Speaker 1: From The Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Kristinaviot.
Speaker 1: It's Wednesday, May fifteenth. Treasurer at Jim Chalmers handed down
Speaker 1: his third federal budget on Tuesday night.
Speaker 2: Speak of this government, and this budget delivers for every
Speaker 2: Australian a tax cut for every taxpayer, wages growing in
Speaker 2: every industry, a better deal for every working parent, a
Speaker 2: fair ago at every checkout.
Speaker 1: The Treasurer is forecasting a bigger than expected surplus this
Speaker 1: year to the tune of nine point three billion dollars,
Speaker 1: and Labour's going big on cost of living relief, committing
Speaker 1: almost eight billion dollars to subsidies and rent assistance. That
Speaker 1: means every Australian will get a three hundred dollars subsidy
Speaker 1: to help with energy bills. But the Treasurer says it
Speaker 1: won't send inflation soaring again. But there's no such thing
Speaker 1: as a free lunch. And the Treasurer will run combined
Speaker 1: deficits of more than one hundred twenty two billion dollars
Speaker 1: over the next four years to accommodate the spending. And
Speaker 1: with the federal election on the horizon, the government has
Speaker 1: carved out almost seven billion dollars for campaign spending, and
Speaker 1: Chalmers's unique economic strategy could see it called sooner rather
Speaker 1: than later. You can read our experts detailed reporting and
Speaker 1: analysis of the federal budget right now at the Australian
Speaker 1: dot com dot au. Chris Dawson didn't get a fair go.
Speaker 1: That's the contention of the barrister representing the former rugby
Speaker 1: league star in the appeal against his conviction for the
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty two murder of his wife Lynn. Public defender
Speaker 1: Belinda Rigg argued Dawson's good character deserves greater consideration, but
Speaker 1: the three Supreme Court justices hearing the appeal aren't so sure.
Speaker 1: That's today's episode. When Justice Ian Harrison convicted Chris Dawson
Speaker 1: for the nineteen eighty two murder of his first wife, Lynn,
Speaker 1: he did so on a circumstantial case.
Speaker 3: The evidence not reveal how mister Dawson killed Lynette Dawson.
Speaker 3: It does not reveal whether he did so with the
Speaker 3: assistance of anyone else or by himself. It does not
Speaker 3: reveal where or when he did so, nor does it
Speaker 3: reveal well and at Dawson's body is now The charge
Speaker 3: of murder in this trial is unsupported by direct evidence.
Speaker 3: The case against mister Dawson is wholly circumstantial.
Speaker 1: That means there was no body, no crime scene, no weapon,
Speaker 1: or no eyewitness that could prove beyond a reasonable doubt
Speaker 1: that Dawson committed the crime. When a prosecutor is running
Speaker 1: a circumstantial case, like Craig Everson was in twenty twenty
Speaker 1: two when Chris Dawson was brought to trial, they have
Speaker 1: to instead rely on other types of evidence like witness testimony,
Speaker 1: police statements, official documents, video footage, and contemporaneous notes or
Speaker 1: correspondence to prove it. This huge body of evidence is
Speaker 1: known in the law as strands of a cable, or
Speaker 1: links in a chain, or threads in a rope. Basically,
Speaker 1: it means each thread isn't neces necessarily capable of proving
Speaker 1: a case on its own, but they're more powerful, sometimes
Speaker 1: even undeniable, when they're all woven together. Chris Dawson's case
Speaker 1: was heard by a judge alone. That's what the former
Speaker 1: rugby league star wanted. He argued in the run up
Speaker 1: to his Supreme Court trial that the publicity generated by
Speaker 1: The Australian's investigative podcast The teacher's pet meant he wouldn't
Speaker 1: get a fair trial if the decision were in the
Speaker 1: hands of a jury. But the thinking is that judges
Speaker 1: aren't as easily swayed as regular joe's like you and
Speaker 1: I and so. In hearing the case alone, Justice Harrison
Speaker 1: had to determine the truth of those threads himself. On Tuesday,
Speaker 1: Belinda Rigg, SC, the public defender representing Chris Dawson in
Speaker 1: his appeal, argued that Justice Harrison got it wrong when
Speaker 1: he accepted that Lynn died on that weekend in early
Speaker 1: January nineteen eighty two. Remember, Chris Dawson has always maintained
Speaker 1: he received a phone call for from Lynn on Saturday,
Speaker 1: January nine, while he was working as a lifeguard at
Speaker 1: the Northbridge Baths. He claims she said in that call
Speaker 1: she was going away for a few days to clear
Speaker 1: her head. Rig had previously argued there was a reasonable
Speaker 1: possibility that's what happened, because Lynn was confident her beloved daughters,
Speaker 1: then just at four and two years old, would be
Speaker 1: well cared for by Dawson, who she said was every
Speaker 1: bit the doting dad. But rig argued that the fact
Speaker 1: of Lynn's death, the thread wasn't born out by the
Speaker 1: evidence presented at trial. There are no phone records to
Speaker 1: show that a long distance phone call was received at
Speaker 1: the kiosk at the baths. The teenage attendant who answered
Speaker 1: the phone says she can't remember who was on the
Speaker 1: other end or if it was the call. Dawson says
Speaker 1: he took Lynn's mum, Helena Simms, and his friend Philip Day,
Speaker 1: who were also at the bards on that day, didn't
Speaker 1: see or hear Dawson take the call. Over the course
Speaker 1: of more than two hours on Tuesday morning, Belinda Rigg
Speaker 1: covered a lot of ground. Some of it was reiterating
Speaker 1: arguments made on Monday, but there was some newness there too.
Speaker 1: Justice Ian Harrison found Chris Dawson was motivated to kill
Speaker 1: his first wife by an obsession with the teenage babysitter
Speaker 1: known as j C. The pair later married and had
Speaker 1: a child together. He found Dawson was terrified of losing
Speaker 1: the teenager who'd also been his student, and saw his
Speaker 1: wife as a roadblock to that relationship. But on Tuesday,
Speaker 1: Belinda Rigg told the court Dawson would have carried on
Speaker 1: with j C even if he was still married to Lynn,
Speaker 1: and that it was JAC who wanted out. We've used
Speaker 1: voice actors to bring you the words spoken in court.
Speaker 4: Lynette was never an impediment as far as JAC was concerned,
Speaker 4: and he demonstrated himself to be well prepared to lose
Speaker 4: his relationship with his wife if JAC would continue the
Speaker 4: relationship with him.
Speaker 1: In the final moments of her submission rig swung big.
Speaker 1: She suggested the better elements of Dawson's character had been
Speaker 1: overlooked by Justice Harrison in twenty twenty two, and implored
Speaker 1: Justices Julie Ward, Christine Adamson and Anthony Paine not to
Speaker 1: do the same.
Speaker 4: On the issue of the reasonableness of the verdict. The
Speaker 4: applicant's character is something which is required in our submission
Speaker 4: to be taken into account, and we've set out in
Speaker 4: detail in the written submissions the evidence that bears upon
Speaker 4: that issue of his good character.
Speaker 1: Justice Adamson responded just in.
Speaker 5: Terms of that good character, he didn't have any criminal convictions.
Speaker 5: But when one looks at the evidence of JC and
Speaker 5: how he conducted himself as a married man, as a
Speaker 5: teacher with students under his authority, one might think that
Speaker 5: the good character was not entitled to be given any
Speaker 5: particular weight.
Speaker 1: Dawson claims he dropped Lynn, who didn't drive, at a
Speaker 1: bus stop in Mona Vale, on Sydney's North Beaches on
Speaker 1: the morning of Saturday, January nine. It was later that
Speaker 1: day that he says she called him at the baths
Speaker 1: to say she needed some time away. JC testified at
Speaker 1: trial that Dawson allowed her to wear and keep items
Speaker 1: of Lynn's clothing after he moved her into the family
Speaker 1: home at Bayview. Her wedding and engagement rings were also
Speaker 1: left there and later made into a new wedding set
Speaker 1: for JC. That wasn't lost on Justice Julie Ward, who
Speaker 1: said it was convenient that Lynn wasn't wearing the rings
Speaker 1: when Dawson alleges he took her to the bus stop.
Speaker 1: Belindaregg had one more hand to play on Tuesday, before
Speaker 1: clearing the floor for Crown Prosecutor Brett Hatfield to make
Speaker 1: his submissions, she attempted to tender more than seven hundred
Speaker 1: pages of material relating to Chris Dawson's declining mental health.
Speaker 1: Hatfield objected to the tender. He said he was concerned
Speaker 1: it would be used in some kind of opaque attack.
Speaker 1: On the prosecution case run by Craig Everson in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two.
Speaker 6: If it's going to be suggested that something improper occurred
Speaker 6: or there was bad faith by the trial Crown in
Speaker 6: how he conducted the matter, then that should be made
Speaker 6: clear and we should be able to respond with proper
Speaker 6: submissions directed at it.
Speaker 1: Rick responded that the material, which included medical assessments made
Speaker 1: by a doctor and a psychologist following Dawson's incarceration, was
Speaker 1: important in understanding his current circumstances and the ongoing impact
Speaker 1: of the long delay in bringing charges. But Justice Julie
Speaker 1: Ward said a large chunk of time had already been
Speaker 1: dedicated to Dawson's so called forensic disadvantage and rejected the
Speaker 1: tender coming up what the Crown Prosecutor has to say
Speaker 1: about Chris Dawson's version of events. Subscribers to The Australian
Speaker 1: get access to this kind of in depth reporting and
Speaker 1: analysis twenty four to seven, even when it happens on
Speaker 1: the same day as the federal budget. Also breaking news alerts,
Speaker 1: newsletters and live events. Check us out at the Australian
Speaker 1: dot com dot au. We'll be back after this break.
Speaker 1: When he opened his submissions on Tuesday. Crown Prosecutor Brett
Speaker 1: Hatfield got right to the point, we've used voice actors
Speaker 1: to bring you the words spoken in court.
Speaker 6: There is not a significant possibility that an innocent person
Speaker 6: has been convicted in this case.
Speaker 1: Hatfield argued that Dawson's version of events that Lynn had
Speaker 1: left the family home at Bayview voluntarily and called him
Speaker 1: at the Northridge Bath to relay her plan to spend
Speaker 1: some time away wasn't credible. The prosecutor worked his way,
Speaker 1: sometimes at breakneck speed, through the evidence given by Lynn's
Speaker 1: family members, her friends, her colleagues, and even Jc, the
Speaker 1: teenage babysitter who was installed at Bayview after she disappeared
Speaker 1: in early nineteen eighty two. Hatfield said Lynn never contacted
Speaker 1: anyone but Chris Dawson after January eighth of that year.
Speaker 1: Dawson's public defender, Belinda Rigg, argued that the Sims family
Speaker 1: weren't particularly close or in any kind of habitual contact,
Speaker 1: but Hatfield said prolific diary entries and letters panned by
Speaker 1: Lynn's mum, Helena, proved the opposite.
Speaker 6: That material does show a very close and regular contact
Speaker 6: between the deceased and her mother.
Speaker 1: What's more, evidence given by Lynn's siblings, Pat Jenkins and
Speaker 1: Greg Simms showed members of the family spoke regularly and
Speaker 1: often spent time together at their parents' home in Sydney's
Speaker 1: Eastern suburbs. Hatfield said later that even if her marriage
Speaker 1: to Dawson ended, Lynn wouldn't cut contact with her parents
Speaker 1: and siblings. Next, Hatfield dealt with Rigg's assertion that it
Speaker 1: was plausible that Lynn would leave the family home knowing
Speaker 1: her children would be in safe hands with their father.
Speaker 1: Hatfield pointed to Dawson's decision to send the two children
Speaker 1: to stay with their grandmother, Helena Simms after their trip
Speaker 1: to the Northbridge Bards on January ninth, as evidence he
Speaker 1: possibly wasn't as well equipped as a parent as he'd
Speaker 1: have the court believe.
Speaker 6: My learned friend's argument is that he was a fantastic
Speaker 6: father and could take care of the kids himself. Why
Speaker 6: the deceased is disappearing off for a few days. Is
Speaker 6: he specifically asking for the children to go to the
Speaker 6: mother's on that day if she is happy leaving the
Speaker 6: kids with him, and then wanting the kids to go
Speaker 6: to her mother's place, but then not contacting her mother.
Speaker 6: It seems to be part of the implausibility.
Speaker 1: The prosecutor acknowledged Lynn Simms was upset about the deterioration
Speaker 1: of her relationship and the arrival on the scene of
Speaker 1: the teenage babysittert JC, but he said she was also
Speaker 1: committed to her marriage.
Speaker 6: If she wasn't leaving when those other things occurred, why
Speaker 6: would she leave when it was looking better after the counseling.
Speaker 1: By other things, Hatfield means Dawson's infidelity and his impromptu
Speaker 1: trip to Queensland with JC just before Christmas in nineteen
Speaker 1: eighty one. The pair ultimately returned to Sydney when j
Speaker 1: C became ill. The prosecutor also pointed to various attempts
Speaker 1: by Dawson to leave Lynn, including taking out a lease
Speaker 1: on a property in Manly where he intended to live
Speaker 1: with j C. Hatfield said Dawson's interactions with j C
Speaker 1: were marked by a degree of desperation and obsession.
Speaker 6: An affair is an understatement about this relationship. It's not
Speaker 6: an affair. It's an obsessive, possessive relationship with a between
Speaker 6: the applicant, the former teacher of the girl that turns eighteen.
Speaker 6: Only at that time.
Speaker 1: Where Belinda Brigg attempted to build up Dawson's character in
Speaker 1: her submissions, the prosecutor, Brett Hatfield took a different tack.
Speaker 1: He said, Chris Dawson's behavior in the days and weeks
Speaker 1: after Lynn disappeared wasn't what y'd exct sspeck from a
Speaker 1: concerned husband.
Speaker 6: The applicant conducted himself in a manner which was completely
Speaker 6: irreconcilable with any purported belief that the deceased might be
Speaker 6: alive or return home. So collecting JC from Southwest Rocks
Speaker 6: on the eleventh of January nineteen eighty two, immediately cohabitating
Speaker 6: with JC and sharing the matrimonial bed and the evidence
Speaker 6: about the clothing and the jewelry.
Speaker 1: At that time, Hatfield noted that based on the available evidence,
Speaker 1: Dawson was the last person to see Lynn alive, meaning
Speaker 1: he had both opportunity and motive to kill her on
Speaker 1: or about the eighth of January in nineteen eighty two.
Speaker 1: The prosecutor said, proof of life checks conducted in the
Speaker 1: months and years after that date had come up empty.
Speaker 1: All of that, taken together, the prosecutor says, means justice
Speaker 1: ian Harrison's finding that Dawson murdered his wife was reasonable.
Speaker 1: He'll continue his submissions today, come back to the front
Speaker 1: tomorrow to hear how it all wraps up. And you
Speaker 1: can read about what the government's new federal budget means
Speaker 1: for you at the Australian dot com dot au