WEBVTT - From The Front: Can journalists call someone a murderer? 0:00:06.040 --> 0:00:08.400 You can listen to the Front on your smart sneaker 0:00:08.560 --> 0:00:12.680 every morning to hear the latest episode. Just say play 0:00:12.720 --> 0:00:23.520 the news from the Australian. From the Australian, here's what's 0:00:23.560 --> 0:00:29.200 on the front. I'm Claire Harvey. It's Wednesday, July thirty one. 0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:33.519 Drama in the bush as regional airline REX fights to 0:00:33.640 --> 0:00:34.440 stay in the air. 0:00:34.880 --> 0:00:35.680 REX is in a. 0:00:35.680 --> 0:00:39.000 Trading halt amid fears it's on the brink of collapse, 0:00:39.280 --> 0:00:42.440 but it's the only carrier on dozens of routes to 0:00:42.520 --> 0:00:49.199 remote locations. Inflation numbers come out today and it's not 0:00:49.600 --> 0:00:52.559 going to be pretty. Analysts they're expecting a jump in 0:00:52.640 --> 0:00:55.279 price growth to three point eight percent in the year 0:00:55.320 --> 0:00:58.600 to June, raising fears of yet another interest rate rise 0:00:58.760 --> 0:01:00.959 next week. You can be the first to know when 0:01:00.960 --> 0:01:04.080 the figures come out at the Australian dot com. Dorau 0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:11.640 John Perros was acquitted of murdering his ex girlfriend Shandy Blackburn. 0:01:12.040 --> 0:01:15.960 Then a coroner said he did in fact kill Shandy. Now, 0:01:16.040 --> 0:01:19.720 a defamation case by Paris against The Australian poses the 0:01:19.800 --> 0:01:23.800 question is it okay for journalists to question the finding 0:01:23.920 --> 0:01:27.640 of a jury? Today, Day two of Paris's bold bid 0:01:27.959 --> 0:01:32.280 to show his reputation was seriously harmed by the Australians 0:01:32.319 --> 0:01:44.200 podcast Shandy Story. John Perros has always denied wrongdoing. It's 0:01:44.319 --> 0:01:47.560 one of the most harrowing cases in Australian history. 0:01:48.760 --> 0:01:51.360 I just yelled out as anyone got a torch, then 0:01:51.520 --> 0:01:52.560 goo's got my baby. 0:01:52.960 --> 0:01:57.280 The verdict in Missus Chamberlain's case guilty for mister Chamberlain guilty. 0:01:57.480 --> 0:02:00.480 Missus Chamberlain was then sentenced to life in Chris. 0:02:00.720 --> 0:02:04.080 Today it has ended with the fourth Coronial inquest finding 0:02:04.120 --> 0:02:07.680 that Azaria Chamberlain was killed by dingo, as her parents 0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:09.000 had claimed from the beginning. 0:02:09.840 --> 0:02:13.760 The story of Lindy Chamberlain and her husband Michael, whose 0:02:13.919 --> 0:02:17.440 nine week old baby Azaria died at Ularu in nineteen 0:02:17.520 --> 0:02:21.440 eighty It's one of our greatest miscarriages of justice. A 0:02:21.560 --> 0:02:26.520 family's life ruined by a wrongful conviction. A jury found 0:02:26.520 --> 0:02:30.880 them guilty. Three decades later a coroner, examining fresh evidence, 0:02:31.040 --> 0:02:34.680 said they were not guilty. This is Coroner Elizabeth Morris 0:02:34.680 --> 0:02:35.720 in twenty twelve. 0:02:36.639 --> 0:02:40.400 Please accept my sincere sympathy on the death of your 0:02:40.440 --> 0:02:45.760 special and loved daughter, insists her Azaria. I'm so sorry 0:02:45.760 --> 0:02:49.720 for your loss time does not remove the pain and 0:02:49.800 --> 0:02:52.800 sadness of the death of a child. 0:02:55.160 --> 0:02:57.960 The case of Azaria Chamberlain was invoked in the Queensland 0:02:57.960 --> 0:03:02.639 Supreme Caught on Wednesday by Justice Peter Applegarth. He's hearing 0:03:02.680 --> 0:03:06.280 another case where a jury's decision went the opposite way 0:03:06.520 --> 0:03:07.280 to a coroner. 0:03:08.280 --> 0:03:12.040 The coroner found the dingo did it? A Darwin jury 0:03:12.120 --> 0:03:15.639 finds Lyndy Chamberlain did it. The coroner was right. 0:03:16.919 --> 0:03:20.239 This is the matter of John Perros. He was acquitted 0:03:20.280 --> 0:03:23.240 by a jury in twenty nineteen of murdering his ex 0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:27.399 girlfriend Shandy Blackburn, but he was found by a coroner 0:03:27.480 --> 0:03:31.040 in twenty twenty to be the murderer. We're using a 0:03:31.120 --> 0:03:34.040 voice actor to bring you the judge's words as spoken 0:03:34.080 --> 0:03:34.600 in court. 0:03:35.720 --> 0:03:39.480 So don't we have something similar here that the jury acquitted. 0:03:40.120 --> 0:03:44.360 The tone of episode thirteen is doing their duty. They 0:03:44.440 --> 0:03:47.560 should have acquitted on the evidence that was before them, 0:03:48.080 --> 0:03:52.119 but the coroner made these findings on additional evidence. 0:03:53.480 --> 0:03:57.800 The judge was questioning David Helvajian, a barrister representing John 0:03:57.840 --> 0:04:01.920 Perros in his defamation case. Sparked by the Australians Blockbuster 0:04:02.040 --> 0:04:08.760 investigative podcast Shandy's story. Peros has always denied killing Shandy, 0:04:09.000 --> 0:04:12.320 just as Applegarth is asking this. Just like in the 0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:15.640 Chamberlain case, the jury in John Perros's case did not 0:04:15.840 --> 0:04:19.520 have the same evidence that the coroner was later able 0:04:19.640 --> 0:04:24.920 to consider. The podcast pointed this out and even quoted 0:04:24.920 --> 0:04:27.839 Shandy's mother saying if she was on the jury, she 0:04:27.960 --> 0:04:32.359 would probably have acquitted Perros because the evidence just wasn't there. 0:04:33.120 --> 0:04:36.920 So the judge wants to know. Isn't the podcast allowed 0:04:37.080 --> 0:04:41.880 to point this out? Here's what David Helvajian, representing John Perros, 0:04:42.040 --> 0:04:42.799 told the court. 0:04:43.600 --> 0:04:48.000 My submission still stands that Episode thirteen causes serious harm 0:04:48.040 --> 0:04:52.000 because of the removal of any doubt. It imputes murderer 0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:55.520 and tells a listener why they can be sure of murderer. 0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:59.320 This case is a big deal, not just for us 0:04:59.320 --> 0:05:02.920 at The Australian, but for journalism more generally. If a 0:05:03.040 --> 0:05:06.839 jury makes one finding and a coroner makes another, how 0:05:06.839 --> 0:05:14.600 are journalists supposed to report? Shandy Blackburn was left to 0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:17.919 die in a gutter in the North Queensland tropical city 0:05:17.960 --> 0:05:22.479 of Mackay in February twenty thirteen. She'd been stabbed more 0:05:22.520 --> 0:05:26.440 than twenty times as she walked home from work. Her 0:05:26.480 --> 0:05:30.240 ex boyfriend, John Perros was charged and acquitted of the murder, 0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:34.200 but a coroner who compelled Perros to give evidence found 0:05:34.320 --> 0:05:37.760 he did stab Shandy to death. That would have been 0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:40.440 the end of it, because once acquitted, Peros could not 0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:45.359 be tried again without fresh evidence, until investigative journalist Headley 0:05:45.440 --> 0:05:48.600 Thomas came along with his twenty twenty one podcast for 0:05:48.680 --> 0:05:52.680 the Australian Shandy's Story. This is a moment from episode 0:05:52.760 --> 0:05:54.120 one of shandy Story. 0:05:54.880 --> 0:05:58.920 Shandy and John were sometimes in passionate all consuming love, 0:05:59.560 --> 0:06:03.800 ended up times in deep self doubting despair at their exhausting, 0:06:04.040 --> 0:06:09.440 abusive rows. The jealousies were toxic. John had made no 0:06:09.600 --> 0:06:12.640 secret of what he called his serious trust issues. 0:06:13.279 --> 0:06:16.960 In that first episode, Headley explored doubts over who really 0:06:17.080 --> 0:06:17.839 killed Shandy. 0:06:18.880 --> 0:06:22.320 I've interviewed Mackay, friends of John Perros, and talked to 0:06:22.400 --> 0:06:26.360 others at length off the record. They described John as 0:06:26.440 --> 0:06:30.400 gentle and caring, a tough fighter in the boxing ring, 0:06:30.440 --> 0:06:33.400 but a good natured soul and loyal to a fault. 0:06:34.160 --> 0:06:38.719 A bit intense in relationships, yes, but surely not a murderer. 0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:43.839 Perros is not complaining about the first twelve episodes of 0:06:43.880 --> 0:06:48.880 this podcast. He says episode thirteen defamed him by suggesting 0:06:49.000 --> 0:06:51.640 the jury got it wrong and he was in fact 0:06:51.720 --> 0:06:55.440 a murderer, and that's why he's suing Nationwide News, publisher 0:06:55.520 --> 0:06:59.760 of The Australian, Headley Thomas, and shandy sister Shanna Blackburn. 0:07:01.480 --> 0:07:04.360 The Australian's lawyers want the judge to listen to episodes 0:07:04.440 --> 0:07:07.400 one to twelve as well, because they say there's a 0:07:07.520 --> 0:07:11.280 huge amount of context and background that ensures the podcast 0:07:11.480 --> 0:07:14.240 is fair to Perros and allows the audience to make 0:07:14.320 --> 0:07:18.160 up its own mind. Peros's lawyers are arguing in court 0:07:18.240 --> 0:07:21.760 that most Australians were unaware of the coroner's finding that 0:07:21.800 --> 0:07:25.720 Peros was a murderer. They say because Shandy's story was 0:07:26.000 --> 0:07:29.200 wildly popular, sitting at the top of the podcast charts 0:07:29.200 --> 0:07:37.240 for months, it caused serious harm to his reputation. A 0:07:37.320 --> 0:07:39.440 date has not yet been set for the full hearing 0:07:39.480 --> 0:07:42.400 of this trial. What's happening right now in the Queensland 0:07:42.440 --> 0:07:46.520 Supreme Court is a high stakes preliminary hearing where Dowd's 0:07:46.520 --> 0:07:50.480 obtained sc counsel for the defendants, that is, the Australian Headley, 0:07:50.560 --> 0:07:54.120 and Shanna is attempting to have Peros's case thrown out 0:07:54.440 --> 0:07:58.160 before the case even begins. It all turns on a 0:07:58.240 --> 0:08:02.720 notion called serious harm under defamation law. Perros has to 0:08:02.720 --> 0:08:07.120 demonstrate the publication he's complaining about Episode thirteen caused him 0:08:07.320 --> 0:08:11.880 serious harm, but Siptain says that can't possibly be the case. 0:08:12.840 --> 0:08:16.640 The coroner's finding is a true fact. Episode thirteen has 0:08:16.680 --> 0:08:19.760 said nothing more than the conclusion to which the coroner came. 0:08:20.000 --> 0:08:23.560 He is a killer. The real cause of the harm 0:08:23.600 --> 0:08:26.880 to the plaintiff's reputation is because the coroner made a finding. 0:08:27.440 --> 0:08:29.920 Had it not been for that finding, this podcast may 0:08:29.920 --> 0:08:31.080 never have been made. 0:08:31.760 --> 0:08:35.600 Episode thirteen included emotional interviews with Shandy's mother and sister, 0:08:35.960 --> 0:08:39.320 and examinations of how the coroner had before him evidence 0:08:39.360 --> 0:08:42.640 that Dury never got to hear. For example, the coroner 0:08:42.679 --> 0:08:46.600 had access to CCTV of what he accepted was John 0:08:46.640 --> 0:08:50.400 Perros's car driving near the scene of Shandy's murder, and 0:08:50.480 --> 0:08:54.480 evidence about when John Perros's phone was turned on and off. 0:08:55.080 --> 0:08:58.000 The coroner had access to John Perros's initial record of 0:08:58.000 --> 0:09:02.120 interview with police, and the coroner compelled Perros to give 0:09:02.160 --> 0:09:05.880 evidence something Peros didn't want to do for fear of 0:09:05.920 --> 0:09:07.320 incriminating himself. 0:09:08.360 --> 0:09:11.040 To say of somebody that they are a murderer. It's 0:09:11.080 --> 0:09:14.240 been found that he's a murderer. To call him a murderer, 0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:17.120 or to say yeah, I agree with that finding. What 0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.880 more harm does that do? How is its serious harm? 0:09:21.960 --> 0:09:25.720 Just as Peter Applegarth put this to Dowd's Obtain, Episode 0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:28.640 thirteen presented all these facts, but it also endorsed the 0:09:28.679 --> 0:09:32.199 coroner's findings and suggested the jury got it wrong. 0:09:33.160 --> 0:09:36.640 It bolsters the coroner's finding to something that may be right, 0:09:37.320 --> 0:09:42.120 may be wrong, probably right, to something that is definitely right. 0:09:42.960 --> 0:09:46.200 They are true facts that there was evidence that was 0:09:46.240 --> 0:09:49.240 heard by the coroner that was not heard by the jury. 0:09:50.120 --> 0:09:53.800 Episode thirteen was a revelation of those facts that were 0:09:53.840 --> 0:09:57.600 part of the finding and providing some explanation to the listeners. 0:09:58.160 --> 0:10:01.360 How could he have been acquitted? Well, it was made 0:10:01.440 --> 0:10:04.560 plain the coroner had evidence the jury didn't have. 0:10:08.280 --> 0:10:13.520 After the break exactly what Episode thirteen said. Original investigative 0:10:13.559 --> 0:10:16.320 reporting is what we do at The Australian every day. 0:10:16.559 --> 0:10:19.679 In a world of misinformation and hot takes, you can 0:10:19.720 --> 0:10:23.000 invest in reliable, credible, journalism for a lot less than 0:10:23.040 --> 0:10:26.080 the price of your morning coffee. Right now, it's a 0:10:26.120 --> 0:10:28.880 dollar a week for the first four weeks. Check us 0:10:28.880 --> 0:10:32.200 out at the Australian dot com dot ayu and we'll 0:10:32.200 --> 0:10:50.560 be back after this break. In court on Tuesday, David Helvajian, 0:10:50.600 --> 0:10:53.480 the barrister representing John Perros, took the judge through the 0:10:53.480 --> 0:10:57.360 transcript of episode thirteen and explained why he believed it 0:10:57.480 --> 0:11:01.400 caused serious harm to his client. We'll play the lines 0:11:01.400 --> 0:11:05.319 from the episode with David Helvagian's commentary. We've used a 0:11:05.400 --> 0:11:09.120 voice actor to bring you David Helvagian's words. First, you'll 0:11:09.160 --> 0:11:13.000 hear the real audio from episode thirteen with Shanna Blackburn 0:11:13.120 --> 0:11:14.400 speaking to Headley Thomas. 0:11:15.640 --> 0:11:17.080 One matter of. 0:11:17.120 --> 0:11:20.480 Fact, it was him, how can you be so sure? 0:11:21.240 --> 0:11:23.800 And then we have these lines that I say directly 0:11:23.840 --> 0:11:27.880 go to this publication establishing that the acquittal was wrong. 0:11:28.080 --> 0:11:31.040 Because I've seen more evidence than what was presented at 0:11:31.120 --> 0:11:35.520 the trial. We know the evidence that was ruled out 0:11:35.720 --> 0:11:39.440 before the trial, we know the evidence that hasn't been seen, 0:11:39.920 --> 0:11:44.679 and it's undeniable. When you have seen all that evidence 0:11:44.800 --> 0:11:50.560 together that there is any other person responsible. 0:11:49.920 --> 0:11:53.880 For this, then what you are saying is that he's 0:11:53.880 --> 0:11:54.880 got away with murder. 0:11:54.880 --> 0:11:59.520 App I think it's a letdown in our justice system. 0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:03.840 To episodes thirteen, my submission is the most likely inference 0:12:04.480 --> 0:12:07.440 is people know the plaintiff is one of two suspects, 0:12:08.360 --> 0:12:12.360 they know about the coroner's findings. There's a question in 0:12:12.400 --> 0:12:16.199 their minds why there's a dichotomy between a jury acquittal 0:12:16.280 --> 0:12:22.080 within two hours versus a coroner's findings. Mister Perros is 0:12:22.120 --> 0:12:25.560 a suspect with mister William Daniel, and there's a big 0:12:25.640 --> 0:12:28.080 question mark as to who really committed the murder. 0:12:28.920 --> 0:12:33.880 Helvajian had earlier presented as evidence a few anonymous Reddit comments, 0:12:33.920 --> 0:12:35.040 including these. 0:12:35.640 --> 0:12:39.040 One hundred percent he did just listen to this. Her 0:12:39.120 --> 0:12:40.440 ex absolutely did it. 0:12:41.200 --> 0:12:45.040 That kind of certainty is what episode thirteen provides, and 0:12:45.120 --> 0:12:47.199 that's where serious harm arises. 0:12:48.320 --> 0:12:52.080 In episode thirteen, Healy Thomas tells the audience John Perros's phone, 0:12:52.360 --> 0:12:55.360 which was rarely turned off, had been switched off on 0:12:55.400 --> 0:12:59.640 the nights before Shandy's murder. Headley spoke to Vicky Blackburn, 0:13:00.000 --> 0:13:00.840 Andy's mother. 0:13:01.960 --> 0:13:05.160 Now, the jurors in John's murder trial didn't hear anything 0:13:05.160 --> 0:13:10.400 about John's mobile phone usage, and that inactivity, but Vicky 0:13:10.520 --> 0:13:12.559 and Shammer and the cops knew it. 0:13:13.480 --> 0:13:18.400 He went to three nights. He did the same thing. 0:13:18.520 --> 0:13:21.520 He turned his phone off at the same time. He 0:13:21.600 --> 0:13:25.360 tried that for three nights and got a successful. 0:13:26.160 --> 0:13:29.520 Vicki Blackburn, the victim's mother, insinuates that he got lucky 0:13:29.559 --> 0:13:33.160 that night she was walking home from work the prior 0:13:33.240 --> 0:13:37.679 knight she got picked up by her boyfriend. The insinuation 0:13:38.120 --> 0:13:42.040 is he was stalking. Now that evidence wasn't before the jury, 0:13:42.200 --> 0:13:45.360 so it's another element that undercuts the acquittal. 0:13:45.440 --> 0:13:50.240 In my submission, David Helvagian read to the judge words 0:13:50.240 --> 0:13:53.520 in the episode from former detective Scott Furlong. He and 0:13:53.600 --> 0:13:56.240 Headley were discussing the fact that some of the evidence 0:13:56.280 --> 0:13:58.960 that was before the coroner had not been put to 0:13:59.000 --> 0:14:02.480 the jury. She is got Furlong talking to Headley in 0:14:02.520 --> 0:14:06.800 episode thirteen. Scott Furlong speaks first, so what. 0:14:06.720 --> 0:14:11.120 Would the baggyars detective know about prosecuting a case or 0:14:11.160 --> 0:14:12.160 trust the process? 0:14:13.040 --> 0:14:15.600 I hear that at the same time as you've said, 0:14:16.559 --> 0:14:20.760 you're so disappointed because in your view, you arrested the 0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:26.680 right person, so therefore the process you've trusted has freed 0:14:26.720 --> 0:14:27.160 the killer. 0:14:28.600 --> 0:14:31.000 Yeah, take that one. 0:14:30.880 --> 0:14:31.400 To bed with you. 0:14:33.000 --> 0:14:34.720 It's hard to get the hair around that it is. 0:14:34.760 --> 0:14:37.440 But yeah, you feel you've let the family down, You 0:14:37.480 --> 0:14:40.440 feel you let the community down to have a not 0:14:40.480 --> 0:14:43.120 guilty verdict when you know in your heart of hearts 0:14:43.160 --> 0:14:48.240 that there's somebody that's responsible for her murder and you 0:14:48.400 --> 0:14:51.080 arrested that person and put them before the courts. We 0:14:51.120 --> 0:14:51.800 did our part. 0:14:51.960 --> 0:14:52.800 We caught the killer. 0:14:53.160 --> 0:14:57.320 In my opinion, Here's how David Helvajan described that in 0:14:57.360 --> 0:14:58.400 court on Tuesday. 0:14:59.320 --> 0:15:02.920 Now, if comments like that do not remove any doubt 0:15:02.920 --> 0:15:06.320 in the listener's mind, it actually gets worse in my 0:15:06.440 --> 0:15:07.600 respectful submission. 0:15:08.400 --> 0:15:11.720 Episode thirteen also featured someone who listeners to Shandy's story 0:15:11.720 --> 0:15:16.440 wouldn't know well, forensic scientist Kirsty Wright. She examined why 0:15:16.560 --> 0:15:20.200 the DNA samples from Shandy's crime scene and John Perros's 0:15:20.200 --> 0:15:25.080 car yielded no useful evidence for John's trial. Kirsty's work 0:15:25.160 --> 0:15:29.520 led to stunning revelations in the podcast that Queensland's entire 0:15:29.760 --> 0:15:34.640 DNA processing system was deeply flawed. David Helvagian told the 0:15:34.640 --> 0:15:37.680 court it all added up to a strong insinuation in 0:15:37.720 --> 0:15:40.440 the episode that the coroner was right and the jury 0:15:40.520 --> 0:15:43.680 was wrong, and he said it was all made worse 0:15:44.000 --> 0:15:47.640 by the fact The Australian is a high quality publication. 0:15:48.720 --> 0:15:54.720 This is an investigative true crime podcast with experience, credibility, expertise. 0:15:55.360 --> 0:15:58.080 It's not a headline or a two column piece. 0:15:58.840 --> 0:16:02.480 Helvagian also said episode thirteen presented itself as the final 0:16:02.640 --> 0:16:04.960 conclusion that Peros did it. 0:16:05.880 --> 0:16:10.400 Episode thirteen so leads to certainty that it causes serious harm. 0:16:10.960 --> 0:16:13.520 How can it otherwise when you have such a credible 0:16:13.520 --> 0:16:18.240 publication interviewing the investigative police officer, the mother of the victim, 0:16:18.560 --> 0:16:22.080 the sister of the victim, a DNA expert, a criminal 0:16:22.160 --> 0:16:25.640 lawyer who says it's bad evidence. Those will point in 0:16:25.720 --> 0:16:29.240 my respectful submission to the end of the story. 0:16:38.600 --> 0:16:41.960 Justice Peter Applegarth has reserved his decision and will be back, 0:16:42.120 --> 0:16:44.360 possibly at the end of August, but more likely in 0:16:44.400 --> 0:16:48.360 September to let John Perros and the defendants know their fate. 0:16:49.080 --> 0:16:51.440 Thanks for joining us on the front and don't forget 0:16:51.440 --> 0:16:54.800 to join ours. Subscribers at the Australian dot com dot 0:16:54.800 --> 0:17:01.760 au