor, the expert you're just talking about,
[38:23] Speaker 2: did give evidence in that case and spoke about is
[38:27] Speaker 2: gratuitous concurrence. Yeah, and that was more or less. In
[38:32] Speaker 2: some cases people will agree, particularly if they're overpressed over time,
[38:39] Speaker 2: they'll just say yes because they feel as though they should.
[38:44] Speaker 2: In this case, the the young bloke, the miscommunication was everywhere.
[38:50] Speaker 2: In the case of Gene Gibson, who was arrested for
[38:53] Speaker 2: the murder of a young white breaker, even with his
[38:56] Speaker 2: own legal aid lawyers on a number of occasions they
[39:00] Speaker 2: didn't have an interpreter and the legal aid lawyers trying
[39:04] Speaker 2: to give him instructions. The legal aid lawyer doesn't speak
[39:08] Speaker 2: Pintupe and Gen Gibson doesn't speak English very well. And
[39:15] Speaker 2: it was said later that that, you know, one of them,
[39:19] Speaker 2: one of the barristers said, you know, what came out
[39:21] Speaker 2: of the mouth of the legal aid lawyer and what
[39:24] Speaker 2: went into Gen Gibson's brain is where it all went wrong,
[39:28] Speaker 2: because it was completely he didn't understand. Look, it's it's
[39:32] Speaker 2: and the police it's difficult.
[39:35] Speaker 1: I felt sorry for the police in that, and you
[39:37] Speaker 1: raised it. You said that the police we tried to
[39:40] Speaker 1: do our best, and that's the sense I got the
[39:42] Speaker 1: way the story was told in your book. Yes, at
[39:45] Speaker 1: least we're trying to do the right thing. But they
[39:47] Speaker 1: did not have the have the expertise.
[39:49] Speaker 2: They didn't have the expertise, they didn't have the training.
[39:52] Speaker 2: There was a complete, i think absence of training. And
[39:56] Speaker 2: again I think the experts said this that you know,
[40:01] Speaker 2: there was a complete misunderstanding on all sides. She part
[40:07] Speaker 2: of the interview with Geen Gibson, the guy accused of
[40:10] Speaker 2: murder and far north of Wa was recorded and as
[40:15] Speaker 2: she said in her evidence, on the face of it,
[40:18] Speaker 2: it appeared the police were trying to do the right things.
[40:21] Speaker 2: They were respectful, they were patient, but it was clear
[40:27] Speaker 2: that Jeen Gibson did not understand it. They did bring
[40:31] Speaker 2: in an interview friend. As it turned out, the interview
[40:36] Speaker 2: friend had the best of intentions.
[40:38] Speaker 1: But that worked against it.
[40:39] Speaker 2: But it worked against Jen Gibson because the interview friend
[40:42] Speaker 2: who sat with Gen Gibson while he was being interrogated,
[40:46] Speaker 2: was in a kinship sense in the Indigenous community, was
[40:49] Speaker 2: like a grandfather to him, so an authority figure. The
[40:53] Speaker 2: police are asking questions in English. Obviously the interpreter friend
[40:59] Speaker 2: is then translating into Pintupe to Gene Gibson, but the
[41:05] Speaker 2: police obviously have no idea what's being said. So when
[41:09] Speaker 2: they were saying you, do you understand that you don't
[41:12] Speaker 2: have to speak to us, you have the right to
[41:15] Speaker 2: silence or words to that effect, the interview friend was
[41:18] Speaker 2: saying to Gene Gibson Son Son, you've got to You've
[41:22] Speaker 2: got to tell them the truth. You've got to talk
[41:24] Speaker 2: to them. He's right to silence. And as it turns out,
[41:28] Speaker 2: Geen Gibson didn't even want this person there. There was
[41:32] Speaker 2: a total misunderstanding about that, a complete breakdown in communication
[41:36] Speaker 2: in language, and yeah, I think it's an example where
[41:43] Speaker 2: incredibly it's difficult for the police, but it was. It
[41:47] Speaker 2: was a very it was a very sad case all
[41:50] Speaker 2: round because he was charged with murder. But a judge
[41:56] Speaker 2: I think ruled some of the early interviews that were
[41:59] Speaker 2: not recorded to be admissible. So then, through his legal
[42:02] Speaker 2: aid lawyer, because there were still a couple of other
[42:04] Speaker 2: witnesses who had said things against him, he pleads guilty
[42:09] Speaker 2: de manslaughter. But even then he didn't really understand what
[42:13] Speaker 2: he was pleading to. Eventually the conviction is quashed and
[42:17] Speaker 2: I remember one of the legal aid lawyers was asked
[42:20] Speaker 2: if he understood you think Jeane understood what was being
[42:24] Speaker 2: said to him, and she said something like.
[42:27] Speaker 1: No.
[42:28] Speaker 2: Most of the times that I met him, he sat alone,
[42:34] Speaker 2: staring in silence, staring at the wall.
[42:37] Speaker 1: Yeah, and this was that from the Pilbur region. Yeah,
[42:42] Speaker 1: this is isolation.
[42:44] Speaker 2: It's said to be the most remote community in Australia.
[42:48] Speaker 2: I think it's about seven hundred k's from Alice Springs
[42:52] Speaker 2: in about nine hundred to one thousand k's from Broom.
[42:54] Speaker 2: It's a speck in the western desert. It's a tiny
[42:57] Speaker 2: community Kuakura.
[42:58] Speaker 1: So yeah, and that is where the legal system gets
[43:04] Speaker 1: very complicated. Then, you know, less lessons learned. Seeing that,
[43:08] Speaker 1: I know we're on the back of bearable The parliamentary
[43:11] Speaker 1: inquiry for one of the first recommendations was a training
[43:14] Speaker 1: film to be made for New South Wales Police speaking
[43:18] Speaker 1: about the issues that I encountered and what the experts
[43:22] Speaker 1: had said and how we could address it. So hopefully
[43:25] Speaker 1: we are becoming more aware of it. But it's a
[43:28] Speaker 1: complex thing.
[43:29] Speaker 2: It is.
[43:29] Speaker 1: People get caught up, and.
[43:33] Speaker 2: I think people sometimes want to see the justice system
[43:35] Speaker 2: is like, you know, a bit like, as one of
[43:38] Speaker 2: my colleagues put it to me years ago, a bit
[43:40] Speaker 2: like Marvel comics. You know, there's evil villains and superheroes
[43:45] Speaker 2: and there ain't nothing in between. Well, that's not life,
[43:48] Speaker 2: as you know, both know, things can get very complex
[43:51] Speaker 2: and difficult for police, for suspects, particularly First Nations people.
[43:58] Speaker 2: And there's a few amples of Aboriginal Australians in the
[44:02] Speaker 2: book who have been wrongfully arrested, convicted and so on
[44:07] Speaker 2: for a variety of reasons, you know, identification evidence. In
[44:11] Speaker 2: one case, in the case of Eric Honeyset, who was
[44:15] Speaker 2: a well known Sydney yeah criminal, it's an entirely different
[44:19] Speaker 2: kettle of fish, but he did get framed. Yeah, back
[44:23] Speaker 2: in the early eighties. Back in those days, where as
[44:26] Speaker 2: we were just discussing, you know, confessions, confessions were suddenly
[44:31] Speaker 2: made by a bloke who's been through the system. Well,
[44:34] Speaker 2: it's as tough as nails.
[44:36] Speaker 1: I'll let people read the book on that one. But
[44:38] Speaker 1: it's interesting in that he got verbal, ended up pleading guilty,
[44:43] Speaker 1: and then they found the actual offender for it. He
[44:46] Speaker 1: pleaded guilty because he knew, Okay, well, I can't beat
[44:51] Speaker 1: this system.
[44:51] Speaker 2: I can't beat the system, and if I plead guilty
[44:53] Speaker 2: to a lesser charge, I won't be facing life maximum
[44:56] Speaker 2: ten years. As he said later, I did some arithmetic.
[45:00] Speaker 1: Plead are guilty to something you didn't do. I've got
[45:05] Speaker 1: inadequate legal representation as well, because I think that that
[45:09] Speaker 1: plays a big part in a lot of miscarriages of justice.
[45:13] Speaker 1: And yeah, I talk with the DPP. I know how
[45:17] Speaker 1: hard they're they're working. So yeah, what what's your take
[45:21] Speaker 1: on inadequate legal representation?
[45:25] Speaker 2: My only advice is if you can afford to get
[45:29] Speaker 2: a good lawyer, somebody who's experienced in the criminal law.
[45:32] Speaker 2: That's easier said than done. For many people, they might
[45:37] Speaker 2: have enough assets so they don't qualify for legal aid.
[45:40] Speaker 2: Legal aid's overworked.
[45:42] Speaker 1: You. I mentioned the DPP, but legal aid is notoriously.
[45:46] Speaker 2: But there's a number of cases where defense lawyers should
[45:50] Speaker 2: have you know, should have called an expert witness.
[45:53] Speaker 1: Well, I like to think it's changing, changing to a degree,
[45:57] Speaker 1: because the immediate landscape has changed. You don't have to
[46:01] Speaker 1: be affiliated with a large media organization and different forms
[46:05] Speaker 1: of social media and all that. But because and you
[46:09] Speaker 1: would have known that early days as a journalist and
[46:12] Speaker 1: covering crime matters, there was a real strong affiliation with
[46:15] Speaker 1: the police and it was basically, the police give you
[46:19] Speaker 1: this information, that's what's reported, and there wasn't generally speaking,
[46:23] Speaker 1: a lot of scrutiny done about what was being provided.
[46:26] Speaker 1: I think in this day and age there's more accountability
[46:29] Speaker 1: and more scrutiny, and I think that can help because
[46:31] Speaker 1: media play a big part in some of the miscarriages
[46:34] Speaker 1: of justice. Because if you put the person like the
[46:37] Speaker 1: Harry Blackburn, one that could have just rolled rolled and
[46:41] Speaker 1: rolled through, couldn't it? Absolutely And you would have imagined
[46:44] Speaker 1: the articles you could write about it, convicted the serial
[46:47] Speaker 1: rapist hiding as a police officer for all these years,
[46:50] Speaker 1: and it would have gone just played out.
[46:53] Speaker 2: Yeah, well, it absolutely would have. And that's what the
[46:56] Speaker 2: Royal Commissioners said. He could possibly or even probably have
[47:00] Speaker 2: been convicted and nobody would have known. I mean, well
[47:04] Speaker 2: he would have known, and he had some pretty good
[47:07] Speaker 2: lawyers whom I met with. But yeah, I think you're right.
[47:11] Speaker 2: You're absolutely right. The system is better that certainly much better.
[47:14] Speaker 2: There is more supervision of police. There is more scrutiny
[47:18] Speaker 2: I think from the media than there was back in
[47:20] Speaker 2: the seventies and eighties, where you know, I was a
[47:23] Speaker 2: police reporter and you relied on the certain squads to
[47:28] Speaker 2: like homicide, armed robbery, that sort of thing. To get information.
[47:32] Speaker 2: You had to have contacts in those squads or the
[47:35] Speaker 2: head of the CIB or people SENI you and there
[47:40] Speaker 2: was probably this unacknowledged trade off that if you got
[47:44] Speaker 2: really good information, you know, you're tipped off about somebody
[47:49] Speaker 2: to be arrested for a big murder. There's a trade
[47:52] Speaker 2: off that you don't don't criticize the police. That started
[47:58] Speaker 2: to change in the eighties. Yeah, the media definitely has
[48:01] Speaker 2: a role to play, and I think there's a lot
[48:04] Speaker 2: more scrutiny now than there was back in the seventies
[48:06] Speaker 2: and eighties.
[48:07] Speaker 1: Well, I think it's good too, in having this book
[48:10] Speaker 1: out like this and people that read it and we're
[48:13] Speaker 1: talking about it now, just understanding that there are mistakes
[48:16] Speaker 1: made and it's important that and each story there there
[48:20] Speaker 1: is a clear lesson that can be learned, and if
[48:24] Speaker 1: one would assume lessons are learned. Fornzic evidence, the scientific
[48:29] Speaker 1: evidence is one that quite often causes problems in courts.
[48:35] Speaker 1: Let's talk the story of Jumma.
[48:37] Speaker 2: Is it in Melbourne?
[48:39] Speaker 1: Yeah? With the DNA evidence.
[48:42] Speaker 2: Yeah, the DNA evidence.
[48:45] Speaker 1: Neil, Just when I thought you couldn't shock me anymore,
[48:48] Speaker 1: you came up with that story of God. No.
[48:52] Speaker 2: I I feel bad that you're reading this.
[48:54] Speaker 1: On holiday because it's all the zen and all the
[48:58] Speaker 1: chilled vibes I had.
[48:59] Speaker 2: It is a part of it is a little confronting,
[49:02] Speaker 2: but I think people will find will go wow. I
[49:07] Speaker 2: didn't understand how that could happen. Now I understand how
[49:09] Speaker 2: it can happen. This case, this young bloke whose family
[49:15] Speaker 2: had fled Somalia, they had settled in Melbourne. He's about
[49:22] Speaker 2: eighteen or so. He's doing his well the equivalent of
[49:25] Speaker 2: his HSC. He's, you know, minding his own business. The
[49:33] Speaker 2: case starts at a nightclub for mature mature adults. Apparently
[49:38] Speaker 2: anybody over twenty eight is mature. That was the age.
[49:41] Speaker 2: Don't ask me why. A woman and her couple of
[49:45] Speaker 2: her friends go to the nightclub. They pre load in
[49:49] Speaker 2: the car outside before they go in. She's forty eight
[49:53] Speaker 2: years old. She goes into the nightclub. It's a big nightclub.
[49:57] Speaker 2: There are hundreds of people in there. Lose the track
[50:00] Speaker 2: of her friends. I think she goes into something like
[50:02] Speaker 2: ten twenty pm, and this is seen on one of
[50:06] Speaker 2: the CCTV cameras. She says, you know, I spoke to
[50:10] Speaker 2: a couple of blokes. I sat down, had a drink,
[50:12] Speaker 2: had another drink, and then everything went blank. She's found
[50:18] Speaker 2: in the women's toilets, unconscious, the doors locked. They have
[50:24] Speaker 2: great difficulty getting her out. Women, the security women and
[50:30] Speaker 2: a patron have to jump over and help carry her out.
[50:34] Speaker 2: She's taken to hospital. Obviously she's unconscious. She's very blurry. Says,
[50:39] Speaker 2: I don't know how it happened. I didn't have that
[50:41] Speaker 2: many drinks. I'm worried I might have been assaulted. And
[50:46] Speaker 2: that's fair enough. Yep, she's not known what she's not
[50:48] Speaker 2: knowing what's happened. Once she said that certain protocols were
[50:52] Speaker 2: put in place. A doctor's called in to and there's
[50:58] Speaker 2: within this hospital which she's been taken, there's something called
[51:01] Speaker 2: a crisis care unit, and the doctor who's experienced in
[51:05] Speaker 2: a very good doctor, does swabs and tests and takes
[51:10] Speaker 2: samples and so on, which are then put on slides.
[51:14] Speaker 2: It's all done within this small room. The results come
[51:19] Speaker 2: back later they have found sperm. So to all intents
[51:25] Speaker 2: and purposes, she has been raped. She just can't remember anything.
[51:29] Speaker 2: She's passed out. They do DNA if this takes some weeks.
[51:34] Speaker 2: The DNA matches that of the eighteen year old Somali
[51:40] Speaker 2: bloke Parajama. This is a story within a story because
[51:46] Speaker 2: it's difficult to explain because how did his DNA come
[51:51] Speaker 2: to be on the database. Anyway, his DNA is on
[51:56] Speaker 2: the database. It matches that found on the woman from
[52:00] Speaker 2: the nightclub. The police then naturally launched an investigation. They
[52:05] Speaker 2: go and arrest him and he's eventually charged with the
[52:11] Speaker 2: rape of the of the woman. But even then the
[52:15] Speaker 2: police are a bit concerned because he's a tallish, young,
[52:19] Speaker 2: good looking Somali.
[52:21] Speaker 1: Bloke and he was stood there in that club.
[52:24] Speaker 2: It's a nightclub for mature couples and singles. I think
[52:28] Speaker 2: it's pretty much white people. Nobody has seen anybody that
[52:35] Speaker 2: matches his descriptions. Security's not seen him, staff have not
[52:38] Speaker 2: seen him. The victim herself says, I did not speak
[52:42] Speaker 2: to any black men that night. That was her quote.
[52:46] Speaker 2: So and there's nothing on CCTV. Although some of the
[52:49] Speaker 2: CCTV doesn't work. As often happens, this case rests wholly
[52:56] Speaker 2: on the DNA which they've taken from the woman and
[53:00] Speaker 2: which matches Farajama. The young bloke. He says, I didn't
[53:03] Speaker 2: do it. I've never been to the nightclub. I've never
[53:06] Speaker 2: been near the nightclub. The police do all the right checks,
[53:10] Speaker 2: no fingerprints, you know, he's not near there anywhere. They
[53:14] Speaker 2: check bank statements, phones, all the stuff that you should
[53:18] Speaker 2: have been done. They put the brief up to the DPP,
[53:22] Speaker 2: and even the DPP says, this is a unique case
[53:26] Speaker 2: because that's all we've got, well, nothing else. There's no
[53:29] Speaker 2: corroboration at all.
[53:32] Speaker 1: Excepits solely on the DNA.
[53:33] Speaker 2: Relying solely on the DNA. What happens in court is that,
[53:38] Speaker 2: you know, the prosecution says, DNA is essentially infallible. It
[53:43] Speaker 2: is eight hundred. This is the actual figure was used.
[53:47] Speaker 2: Eight hundred billion times more likely to have come from
[53:52] Speaker 2: the young man than anyone else, which, as you have
[53:55] Speaker 2: pointed out previously, means you'd have to go to another galaxy.
[53:59] Speaker 2: So I mean, I sort of I don't understand those figures.
[54:02] Speaker 2: I don't understand how you can reach that number. But
[54:06] Speaker 2: that's what's presented, and that's if you're a member of
[54:10] Speaker 2: the jury. I mean, that's that's got to be convincing
[54:13] Speaker 2: if you've got to say it's him, even though nobody's
[54:19] Speaker 2: seen him at the nightclub. There's no evidence he's ever
[54:21] Speaker 2: been to the nightclub that night or any other night.
[54:24] Speaker 2: There's nothing to put him even within Kui. And there
[54:28] Speaker 2: are some alibi witnesses for him, but they're members of
[54:32] Speaker 2: his family and in the witness box they're not very
[54:36] Speaker 2: impressive because it's they've never been in the court before. Communications, miscommunication. Again,
[54:44] Speaker 2: the jury, to their credit there on the on the ball,
[54:48] Speaker 2: they go, they ask a question of the judge, how
[54:51] Speaker 2: is this man's DNA on the database? And this goes
[54:57] Speaker 2: back to a point you were alluding to early or
[54:59] Speaker 2: mentioned earlier. They're not allowed to be told how it's
[55:03] Speaker 2: on the database. And the judge says words to the
[55:06] Speaker 2: effect of, don't worry about that, that's not something you
[55:09] Speaker 2: have to consider. You just go with the evidence. They
[55:13] Speaker 2: go with the evidence, and they obviously the only evidence DNA.
[55:16] Speaker 2: They go, well, it can't be wrong. Prosecutor says, it
[55:19] Speaker 2: can't be wrong. It's not contaminated, has not been contaminated.
[55:23] Speaker 2: He's found guilty. He goes to jail. It's not until
[55:29] Speaker 2: a long time later that an appeal is sort of lodged,
[55:35] Speaker 2: and to his credit, a lawyer within the office of
[55:39] Speaker 2: the DPP starts looking at the case and he wonders
[55:45] Speaker 2: how the DNA got on the database, and he goes
[55:49] Speaker 2: back to the very beginning, because they'd all concentrated on, Oh,
[55:52] Speaker 2: there must have been contamination at the police laboratory. Police
[55:56] Speaker 2: lab says no, no, because and they present it that
[56:00] Speaker 2: all the protocols have been followed. They present cogent reasons
[56:04] Speaker 2: why there is no contamination. The solicitor from the DPP,
[56:08] Speaker 2: because an appeals coming up, goes back to the hospital.
[56:13] Speaker 2: As it turns out, the night before the woman who
[56:17] Speaker 2: felt she'd been raped has come in and been examined.
[56:21] Speaker 2: About twenty hours earlier, a young woman had come in
[56:25] Speaker 2: and been examined in the very same room by the
[56:28] Speaker 2: very same doctor, and she too had had swabs taken,
[56:34] Speaker 2: and she had said she'd been sexually assaulted. That's what
[56:40] Speaker 2: she said at that stage. She then withdraws her complaint
[56:46] Speaker 2: and as an later inquiry found, she substantially agreed with
[56:51] Speaker 2: the version that had been given by Farajama that a
[56:58] Speaker 2: week or so early, I can't remember the exact timeline.
[57:01] Speaker 2: She the young woman had had sex with him and
[57:07] Speaker 2: two other men, and she was well. She withdrew her
[57:11] Speaker 2: complaint and she and the men said it was consensual.
[57:16] Speaker 2: She more or less agreed, and that was found to
[57:18] Speaker 2: be the fact in a subsequent inquiry. I don't want to,
[57:22] Speaker 2: you know, sort of say that this is commonplace or anything,
[57:30] Speaker 2: but this is where the case has gone awry. It's
[57:33] Speaker 2: in the hospital. The younger woman is coming on say,
[57:36] Speaker 2: Friday night, the older woman from the nightclub is coming
[57:41] Speaker 2: on the Saturday. Both examined in the same room. That's
[57:45] Speaker 2: where his DNA has come from. But it's been it's
[57:50] Speaker 2: been contaminated there so that when they it matches, but
[57:56] Speaker 2: it's been contaminated on one of the slides. As it
[57:59] Speaker 2: turns out, these units the crisis key units aren't cleaned properly,
[58:03] Speaker 2: there's been contamination there. So this is particularly difficult for
[58:08] Speaker 2: the woman who thought she'd been assaulted because a bloke's
[58:11] Speaker 2: been convicted.
[58:13] Speaker 1: And thinking why I'm unconsciousness, Absolutely so going through all
[58:17] Speaker 1: the trauma.
[58:18] Speaker 2: She's gone through all the trauma. She gives evidence in
[58:20] Speaker 2: the court case, says, look, I can't remember. She tells
[58:24] Speaker 2: the truth. She's done absolutely the right thing. But it
[58:27] Speaker 2: now turns out, and there's this inquiry led by Frank
[58:32] Speaker 2: Vincent QC. It now turns out the contamination of the
[58:36] Speaker 2: DNA happened in the hospital at the very beginning, and
[58:42] Speaker 2: there is in fact no sexual assault in the nightclub.
[58:47] Speaker 2: And the woman comes to accept that, which would obviously
[58:51] Speaker 2: be traumatic in itself.
[58:56] Speaker 1: I'm thinking your mind would be all over the place.
[58:58] Speaker 2: But any worry, Frank Vincent sort of talks about common
[59:02] Speaker 2: sense and says total faith was put in the DNA.
[59:08] Speaker 2: Everybody jumped over all these hurdles, that this bloke had
[59:14] Speaker 2: never been seen, and common sense tells you that if
[59:18] Speaker 2: he had been at the nightclub, he would have been seen.
[59:21] Speaker 2: And also the timeline the woman small window of very
[59:25] Speaker 2: small window of opportunity. She enters the nightclub at ten twenty,
[59:29] Speaker 2: she's found in the toilet ten fifty. On her own statement,
[59:33] Speaker 2: she's after ten twenty, has bought a drink, sat down,
[59:37] Speaker 2: had a cigarette, spoken to a few blokes. She wasn't
[59:40] Speaker 2: there to pick up her and a thing. She was
[59:41] Speaker 2: just there for relaxation, to have a good night, to
[59:44] Speaker 2: wind down. But there's what a twenty or thirty minute window,
[59:49] Speaker 2: where As Frank Vincent said, I mean, the timeline didn't fit.
[59:53] Speaker 2: People have jumped over all these obvious common sense things
[59:57] Speaker 2: that tell you this can't have happened because of DNA,
[1:00:02] Speaker 2: and you know DNA is not infallible. Well that without
[1:00:06] Speaker 2: without corroboration, there was no other corroboration. That was the
[1:00:09] Speaker 2: sole evidence, and it was wrong.
[1:00:12] Speaker 1: That's that's the concerning thing, isn't it. And then that
[1:00:16] Speaker 1: everyone involved in the investigation stepped away and or we've
[1:00:19] Speaker 1: got the DNA and not looking at it was almost
[1:00:21] Speaker 1: like physically impossible for that to occur when you when
[1:00:25] Speaker 1: you look at it now and we sit here and
[1:00:27] Speaker 1: we say we've got the benefit of hindsight. Yes, but
[1:00:29] Speaker 1: even at the time you're thinking such a small window
[1:00:32] Speaker 1: of opportunity. He wasn't seen in the club the location
[1:00:35] Speaker 1: she was found, you'd have to have doubts. But I
[1:00:40] Speaker 1: and what you've raised here with DNA, because it's getting
[1:00:44] Speaker 1: forensic science is improving so much. I dare say, when
[1:00:47] Speaker 1: you walk out of here, if the police grabbed hold
[1:00:50] Speaker 1: of you, you'd have some of my DNA on you.
[1:00:53] Speaker 1: And that's what we've got to be careful of. It's
[1:00:55] Speaker 1: such a fine thing that mistakes can be can be made.
[1:01:00] Speaker 2: I think the big mistake was that it was the
[1:01:02] Speaker 2: only evidence, and that's what Vincent QC said, you know,
[1:01:07] Speaker 2: I mean, there was nothing to put him in the
[1:01:09] Speaker 2: nightclub in the vicinity. She said, I've never seen him before.
[1:01:15] Speaker 2: It's sort of defied common sense. And as you say,
[1:01:18] Speaker 2: there was a very narrow window, you know. And it
[1:01:23] Speaker 2: goes to your point that unless there's some other evidence,
[1:01:28] Speaker 2: DNA can be contaminated. I'm not saying, you know, obviously
[1:01:33] Speaker 2: DNA is an invaluable tool for police, definitely obviously, and
[1:01:38] Speaker 2: it's improving all the time. But mistakes can be made.
[1:01:43] Speaker 1: Well, it's a cautionary tale, and I think sometimes it's
[1:01:46] Speaker 1: got to be spelled out to everyone in an obvious way.
[1:01:49] Speaker 1: This is where mistakes can be made because as an investigator, well,
[1:01:53] Speaker 1: we've got the DNA he seemens found on the woman.
[1:01:56] Speaker 1: This is science one in eight hundred b and we
[1:01:59] Speaker 1: can't argue with that.
[1:02:00] Speaker 2: Can't argue with that.
[1:02:01] Speaker 1: But yeah, again, we started off the discussion in part
[1:02:04] Speaker 1: one talking about common sense in court. There is common
[1:02:07] Speaker 1: sense that we need to hang on to, isn't it.
[1:02:09] Speaker 4: Yeah?
[1:02:09] Speaker 2: I think particularly, I mean, the jury did ask the question,
[1:02:13] Speaker 2: and this goes to your point. What jury is not
[1:02:15] Speaker 2: allowed to know? If they I guess it's at the prejudicial.
[1:02:22] Speaker 3: Pride, they might have gone but even though they weren't told,
[1:02:28] Speaker 3: I mean, they must have gone back in and said, well,
[1:02:31] Speaker 3: he must have been convicted or charged with something because
[1:02:33] Speaker 3: his DNA is there.
[1:02:34] Speaker 1: The way the judge tried to answer that, I'm thinking,
[1:02:37] Speaker 1: what there is a discussion going on in the jury room. Well,
[1:02:40] Speaker 1: he must be a.
[1:02:41] Speaker 2: Rapist, That's pretty much what I'd be saying. Well, he's
[1:02:44] Speaker 2: definitely come to the attention of the police. They've taken
[1:02:47] Speaker 2: his DNA for a reason, and it would probably be.
[1:02:51] Speaker 4: Or it could be sexual assault, and that would and
[1:02:53] Speaker 4: he's got off and that would add to the jury
[1:02:55] Speaker 4: going Okay, there is no other evidence supporting the police
[1:02:58] Speaker 4: wouldn't have charged him. We've got the DNA, we know
[1:03:01] Speaker 4: it's him.
[1:03:01] Speaker 2: We know it's him.
[1:03:02] Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's well, that's why I think the jury
[1:03:05] Speaker 1: need to have as much information as as possible so
[1:03:10] Speaker 1: they can make informed decisions. Neil, We've we could talk
[1:03:14] Speaker 1: all day about this, unfortunately, because I would have been
[1:03:18] Speaker 1: a better book if it was Great Convictions but falsely Convicted.
[1:03:22] Speaker 1: Hey on the on the cover of your book, A
[1:03:25] Speaker 1: meticulous unraveling of Australia's most horrendous judicial failures. Mersus book
[1:03:30] Speaker 1: reads like a thriller, but at its heart it's the
[1:03:33] Speaker 1: devastation reaked on innocent victims of the legal system. Now
[1:03:37] Speaker 1: that's signed off by Kate McClymont. She's a scary lady.
[1:03:42] Speaker 1: A lot of respect for her for many years, Yeah.
[1:03:45] Speaker 2: And many years. She's a she's a colleague of mine
[1:03:49] Speaker 2: and a friend. So she was very generous in her praise.
[1:03:53] Speaker 1: Well, the reputation she has in the in the media
[1:03:56] Speaker 1: and journalism, and I know that that when she's on
[1:03:59] Speaker 1: the case she tends to get to the bottom of it.
[1:04:02] Speaker 2: She does. I think it's yeah, I.
[1:04:04] Speaker 1: Think that's a good one. I was going to say,
[1:04:06] Speaker 1: like a dog with a bay and there's a compliment, Yes,
[1:04:08] Speaker 1: that the way she goes after stories, but she touches
[1:04:12] Speaker 1: on something there and I think it's great. It reflects
[1:04:14] Speaker 1: on the book that someone with Kate's a reputation does
[1:04:18] Speaker 1: a endorsement like that. But the devastation wreaked on the
[1:04:23] Speaker 1: innocent victims. And we've had a discussion, we've dissected different investigations.
[1:04:29] Speaker 1: But it does have an emotional impact, doesn't it Not
[1:04:32] Speaker 1: just emotional physical that destroys lives if we get it wrong.
[1:04:36] Speaker 2: Yeah, it does. It must have, particularly like one of
[1:04:39] Speaker 2: the cases in there that the bloke spent twenty years
[1:04:41] Speaker 2: in jail. I mean, there's twenty years lost of your
[1:04:46] Speaker 2: kids growing up, which never get back. If you lose
[1:04:50] Speaker 2: friends that people you know, their lives move on. As
[1:04:54] Speaker 2: that particular blake told me, he said, you know, people
[1:04:58] Speaker 2: would write at the beginning when I first went in,
[1:05:00] Speaker 2: friends would write, friends would visit, and it sort of
[1:05:02] Speaker 2: slowly stopped, not because they were being they'd forgotten him,
[1:05:07] Speaker 2: but their lives had moved on. His life stood still
[1:05:11] Speaker 2: in a jail cell. And yeah, that's that's the cost
[1:05:15] Speaker 2: of it. It does turn people's lives upside down, and
[1:05:19] Speaker 2: some of them just never recover.
[1:05:21] Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, well, thank you for coming on. I catch
[1:05:24] Speaker 1: Killers again for a second, second time. And I know
[1:05:28] Speaker 1: you've won Walkley Awards and other other awards, but that
[1:05:30] Speaker 1: must sit real high in your high points of your career,
[1:05:34] Speaker 1: coming ony catch Killers.
[1:05:35] Speaker 2: It does indeed garage twice. I'll be working on the
[1:05:39] Speaker 2: next time. Okay, very thanks for having it, Thanks for
[1:05:41] Speaker 2: having me.
[1:05:41] Speaker 1: And also thank you for pointing out as we're discussed today,
[1:05:46] Speaker 1: where these mistakes happen, they will, We're human mistakes. Mistakes happen,
[1:05:50] Speaker 1: but if we learn from the mistakes, that puts the
[1:05:52] Speaker 1: system in a better place. And I think that's an
[1:05:54] Speaker 1: important important message to come out. Yeah, indeed, thanks very much.
[1:05:59] Speaker 1: Thank you. So you're next.
[1:06:00] Speaker 2: Don't see you next time.
[1:06:09] Speaker 1: Mm hm

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.