Speaker 1: Are you feeling nervous? We are you going to keep walking?
Speaker 1: Please talk about a four months siment.
Speaker 2: Ellen Jones is used to attracting attention, but not like this.
Speaker 1: Do you think you'll be here for every day of
Speaker 1: the trial?
Speaker 2: At eighty five of the once powerful shock jock who
Speaker 2: for decades acted as judge, drury and executioner in the
Speaker 2: court of public opinion is now the one on trial.
Speaker 2: Jones is accused of historical offenses involving the indecent assault
Speaker 2: and sexual touching of teenagers and young men, claims he
Speaker 2: has always denied it.
Speaker 1: I have never indecently assaulted these people.
Speaker 2: The law assumes that.
Speaker 1: I'm not guilty, and I am not guilty.
Speaker 2: Now a judge will decide. Was the trial slated to
Speaker 2: run over the next four months. I'm Daniel James, and
Speaker 2: you're listening to seven AM today National Affairs editor at
Speaker 2: ten years Hugh Remington on how the first few days
Speaker 2: of the Ellen Jones trial played out in the court
Speaker 2: and what's still the cane. It's Thursday, August sixth and
Speaker 2: a warning, while we try not to get two graphic,
Speaker 2: the following story does cover sexual assault. Take care listening
Speaker 2: you Thanks so much for joining us. Alan Jones's trial
Speaker 2: began this week in Sydney. He's facing charges of indecent
Speaker 2: assault and sexual touching. You've been there in court every
Speaker 2: day thus far. Can you describe the scenes, particularly on
Speaker 2: that very first day as Jones arrived.
Speaker 1: So there were really two elements that were a bit
Speaker 1: unusual about this on the opening day. One is the
Speaker 1: mere fact of Jones's arrival. He's not your normal defendant
Speaker 1: in a criminal trial as you might expect. He arrives
Speaker 1: in a Chofford limousine. He has security. As he turns up,
Speaker 1: he walks in somewhat gingerly.
Speaker 2: Have anything more.
Speaker 1: To say about how you plan to.
Speaker 2: Do the family child room.
Speaker 1: He's an eighty five year old man who's got knee problems.
Speaker 1: He goes with the walking stick that he leans on
Speaker 1: as he proceeds into the court, and of course there's
Speaker 1: a forest of cameras and mics and everything as he
Speaker 1: turns up. Meanwhile, something else was going on, and that
Speaker 1: is that this is despite the seriousness of the charges
Speaker 1: and the reputational stakes for Alan Jones, it is a
Speaker 1: relatively low order criminal matter. It is dealt with in
Speaker 1: the local court. It's not in the higher courts. It's
Speaker 1: a judge alone trial, no jury. There is a jail
Speaker 1: option for the judge in this case, but at the
Speaker 1: lower order for a summary offense. And so it's been
Speaker 1: assigned to a relatively small court for a court three
Speaker 1: point one on the third floor of the Downing Center
Speaker 1: in Sydney, and they're plainly not enough seats for all
Speaker 1: the interests that exists. And so there are a variety
Speaker 1: of people who were just curious about Giones, curious about
Speaker 1: the case, and or might have felt as if they
Speaker 1: had some stake or interest in him, and they were
Speaker 1: trying to queue up to get into the court. There
Speaker 1: was never going to be enough room for them. They
Speaker 1: weren't allowed to get into the court, so they were
Speaker 1: quickly turfed out. So all of this made it more
Speaker 1: of a spectacle than your average Downing Street Center event, not.
Speaker 2: Your average coast all. So hadd the prosecution open its case?
Speaker 2: What did they say about the allegations they're seeking to
Speaker 2: prove against Jones.
Speaker 1: So there are twenty two charges, and it should be
Speaker 1: said that twenty of those charges are what's called technically
Speaker 1: assault with an act of indecency in short form, indecent assault.
Speaker 1: The other two charges are called sexual touching without consent.
Speaker 1: Now in practice they are the same offense. They were
Speaker 1: renamed a couple of years ago. There are six complainants
Speaker 1: now they range from two people who had one brief
Speaker 1: encounter with them didn't know it, and to other people
Speaker 1: who came into his orbit. So the main accuser. So
Speaker 1: nine of the twenty two charges relate to a person
Speaker 1: who's called complainant Jay, and this is a person who's
Speaker 1: been giving evidence. Initially complained that Jay first came into
Speaker 1: jones orbit when he was twelve years old and met
Speaker 1: him frequently from the age of about fourteen or fifteen
Speaker 1: through sport, and Jones took an interest in him. He
Speaker 1: was from a very poor background at a solo mum,
Speaker 1: and he had a number of siblings and that had
Speaker 1: no money, and Jones was willing to support him for
Speaker 1: his sporting career by giving him money and later from
Speaker 1: giving him a phone and giving him a car. So
Speaker 1: the prosecution case was that he was subjected to a
Speaker 1: series of indecent acts happening at Jones' Sydney apartment there
Speaker 1: just by the Sydney Opera House, but also in the
Speaker 1: worst cases that are being alleged at his farmer's state
Speaker 1: down on the Southern Highlands, at a place called Fitzroy Falls.
Speaker 1: So that's him, and then there are others who also
Speaker 1: had these alleged defenses of a somewhat lower order, but
Speaker 1: certainly that meet the threshold of crime if they were
Speaker 1: to be found by the courts to have been proven.
Speaker 2: Some of the testimony we've been hearing from Witness j
Speaker 2: has been very detailed and very graphic in court and
Speaker 2: pretty tough listening. And I'm sure viewing from wind the
Speaker 2: court itself, what can you tell us about some of
Speaker 2: the claims that Witness JA has made thus far?
Speaker 1: Well, the most egregious, if you like, claims that Alan
Speaker 1: Jones came to This is the allegation Alan Jones came
Speaker 1: to say to him that he loved him, planted kisses
Speaker 1: on him, would pull him in vigorously for hugs. He
Speaker 1: invited him to his property in the Southern Highlands on
Speaker 1: the way down. So it's alleged this young man was
Speaker 1: driving he just got his driving license, so he was
Speaker 1: driving Alan Jones Mercedes Benz and during the course of
Speaker 1: this planet Jay says that he grabbed him by the penis,
Speaker 1: and then once they got inside the house itself, he
Speaker 1: says that Alan Jones told him to go and have
Speaker 1: a shower and put on a robe and nothing else,
Speaker 1: and complained that Jay portrays himself as being a young
Speaker 1: man who felt trapped. He'd never had, he said, financial
Speaker 1: support in his life. Alan Jones was giving him financial support.
Speaker 1: He feared that if he made anything of this that
Speaker 1: he would lose that financial support. He'd been given a car,
Speaker 1: for example. He was afraid he was going to lose
Speaker 1: the car. And he felt that He said he was
Speaker 1: a heterosexual young man, he had a girlfriend, he wasn't
Speaker 1: interested in men. He felt that this was something he
Speaker 1: just had to deal with with Alan Jones. But on
Speaker 1: that particular night in the Southern Highlands, it went beyond
Speaker 1: grabbing and touching into an assault, which is very excruciating
Speaker 1: to sort of detail inside a courtroom, and I'm not
Speaker 1: about to repeat it, but it involved naked this bondying
Speaker 1: penises and so on, and it was alleged that he
Speaker 1: went back to his girlfriend, and his girlfriend later said
Speaker 1: he came back from that trip looking like he had
Speaker 1: seen a ghost, and that he was withdrawn and emotionless
Speaker 1: after that trip, but he didn't tell his girlfriend or
Speaker 1: anyone else for some time. So that is that's the
Speaker 1: evidence in chief from complainant Jay.
Speaker 2: As you've been at winning, you the court heard a
Speaker 2: great deal about the money Jones gave witness Jay. How
Speaker 2: important is that financial relationship to Jay's account of what happened.
Speaker 1: Well, it's important to both the prosecution and the defense.
Speaker 1: So the prosecution allegation, or at least his statement to police,
Speaker 1: was that he was being grouped, and the prosecution says
Speaker 1: there was a pattern of behavior by Jones of financial support.
Speaker 1: So that forms part of the prosecution kind of setting
Speaker 1: of the scene as to how Jones operated. But in
Speaker 1: the opening address, jones lawyer Gabrielle Bisher sc said that
Speaker 1: what you're going to see of Alan Jones is nothing
Speaker 1: more than the behavior of a man who was quote,
Speaker 1: unfailingly generous. So these are the two Joneses that you know,
Speaker 1: the judges got to decide between. Is this a man
Speaker 1: who's just unfailingly generous, who gives money to young poor people,
Speaker 1: people on struggle Street. You know, the joke he used
Speaker 1: to say about complaining Jay was that he did just
Speaker 1: live on Struggle Street. He lived on number one Struggle Street,
Speaker 1: and so that's why he was giving him financial support.
Speaker 1: Another view of that was that there was an ulterior
Speaker 1: motive to the money, and this is stuff that lies
Speaker 1: at the heart of the contestation that the Joneses got
Speaker 1: to sort out.
Speaker 2: So he Jones's lawyers have now begun their cross exendining
Speaker 2: of witness Jay what parts of his account of a testing.
Speaker 1: So they have indicated that and this would be normal
Speaker 1: in any defended criminal case. Is where you've got the
Speaker 1: key witnesses where there are not or the key complainants,
Speaker 1: if you like, the alleged victims, and there are not
Speaker 1: witnesses to events that took place in rooms where there
Speaker 1: was no one else. It becomes a case of who
Speaker 1: do you believe? And so it is perfectly normal for
Speaker 1: them to challenge the credibility of this alleged victim complainant Jay.
Speaker 1: They've said that's what they're setting out to do. And
Speaker 1: in their opening address they said they had received a
Speaker 1: bundle of dynamite. Was, in the words of Gabrielle Basher,
Speaker 1: the Council for Alan Jones, a bundle of dynamite that
Speaker 1: would blow up the credibility of complained j Now, this
Speaker 1: bundle of dynamite has been the subject of the cross
Speaker 1: examination that happened on Wednesday, and so the full day,
Speaker 1: effectively on Wednesday, was involved in the defense making the
Speaker 1: case that complainert Jay was not credible. And we can't
Speaker 1: say anything about that because the prosecution has already raised
Speaker 1: an objection signaled an objection and they want that evidence
Speaker 1: in that line of argument to be rendered inadmissible. The
Speaker 1: judge says that he will reserve his decision on the
Speaker 1: relevance and the inadvisibility, but he will hear it. But
Speaker 1: in the meantime it's under a non publication order.
Speaker 2: And so what do we know about Jones's defense? His
Speaker 2: defense team claims he's facing trial by media and the Jones' rivals,
Speaker 2: both within the media and across society and political circles,
Speaker 2: are out there to destroy him. What have we learned
Speaker 2: about the defense he will be running over the coming months,
Speaker 2: because this thing will take months, won't it.
Speaker 1: Well, we don't know the full extent of the defense
Speaker 1: arguments and the way that that will play out, but
Speaker 1: we do know from their opening that they are going
Speaker 1: to make the that Alan Jones, of course, a devisive
Speaker 1: figure in many ways, is the subject of rivalry. Rivalry
Speaker 1: by the nine newspapers who launched the investigation that then
Speaker 1: drew these complainants, these witnesses, Some of them came out
Speaker 1: after it was being reported in the nine newspapers. So
Speaker 1: there's a claim there that there was a media rivalry
Speaker 1: that was involved. Part of that involves Peter fitz Simons.
Speaker 1: So peterfitit Simons is a very well known columnist for
Speaker 1: the Sittingmore and Herald, chiefly on sports, but he range
Speaker 1: with feeling why and he's written a whole number of
Speaker 1: best selling books and.
Speaker 2: A formal ollaby that was coached by Jones at one.
Speaker 1: Point, coached and dropped by Alan Jones. So we'll see
Speaker 1: whether that will be whether he's you know, he burns
Speaker 1: with fury over that to the extent I'm not going
Speaker 1: to get ahead of where there arguments on that are.
Speaker 1: So part of the claim is that at least one
Speaker 1: of these complainants had a connection with Peter fitz Simons
Speaker 1: and then somehow or other that wound up being part
Speaker 1: although that the person who actually carried the stories at
Speaker 1: the Sinning Morning Herald was Kate McClement, the investigation's reporter
Speaker 1: invescular Reporter. The other arch rival, so called was Ray
Speaker 1: Hadley at TGB, So one of the alleged victims worked
Speaker 1: at TWOGB, and the case being made by the defense,
Speaker 1: at least outlined in their opening statement is that this
Speaker 1: gentleman went on to work for Ray Hadley, and so
Speaker 1: Ray Hadley was involved, and that Ray Hadley was an
Speaker 1: arch rival of Alan Jones. Gabriel Basheer, the lead counsel
Speaker 1: for Alan Jones, says that the whole case is a
Speaker 1: matter of rivalry, treachery, opportunism, hatred and desperation. She chucked
Speaker 1: in double dealing as well for good measure, so she
Speaker 1: doesn't have to absolutely make the case because of course
Speaker 1: the burdener proof is on the prosecution, but she has
Speaker 1: set out that she intends to make the case that
Speaker 1: there are people there who, for various reasons, were motivated
Speaker 1: to tell untruths about Allan Jones, and therefore they can't
Speaker 1: be believed. The Crown in this case has an interesting challenge,
Speaker 1: and that is because, to quote the great musical Hamilton,
Speaker 1: you know no one was in the room where it happened.
Speaker 1: They're relying on a process called tendency evidence, where it
Speaker 1: may not be clear beyond reasonable doubt that a single
Speaker 1: incident happened, but if there is a pattern of behavior
Speaker 1: that's consistently happening, and a range of people who have
Speaker 1: no connections with each other report similar behaviors, the criminal behaviors,
Speaker 1: then the court is entitled to conclude that the person
Speaker 1: has a tendency to behave in a particular way that
Speaker 1: is unlawful, so therefore, taken as a whole, they can
Speaker 1: be believed. And so this is particular approach in a
Speaker 1: case like this, and the tendency elements of it will
Speaker 1: be challenged by the defense as well.
Speaker 2: Well. Thank you so much for speaking with us today here.
Speaker 2: I know it must be grilling after a daylight today,
Speaker 2: but once again thanks for coming on the show.
Speaker 1: Great to talk to you.
Speaker 2: Also in the news, Australian authorities are investigating what could
Speaker 2: be the country's first far left terrorist attack after a
Speaker 2: group allegedly firebombed the Melbourne defense manufacturer and threatened further attacks.
Speaker 2: Lover of Technologies was allegedly targeted for its production of
Speaker 2: parts for F thirty five fighter jets. Are links to
Speaker 2: Israel's defense supply chain. Police say the group released a
Speaker 2: video that claimed responsibility for the attack, threatened workers and
Speaker 2: providing instructions for carrying out similar fire bombings. Australian security
Speaker 2: agencies say there has been a rise in arson, vandalism
Speaker 2: and violent protest by anti Israel activists targeting defense company,
Speaker 2: but this is the first time such an attack has
Speaker 2: been investigated as terrorism. And A four time section of
Speaker 2: a SpaceX rocket has crashed into the Moon at eight
Speaker 2: thousand kilometers an hour, prompting concerns that it could be
Speaker 2: a precedent for the disposal of space drunk. The upper
Speaker 2: stage was left drifting in space after launching two private
Speaker 2: lunar landers from Florida in January last year. Scientists warned
Speaker 2: that the impact could permanently alter and contaminate part of
Speaker 2: the lunar surface, and say it highlights the lack of
Speaker 2: rules governing space junk around the Moon's Uncontrolled collisions expected
Speaker 2: to become more common. I'm Daniel James. Thanks for listening
Speaker 2: to seven AM. We'll be back tomorrow.