Speaker 1: From The Australian. Here's what's on the Front. I'm Claire Harvey.
Speaker 1: It's Tuesday, May fourteen. Forget about future surpluses. That's the
Speaker 1: advanced word on today's federal budget. As Jim Charmers bakes
Speaker 1: in long term spending blowouts. The Treasurer will deliver a
Speaker 1: nine point three billion dollar surplus this year, then deeper
Speaker 1: deficits over the next four years. The money's going on
Speaker 1: unavoidable deals with the states to pay for things like
Speaker 1: housing and help, plus pay rises for low paid workers
Speaker 1: and cost of living relief. Tonight we'll release a special
Speaker 1: episode of The Front all about the budget, and you
Speaker 1: can be the first to know all the detail and
Speaker 1: what it means for your business and household by subscribing
Speaker 1: to The Australian dot com dot AU. A member of
Speaker 1: the University of Melbourne's governing council says the UNI's response
Speaker 1: to gaza protests has been unaccepted and he's lashed antisemitism
Speaker 1: proliferating on campuses across the country. The kids, the house
Speaker 1: and the teenage babysitter. That's what Chris Dawson wanted, says
Speaker 1: a judge hearing the former Rugby League stars appeal on
Speaker 1: his murder conviction. Dawson is attempting to demonstrate his wife, Lynn,
Speaker 1: who hasn't been seen by her family since nineteen eighty two,
Speaker 1: may have just walked out on him and their little girls.
Speaker 1: That's today's episode. Sydney in January is hot and sticky.
Speaker 1: New Year's bring temperatures over forty degrees on some days
Speaker 1: and violent afternoon storms in the earliest days of nineteen
Speaker 1: eighty two. That was very much the case. On January ninth,
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty two, a young father from Sydney's Northern Beaches
Speaker 1: arranged to take his two daughters, then aged just four
Speaker 1: and two years old, to a local title pool to
Speaker 1: escape the heat. There they paddled in the shadows, supported
Speaker 1: by their dad, a tanned athletic Chris Dawson. Their maternal grandma,
Speaker 1: Helena Simms, was there, so was one of Dawson's friends,
Speaker 1: Philip Day. It was during this outing that Dawson claims
Speaker 1: he received a phone call from his wife, Lynnette. He
Speaker 1: says she told him she wanted to get away for
Speaker 1: a few days clear her head. Lynn's family never saw
Speaker 1: her again. In twenty twenty two, more than forty years
Speaker 1: after that summer day at Northbridge Baths, Justice he and
Speaker 1: Harrison in the New Southwald Supreme Court found Christopher Michael
Speaker 1: Dawson guilty of Lynnette's murder. The judge said that on
Speaker 1: that day at the baths, Chris had already murderedly and
Speaker 1: left her body in their home, planning to return later
Speaker 1: and dispose of her remains.
Speaker 2: Christopher Michael Dawson on the charge that on are about
Speaker 2: eight January nineteen eighty two, at Dayview or elsewhere in
Speaker 2: the state of New South Wales, you did murder Lynett Dawson,
Speaker 2: I find you guilty.
Speaker 1: On Monday, almost two years after Justice Harrison sentence Dawson
Speaker 1: to twenty four years in prison, Dawson's appeal got underway
Speaker 1: in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal. His
Speaker 1: public defender, Belinda Rigg SC says the evidence doesn't stack up.
Speaker 1: We've used a voice actor to bring you the words
Speaker 1: spoken in court.
Speaker 3: The evidence is not sufficient in its nature and quality
Speaker 3: for the inferences to be drawn beyond reasonable doubt.
Speaker 1: That trip to the north Bridge Barths is central to
Speaker 1: Dawson's application. In the trial, prosecutor Craig Everson SC told
Speaker 1: the court Dawson had in id Lynn's mum, Helena Simms,
Speaker 1: and friend Philip Day to the baths on that day
Speaker 1: so they could see him be called into the pool
Speaker 1: office to take a long distance phone call. That's the
Speaker 1: call Dawson claims was from Lynn. The Crown also alleged,
Speaker 1: and Justice Ian Harrison agreed it was all part of
Speaker 1: Dawson's plan to get his little girls out of the
Speaker 1: way for the night. He told Philip Day that Lynn
Speaker 1: wanted the girls to spend the night with their grandma
Speaker 1: on the other side of Sydney. Justice An Harrison found
Speaker 1: that was so Dawson could go home alone and deal
Speaker 1: with Lynn's remains, but Dawson's public defender, Belinda Rigg SC
Speaker 1: said that's probably reading too much into it. The Crown
Speaker 1: at trial suggests that there was some sinister or underhand
Speaker 1: aspect to this relationship, to this arrangement with mister Day.
Speaker 1: Justice Christine Adamson, one of the three Supreme Court justices
Speaker 1: hearing the appeal, asked rig if she meant to argue
Speaker 1: that Dawson could have murdered Lynn at a later day.
Speaker 1: That is, the judge wanted to know, are you saying
Speaker 1: Dawson could have murdered Lynne, but he just didn't murder
Speaker 1: her at the time. The Crown has alleged.
Speaker 3: No, your honor, it's submitted that it is a reasonable hypothesis,
Speaker 3: consistent with innocence, that she was alive at that time.
Speaker 3: The Crown has undertaken a trial to disprove that as
Speaker 3: an indispensable intermediate fact. And it's not an issue in
Speaker 3: these proceedings that he might have murdered her but at
Speaker 3: a different point in time after that afternoon. No, it's
Speaker 3: a crucial issue whether there's a reasonable possibility that Lynette
Speaker 3: Dawson called the north Bridge Barths on the afternoon of
Speaker 3: the ninth of January, which would result in the acquittal
Speaker 3: of the applicant.
Speaker 1: One of the grounds of Dawson's appeal is that the
Speaker 1: evidence didn't establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Lynn was
Speaker 1: dead on January nine. One of Harrison's reasons for his
Speaker 1: finding was that Lynn didn't communicate with any family members
Speaker 1: after that date, but rig argued, these long breaks in
Speaker 1: communication common. Just a note on this. Belinda Rigg and
Speaker 1: the judges call Lynn miss Dawson. Her legal name was
Speaker 1: Lynnette Dawson, but her family has asked us to call
Speaker 1: her by her maiden name, Lynnette Simms.
Speaker 3: Miss Dawson's sister, pat Jenkins didn't have a phone at
Speaker 3: her home at Stuart's Point on the Mid North Coast.
Speaker 3: She was at that time speaking quickly and breathing heavily,
Speaker 3: and she offered for her to come and stay with her.
Speaker 3: At that time. Miss Dawson had a very close relationship
Speaker 3: with her mother, but there's nothing in Helena sims diary
Speaker 3: entries for October nineteen eighty one to January nineteen eighty
Speaker 3: two or otherwise, or other evidence in the trial suggesting
Speaker 3: that they had daily contact or anything close to that
Speaker 3: with one another.
Speaker 1: Belinda Riggs said Lynd Dawson's mindsetting the lead up to
Speaker 1: her disappearance indicated it was possible that Dawson didn't kill
Speaker 1: her at all, that she left the family home at
Speaker 1: Bayview and her small children of her own volition. Rigg
Speaker 1: said the young mum wasn't coping because Dawson was angry,
Speaker 1: incommunicative and reluctant to be intimate with his wife. Plus
Speaker 1: she was distraught at the arrival in her home of
Speaker 1: a teenage babysitter. This girl is known by the acronym
Speaker 1: JC because she was a child during significant parts of
Speaker 1: this story. J C was sixteen years old when, according
Speaker 1: to the finding of another court, Dawson, her school teacher,
Speaker 1: illegally had sex with her. He's been convicted of unlawful
Speaker 1: carnal knowledge and is serving a three year sentence for that.
Speaker 1: J C was the family babysitter, but Dawson was infatuated
Speaker 1: with her and had moved her into their home for
Speaker 1: long periods of time. Lynn knew she and Chris were
Speaker 1: having sex, and she was distraught.
Speaker 3: She had found him in bed in their home with JC.
Speaker 3: She had found her topless and naked in their family pool,
Speaker 3: and her loss of self esteem and devastation at those
Speaker 3: circumstances were discussed with friends and work colleagues.
Speaker 1: So this is Chris Dawson's public defender arguing that because
Speaker 1: Dawson was being unfaithful with a schoolgirl, Lynn was in
Speaker 1: such despair that she might well have left her beloved
Speaker 1: children and her home. It's a tough case for a
Speaker 1: barrister to argue, even one as learned as Belinda Wigg.
Speaker 1: So what about the fact that witnesses said Lynn would
Speaker 1: never voluntarily leave her kids. Belinda Riggs said Lynn knew
Speaker 1: the girls would be well cared for by their father.
Speaker 3: There was a considerable body of evidence that mister Dawson
Speaker 3: was and was well known to miss Dawson to be
Speaker 3: highly capable of looking after the children. Miss Dawson would
Speaker 3: sit and chat with the other women at the picnics,
Speaker 3: and it would always be mister Dawson who was playing
Speaker 3: with the children, changing nappies, looking after the children's needs.
Speaker 1: That a woman would voluntarily abandon her children wasn't an
Speaker 1: entirely novel concept for Christale. We heard in the murder
Speaker 1: trial that there was a family story about a woman
Speaker 1: who'd done just that. This was the mother of Chris's brother,
Speaker 1: Peter Dawson's ex wife, Lynnell. Lennelle's mother had left the
Speaker 1: family when Lynnell was just a child. Belinda Rigg argued
Speaker 1: this could go some way to explaining Chris Dawson's actions
Speaker 1: in the crucial days and weeks after Lynn disappeared.
Speaker 3: That situation, having so starkly occurred in the Dawson family
Speaker 3: and well known to them, may well have contributed, amongst
Speaker 3: other things, to Chris Dawson not doing everything within his
Speaker 3: power to go and find his wife.
Speaker 1: Justice Adamson was curious about this.
Speaker 4: So in those circumstances where somebody who's really desperate to
Speaker 4: be a mother only becomes a mother seven years after
Speaker 4: she's been married, absolutely adores her children, it's difficult to
Speaker 4: see how the applicant's former sister in law's mother can
Speaker 4: really have a bearing on that normalization, given the focus
Speaker 4: of miss Dawson on getting pregnant and her joy at
Speaker 4: having the two children.
Speaker 3: Rigg responded, his conduct on his own account of what
Speaker 3: happened is uncaring and perhaps callous in terms of just
Speaker 3: continuing things with j C in the house and not
Speaker 3: making a greater effort than he did to find his wife.
Speaker 3: But it is of some importance that there was this
Speaker 3: big feature in their family of a woman who had
Speaker 3: left and set up her own life. That he might
Speaker 3: not necessarily presume something bad had happened to his wife.
Speaker 3: He might think it more plausible than another person might
Speaker 3: that his wife had simply decided to move on and
Speaker 3: set up a new life for herself.
Speaker 1: Justice and Harrison found it was Chris Dawson's infatuation with
Speaker 1: j C. His student and the teenage babysitter who he
Speaker 1: later married, and his fear of losing her that ultimately
Speaker 1: motivated him to kill Lynn. Glinda Rigg said, for the
Speaker 1: most part, the judge in the original trial was right
Speaker 1: to believe jac's evidence.
Speaker 3: That evidence demonstrates a passionate love for j C on
Speaker 3: Dawson's part, which is relevant to the motive the Crown
Speaker 3: relies upon in this case. The evidence indicates that both
Speaker 3: JC and the applicant went away towards Queensland a day
Speaker 3: or two before Christmas nineteen eighty one with the intention
Speaker 3: of not returning to Sydney to start a new life.
Speaker 3: That's jc's evidence. By boxing day, jc's evidence was that
Speaker 3: she did not want the relationship to continue.
Speaker 1: So this was a trip when Chris Dawson was in
Speaker 1: his early thirties and j C was eighteen. Dawson was
Speaker 1: married to Lynn and lived with her and their two
Speaker 1: little girls. He and JC ran away to Queensland together,
Speaker 1: leaving Lynn and the little girls alone for Christmas. But
Speaker 1: in the murder trial, j C said she was no
Speaker 1: longer wanting the relationship with Dawson by then. She gave
Speaker 1: evidence she was so anxious. On that trip, she became
Speaker 1: nauseous and broke out in hives. They turned around and
Speaker 1: headed back to Sydney. Back at the murder trial, the
Speaker 1: Crown argued jc's reluctance made Dawson panic that he decided
Speaker 1: to get rid of Linn because he was terrified of
Speaker 1: losing JC. In court on Monday, Belinda Rigg said that
Speaker 1: wasn't right.
Speaker 3: There was ongoing contact between the applicant and JC between
Speaker 3: Boxing day and the time she went to Southwest Rocks
Speaker 3: on a holiday with friends.
Speaker 1: Rick argued Dawson's insistence that JC call him on a
Speaker 1: daily basis while she was on a trip with her
Speaker 1: friends to a beach town called Southwest Rocks that was
Speaker 1: an evidence he was jealous or possessive of her, especially
Speaker 1: given he didn't try to stop her from going on
Speaker 1: the trip.
Speaker 3: That's not necessarily reflective of a possessiveness or a jealousy,
Speaker 3: as distinct from a more usual type of way people
Speaker 3: who are romantically involved with one another or have been
Speaker 3: romantically involved with one another might speak with one another.
Speaker 1: Justice Adamson probed Dawson's obsession with JC further. She suggested
Speaker 1: Dawson wanted to have it all.
Speaker 4: The applicant, from his point of view, wanted to keep
Speaker 4: the children, wanted to keep the house, and wanted to
Speaker 4: keep JC, and one way of doing that would be
Speaker 4: to murder his wife.
Speaker 1: But Rigg said the fact that Dawson had planned to
Speaker 1: leave his home and the children for a new life
Speaker 1: in Queensland a fortnight earlier was evidence he wasn't particularly
Speaker 1: concerned about the financial implications of his actions. Justice Adamson
Speaker 1: wasn't satisfied.
Speaker 4: His brother, who was a solicitor, said, look, if you
Speaker 4: leave that house, you might jeopardize your financial interest in
Speaker 4: that house, and he described the pre Christmas departure as
Speaker 4: impulsive because he was so desperate to be with JC.
Speaker 3: And Rigg responded, there was obviously a financial impact upon
Speaker 3: the applicant potentially in leaving the house and in leaving
Speaker 3: his wife in the circumstances that he had, but it
Speaker 3: wasn't something he'd shown himself to be overly troubled by
Speaker 3: in the circumstances.
Speaker 1: Rig also revisited an assertion made in the murder trial
Speaker 1: by Dawson's former barrister, Pauline David, that Dawson loved both
Speaker 1: women Lynn and j C simultaneously. She said Jace's withdraw
Speaker 1: will actually brought him closer to Lynn. They attended marriage
Speaker 1: counseling and manly and were seen holding hands shortly thereafter.
Speaker 3: The evidence in our submission indicated that when j C
Speaker 3: withdrew from him in January nineteen eighty two, he made
Speaker 3: more effort in the relationship with his wife. Lynn was
Speaker 3: observed to be positive and happy after the counseling, and
Speaker 3: she and Dawson were seen holding hands. They were both
Speaker 3: in particularly good spirits, were holding hands and once again
Speaker 3: felt close.
Speaker 1: But Jace moved into the family home at Bayview just
Speaker 1: days after Lynd disappeared. J C testified at trial that
Speaker 1: during that time she slept in the marital bed with
Speaker 1: Dawson and wore Lynn's clothes at his encouragement. Belinda Rigg
Speaker 1: said that doesn't necessarily mean Dawson killed Lynn. It was
Speaker 1: here that just as Julie Ward, the President of the
Speaker 1: Court of Appeal, took up the questioning. Ward said it
Speaker 1: would be odd for someone to give his wife's clothing
Speaker 1: to his lover if he expected she'd return home at
Speaker 1: some point. Rigg responded, if all his attention was for
Speaker 1: his wife, and it was being contented that his only
Speaker 1: love was for his wife, and the only thing he
Speaker 1: wanted was for his relationship with his wife to be fixed.
Speaker 1: It would then be incongruous for him to allow j
Speaker 1: C to stay in the house and to allow her
Speaker 1: to wear clothes of his wife. But if his greater
Speaker 1: focus was on JC at the time that she was
Speaker 1: there with him, it doesn't necessarily indicate a knowledge that
Speaker 1: his wife had died or responsibility for that. It's in
Speaker 1: circumstances where the Crown has emphasized the passion that he
Speaker 1: had for JC, it might then be said he's not
Speaker 1: going to necessarily be clear headed and completely logical and
Speaker 1: aversive of risk. The third judge on the bench, just
Speaker 1: as Anthony Payne, chimed in at this point. He asked
Speaker 1: if an innocent person would move a teenager into the
Speaker 1: marital bed after his wife's disappear apearance. Belinda Rigg was
Speaker 1: frank in her response.
Speaker 3: It's not admirable, it's not wise. The nature of his
Speaker 3: interest in JC is, in our submission, related to the
Speaker 3: very reason why his wife left to take some time
Speaker 3: to herself. They're not strangely coincidental occurrences. These occurrences are
Speaker 3: in our submission, intertwined with one another.
Speaker 1: She said Dawson was aware he'd have to deal with
Speaker 1: the consequences if and when Lynn returned to Bayview. Justice
Speaker 1: Adamson asked.
Speaker 4: Because you might say, well, she's already forgiven him for
Speaker 4: going off with JC to Queensland. She's been prepared to
Speaker 4: undertake marriage counseling. Miss Dawson obviously adored the children, and
Speaker 4: he could, as it were, count on her goodwill in
Speaker 4: future if need be.
Speaker 3: Rigg responded, partly, your honor, But the situation on Dawson's
Speaker 3: account is that his view was that Miss Dawson had
Speaker 3: left him without his agreement on nine January nineteen eighty two.
Speaker 3: Part of the request made to j C was for
Speaker 3: her to look after the children, and she did have
Speaker 3: a history of having looked after the children, so that's
Speaker 3: part of the context in which her presence in the
Speaker 3: house could be explicable. But additionally, if JC being back
Speaker 3: in the house then reignited his relationship with JC, his
Speaker 3: focus then may very well have been on JC, despite
Speaker 3: the facts that he would have been required to resolve
Speaker 3: in some way his circumstances with his wife once she
Speaker 3: came back, whether that's by an amicable separation or the
Speaker 3: sale of the house.
Speaker 1: Coming up why Chris Dawson says it's the police's fault
Speaker 1: Lynn's killer wasn't caught earlier. Subscribers to The Australian get
Speaker 1: to read all are exclusive analysis plus the take from
Speaker 1: The Teacher's Pet creator Hedley Thomas at The Australian dot
Speaker 1: com dot a U and we'll be back after this break.
Speaker 1: The phone call Chris Dawson says he got during that
Speaker 1: trip to the Northbridge baths goes to one of the
Speaker 1: other grounds for his appeal. He says it was unfair
Speaker 1: for Justice and Harrison to conclude the call happened because
Speaker 1: he's at a significant forensic disadvantage due to the long
Speaker 1: delay by police in bringing charges. Dawson's wife, Lynn Simms,
Speaker 1: disappeared in early January nineteen eighty two. Dawson wasn't charged
Speaker 1: with her murder until twenty eighteen, following the release of
Speaker 1: The Australian's investigative podcast The Teacher's Pet, made by our
Speaker 1: colleague Headley Thomas. So Dawson can't prove if the call happened,
Speaker 1: or if it did, who made it. On Monday, the
Speaker 1: public defender for Chris Dawson, Belinda riggerc so the forty
Speaker 1: year old phone records were no longer able to be
Speaker 1: scrutinized and that put the former school teacher in a
Speaker 1: tough spot. But just as Christine Adamson said, it goes
Speaker 1: both ways.
Speaker 4: Right, and the Crown has lost capacity to show that
Speaker 4: it came from someone else, like, for example, JC or
Speaker 4: some member of the family. So in terms of forensic disadvantage,
Speaker 4: both parties have potentially suffered forensic disadvantage and there's no
Speaker 4: particular way of knowing what that forensic disadvantage is.
Speaker 3: Is that not right?
Speaker 1: Belinda Riggs said the law wasn't designed to protect the crown,
Speaker 1: it was designed to ensure accused people got a fair trial.
Speaker 1: Come back to the front tomorrow for all the evidence
Speaker 1: from day two of Chris Dawson's appeal, and keep up
Speaker 1: with the federal budget and all our reporting at the
Speaker 1: Australian dot Com dot a U