WEBVTT - Bowraville: Still Fighting for Justice

0:00:02.680 --> 0:00:06.080
<v Speaker 1>Just before nine o'clock last night, the jury returned guilty

0:00:06.160 --> 0:00:08.480
<v Speaker 1>verdicts against all three defendants.

0:00:08.520 --> 0:00:11.119
<v Speaker 2>It was absolutely shambles, to tell you the truth, just

0:00:11.200 --> 0:00:12.480
<v Speaker 2>absolutely really heaving.

0:00:12.240 --> 0:00:15.160
<v Speaker 1>Blood on his clothing. The day after the alleged A top.

0:00:14.960 --> 0:00:16.600
<v Speaker 3>On a show a mud bank and it fits through

0:00:16.600 --> 0:00:16.960
<v Speaker 3>a river.

0:00:17.079 --> 0:00:19.200
<v Speaker 2>Basically, I think most of the people are used to me,

0:00:19.320 --> 0:00:20.600
<v Speaker 2>there are good people.

0:00:20.640 --> 0:00:23.280
<v Speaker 3>I think a really important question we need to ask

0:00:23.480 --> 0:00:26.360
<v Speaker 3>is how many Indigenous prisoners in Australia are innocent.

0:00:27.280 --> 0:00:29.880
<v Speaker 1>This is Curtain, a podcast where we pull back the

0:00:29.920 --> 0:00:32.440
<v Speaker 1>blinds to shine a light on the darkest parts of

0:00:32.479 --> 0:00:36.240
<v Speaker 1>our justice system and ask who are the victims. I'm

0:00:36.240 --> 0:00:38.879
<v Speaker 1>Amy Maguire and I'm.

0:00:38.720 --> 0:00:43.040
<v Speaker 3>Martin Hodgson, a senior advocate for the Foreign Prisoner Support Service.

0:00:43.400 --> 0:00:47.160
<v Speaker 3>And a warning. This series contains the names of deceased

0:00:47.159 --> 0:00:52.160
<v Speaker 3>peoples and has distressing content that might upset some listeners.

0:00:53.520 --> 0:00:59.120
<v Speaker 2>Welcome to Curtain the podcast. We've discussed Araville case many

0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:03.080
<v Speaker 2>times on the PODCAS cast. Before that was the murder

0:01:03.120 --> 0:01:07.360
<v Speaker 2>of three Aboriginal children in Bauerville between nineteen ninety and

0:01:07.480 --> 0:01:14.040
<v Speaker 2>Nought for Justice against terrible police investigations trading trials that

0:01:14.080 --> 0:01:18.040
<v Speaker 2>have led to nowhere against all levels of society and

0:01:18.080 --> 0:01:22.559
<v Speaker 2>the Parliament of New South Wales. Yesterday the New South

0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:26.280
<v Speaker 2>Wales Court of Criminal Appeal refused an application by the

0:01:26.319 --> 0:01:30.560
<v Speaker 2>New South Wales Attorney General to retry the person that

0:01:30.800 --> 0:01:35.360
<v Speaker 2>even the peace suspect of killing all three children. Obviously,

0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:39.199
<v Speaker 2>this is a devastating blow to the family. Once again

0:01:39.240 --> 0:01:42.600
<v Speaker 2>they've been denied their day in court where they could

0:01:42.600 --> 0:01:47.600
<v Speaker 2>seek justice for their children. Amy, You've been following this

0:01:47.680 --> 0:01:51.080
<v Speaker 2>case for a long time, have spoken with the families

0:01:51.280 --> 0:01:55.040
<v Speaker 2>a lot over the years. What was your reaction to yesterday.

0:01:57.120 --> 0:02:01.200
<v Speaker 1>My reaction was genuine, largely because I think that surely

0:02:01.560 --> 0:02:04.520
<v Speaker 1>the families deserved a good outcome, and that outcome would

0:02:04.520 --> 0:02:09.160
<v Speaker 1>have been to send this kiss back to trial, because

0:02:09.160 --> 0:02:12.440
<v Speaker 1>that's all what they've ever wanted, ever since two thousand

0:02:12.440 --> 0:02:15.640
<v Speaker 1>and six when they originally had the victory of the

0:02:15.680 --> 0:02:18.360
<v Speaker 1>overturn of the double jeopardy principle in New South Wales.

0:02:19.000 --> 0:02:24.160
<v Speaker 1>So it felt shocking because for me, just witnessing how

0:02:24.280 --> 0:02:27.360
<v Speaker 1>hard they have struggled and just the impact of these

0:02:27.440 --> 0:02:31.480
<v Speaker 1>murders on not just immediate family, but extended family and

0:02:31.520 --> 0:02:38.120
<v Speaker 1>extended communities over the past twenty seven years. I just thought,

0:02:38.160 --> 0:02:43.200
<v Speaker 1>surely something has to happen, and unfortunately, I think we

0:02:43.240 --> 0:02:47.880
<v Speaker 1>saw the real being and anger come out. So the

0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:52.040
<v Speaker 1>family's always, you know, it's almost been like one step

0:02:52.080 --> 0:02:54.760
<v Speaker 1>forward and two steps back, because every wind they've had,

0:02:55.080 --> 0:02:56.920
<v Speaker 1>there's always been a step back, and it's always been

0:02:56.960 --> 0:03:02.760
<v Speaker 1>accompanied by really offensive guessed by those in power, and

0:03:02.800 --> 0:03:07.000
<v Speaker 1>it's always been just accompanied with feeling that Australia doesn't

0:03:07.000 --> 0:03:10.800
<v Speaker 1>really care and those who are ultimately responsible for this

0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:14.080
<v Speaker 1>enduring injustice, which is the justice system the original police

0:03:14.080 --> 0:03:18.200
<v Speaker 1>investigation just don't seem to care. That just all builds up.

0:03:18.360 --> 0:03:22.919
<v Speaker 1>So it was just a real let down, a real

0:03:22.960 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 1>disappointment to hear that decision because it really felt, you know,

0:03:28.000 --> 0:03:31.520
<v Speaker 1>things were actually going to fall place for the Bearable

0:03:31.560 --> 0:03:35.080
<v Speaker 1>families finally after a long time. And I've been covering

0:03:35.080 --> 0:03:37.000
<v Speaker 1>this case for about six years and so I've been

0:03:37.080 --> 0:03:39.920
<v Speaker 1>up to Variable a few times. I've been at the

0:03:39.960 --> 0:03:47.280
<v Speaker 1>majority of protests and the parliamentary inquiry and various processes

0:03:48.200 --> 0:03:52.320
<v Speaker 1>as this saga has continued. And yeah, it was just

0:03:52.720 --> 0:03:55.600
<v Speaker 1>a real disappointment and I just really feel for the Faise,

0:03:55.800 --> 0:03:58.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, who've waited so long just to be let

0:03:58.800 --> 0:04:00.640
<v Speaker 1>down again and to feel like this may have been

0:04:00.760 --> 0:04:03.280
<v Speaker 1>last shot at justice, But I know that the families

0:04:03.280 --> 0:04:07.000
<v Speaker 1>will never give up and there'll always be avenues that

0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 1>they're going to push through. Giving up was never a

0:04:09.920 --> 0:04:13.240
<v Speaker 1>question for them, So it's about what the strategy is next.

0:04:13.280 --> 0:04:16.560
<v Speaker 1>I think so. I think they still hope. But at

0:04:16.560 --> 0:04:19.039
<v Speaker 1>the same time, this is a real blow to a

0:04:19.080 --> 0:04:21.480
<v Speaker 1>lot of the families. I think Martin, there hasn't been

0:04:21.480 --> 0:04:23.760
<v Speaker 1>a lot of detail about actually what the judgment in

0:04:23.800 --> 0:04:26.560
<v Speaker 1>the Court of Criminal Appeal means. And it's already a

0:04:26.640 --> 0:04:30.400
<v Speaker 1>very complicated case. But you've read judgment and you've been

0:04:30.400 --> 0:04:33.719
<v Speaker 1>able to process it. Can you give us, first just

0:04:33.760 --> 0:04:37.120
<v Speaker 1>a brief summary about why the Court of Criminal Appeal

0:04:37.160 --> 0:04:39.839
<v Speaker 1>has noted the Attorney General's at put back.

0:04:40.839 --> 0:04:43.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I think firstly, the thing to I want to

0:04:43.920 --> 0:04:47.200
<v Speaker 2>acknowledge is that this case would never have got to

0:04:47.240 --> 0:04:49.960
<v Speaker 2>the Court of Criminal Appeal it wasn't for the families.

0:04:50.600 --> 0:04:54.520
<v Speaker 2>I don't think it would have got to a parliamentary inquiry.

0:04:54.560 --> 0:04:56.720
<v Speaker 2>If it wasn't for the families, there wouldn't have been

0:04:56.720 --> 0:05:01.800
<v Speaker 2>a second police investigation. And something that's quite unique to

0:05:01.920 --> 0:05:05.960
<v Speaker 2>this case is that it's been reliant on the families

0:05:06.279 --> 0:05:09.800
<v Speaker 2>to push for justice this entire time, and they've really

0:05:09.839 --> 0:05:14.599
<v Speaker 2>achieved something remarkable to get it this far. The fact is,

0:05:15.320 --> 0:05:18.760
<v Speaker 2>what the Court of Criminal Appeal was deciding was the

0:05:18.800 --> 0:05:24.120
<v Speaker 2>concept of double jeopardy, and in doing so, the family

0:05:24.320 --> 0:05:28.200
<v Speaker 2>has pushed so hard to the point that the criminal

0:05:28.320 --> 0:05:32.400
<v Speaker 2>justice system in New South Wales and in Australia has

0:05:32.480 --> 0:05:36.320
<v Speaker 2>been forced for really one of the first times, to

0:05:36.320 --> 0:05:40.320
<v Speaker 2>elect on this principle of double jeopardy and sudden underpinning

0:05:41.080 --> 0:05:45.520
<v Speaker 2>of our system. And it's important to understand what double

0:05:45.600 --> 0:05:50.479
<v Speaker 2>jeopardy is. So the person police believe committed all three

0:05:50.600 --> 0:05:55.840
<v Speaker 2>murders been put on trial twice individually for two of

0:05:55.880 --> 0:06:00.799
<v Speaker 2>the separate cases, so once for Evelyn and once for Clinton,

0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:04.640
<v Speaker 2>and they were separated by twelve years in nineteen ninety

0:06:04.680 --> 0:06:08.640
<v Speaker 2>four the first trial and less than six And what

0:06:08.720 --> 0:06:12.719
<v Speaker 2>the jeopardy basically says is that once a person has

0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:16.440
<v Speaker 2>been acquitted of an offense, that they are protected by

0:06:16.480 --> 0:06:21.320
<v Speaker 2>the principle of double jeppy and can't be tried again.

0:06:21.800 --> 0:06:26.320
<v Speaker 2>But what this doesn't take into consideration, of course, is

0:06:26.360 --> 0:06:31.440
<v Speaker 2>that huge mistakes are made and that as we know

0:06:31.600 --> 0:06:35.400
<v Speaker 2>with Aboriginal people in particular, and we know from this

0:06:35.680 --> 0:06:41.120
<v Speaker 2>case that when these children had been murdered, the police

0:06:41.160 --> 0:06:45.160
<v Speaker 2>treated it as a missing person's case in each situation,

0:06:45.880 --> 0:06:49.120
<v Speaker 2>and so the proper investigative work that should lead to

0:06:49.160 --> 0:06:53.920
<v Speaker 2>a murder conviction was never done. In addition to that,

0:06:54.279 --> 0:06:59.640
<v Speaker 2>at both trials, fundamental evidence that would have helped secure

0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:03.279
<v Speaker 2>a can viction was not either tended to the court

0:07:03.839 --> 0:07:09.360
<v Speaker 2>orred by the jury. So that's why this person, or

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:12.320
<v Speaker 2>at least one reason why this person, who is suspected

0:07:12.360 --> 0:07:15.960
<v Speaker 2>by the police to have committed all the crimes, was acquitted.

0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:21.800
<v Speaker 2>So the important point that family has always maintained is

0:07:21.840 --> 0:07:26.280
<v Speaker 2>that there needs to be justice, so that this fundamental

0:07:26.280 --> 0:07:31.320
<v Speaker 2>principle of double jeopardy is fine ordinarily, but where justice

0:07:31.360 --> 0:07:35.520
<v Speaker 2>has not been done, where the evidence exists, and where

0:07:35.560 --> 0:07:39.880
<v Speaker 2>there has been failures of the system, that there needs

0:07:39.920 --> 0:07:43.120
<v Speaker 2>to be a review. And this is essentially what the

0:07:43.160 --> 0:07:47.800
<v Speaker 2>Court of Criminal Appeal was doing, was looking at in

0:07:47.840 --> 0:07:53.960
<v Speaker 2>the pursuit of justice, was there the possibility to retry

0:07:54.240 --> 0:08:00.720
<v Speaker 2>this person. And it boiled down to one particular issue,

0:08:00.960 --> 0:08:07.000
<v Speaker 2>which is that was the evidence available at the time

0:08:07.600 --> 0:08:11.400
<v Speaker 2>of these trials, in particular one of the trials, So

0:08:12.320 --> 0:08:14.760
<v Speaker 2>was the evidence that would be presented at a new

0:08:14.840 --> 0:08:19.280
<v Speaker 2>trial to be considered fresh and compelling. Now, what the

0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:24.440
<v Speaker 2>judgment basically says in Layman's terms is that the evidence

0:08:24.600 --> 0:08:29.440
<v Speaker 2>wasn't fresh and compelling, and the restate that is because

0:08:30.840 --> 0:08:35.840
<v Speaker 2>the evidence was seen by the court. But the important

0:08:35.880 --> 0:08:40.280
<v Speaker 2>point is it was not seen by the jury. Some

0:08:40.400 --> 0:08:46.240
<v Speaker 2>of this evidence that is relevant was deemed inadmissible. And

0:08:46.360 --> 0:08:51.440
<v Speaker 2>what was required for this process to be successful is

0:08:51.480 --> 0:08:53.760
<v Speaker 2>for the court to be able to make a ruling

0:08:54.920 --> 0:09:00.520
<v Speaker 2>that evidence that had previously been deemed inadmissible that would

0:09:00.600 --> 0:09:07.000
<v Speaker 2>lead to either ensuring justice or the pursuit of justice,

0:09:07.320 --> 0:09:12.640
<v Speaker 2>i e. That this was evidence that would show a

0:09:12.679 --> 0:09:16.160
<v Speaker 2>person responsible further linked to a crime. It wasn't a

0:09:16.200 --> 0:09:21.760
<v Speaker 2>fishing expedition. This was accurate evidence, but that if that

0:09:21.840 --> 0:09:26.160
<v Speaker 2>had been deemed inadmissible in the past some decades ago,

0:09:26.440 --> 0:09:29.640
<v Speaker 2>that if a law had changed that would now see

0:09:29.720 --> 0:09:34.719
<v Speaker 2>thatce be admissible and allowed in that that should now

0:09:34.760 --> 0:09:41.360
<v Speaker 2>be deemed fresh evidence. But the reason why I believe

0:09:41.400 --> 0:09:44.839
<v Speaker 2>the Court of Criminal Appeal has refused the application re

0:09:45.000 --> 0:09:50.199
<v Speaker 2>trial is not because the evidence isn't fresh. It's not

0:09:50.240 --> 0:09:54.200
<v Speaker 2>because it's not compelling. It's that because the New South

0:09:54.360 --> 0:10:00.320
<v Speaker 2>was parliament after the parliamentary inquiry just two years ago

0:10:00.600 --> 0:10:05.839
<v Speaker 2>failed to make this change that would see and demand

0:10:06.520 --> 0:10:10.320
<v Speaker 2>that the jury see the evidence that not be purely

0:10:10.360 --> 0:10:13.960
<v Speaker 2>at the discretion of judge some twenty years ago, and

0:10:14.000 --> 0:10:19.760
<v Speaker 2>that we maintain judges ruling all the way through. Because

0:10:19.800 --> 0:10:23.240
<v Speaker 2>what makes fresh and compelling evidence is what's presented to

0:10:23.280 --> 0:10:26.880
<v Speaker 2>a jury. It's no use if a judge sees it

0:10:28.280 --> 0:10:33.160
<v Speaker 2>and turns it away. As we know from Kevin Henry's case,

0:10:34.920 --> 0:10:38.600
<v Speaker 2>there was evidence that was never printed. There was his

0:10:38.800 --> 0:10:44.600
<v Speaker 2>forced confession where only certain ass jury as ruled by judge.

0:10:44.720 --> 0:10:48.360
<v Speaker 2>The important part about this case is that you have

0:10:48.559 --> 0:10:53.520
<v Speaker 2>three separate murders, and all of the only two sorry

0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:58.320
<v Speaker 2>how it individually. It's clear to just basic common sense

0:10:58.960 --> 0:11:03.280
<v Speaker 2>that have murders of three children in the same location,

0:11:04.080 --> 0:11:09.600
<v Speaker 2>committed in the same way, with the same prime suspect

0:11:09.760 --> 0:11:13.800
<v Speaker 2>who the police themselves believed did it that the best

0:11:13.880 --> 0:11:18.120
<v Speaker 2>chance of achieving justice is that all the evidence from

0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:24.959
<v Speaker 2>all three crimes be presented. And that's never occurred. So

0:11:25.040 --> 0:11:28.800
<v Speaker 2>what this was hoping that the Court of Criminal Appeal

0:11:28.840 --> 0:11:32.480
<v Speaker 2>would allow a trial and that at least two of

0:11:32.559 --> 0:11:37.560
<v Speaker 2>the case would be heard together, if not all three. Instead,

0:11:37.840 --> 0:11:40.720
<v Speaker 2>I think the failure of the new South Wales government

0:11:40.800 --> 0:11:45.000
<v Speaker 2>to legislate that the jury the court able to hear

0:11:46.120 --> 0:11:51.959
<v Speaker 2>fresh evidence, evidence that was denied to be seen by

0:11:51.960 --> 0:11:55.680
<v Speaker 2>a jury in the past, is the failing that has

0:11:55.760 --> 0:11:57.880
<v Speaker 2>resulted in this knock now.

0:11:59.360 --> 0:12:05.800
<v Speaker 1>Mardin it was there were draft a draft bill put

0:12:05.880 --> 0:12:08.480
<v Speaker 1>forth by Greens and lay Dad Hubridge, who has been

0:12:08.520 --> 0:12:12.400
<v Speaker 1>a key of the Families that he was hoping to

0:12:12.480 --> 0:12:15.760
<v Speaker 1>present to Parliament before the Attorney General at the time,

0:12:15.840 --> 0:12:21.040
<v Speaker 1>gabrielle Upton excited to send the application back to the

0:12:21.080 --> 0:12:26.480
<v Speaker 1>Court of Criminal Criminal Appeal. So what would you say

0:12:26.520 --> 0:12:29.640
<v Speaker 1>about the Attorney generals to that should it have been

0:12:30.600 --> 0:12:34.600
<v Speaker 1>gone to the Niels Parliament first or how easy that

0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:37.920
<v Speaker 1>the fact that the Attorney General has just sent straight

0:12:37.960 --> 0:12:41.840
<v Speaker 1>away to the clarifying that legal definition, because that actually

0:12:41.920 --> 0:12:46.559
<v Speaker 1>came up in the parliamentary inquiry into the family response

0:12:46.600 --> 0:12:49.920
<v Speaker 1>to the murders, which went above and beyond its terms

0:12:49.920 --> 0:12:54.920
<v Speaker 1>of reference and actually recommended clarifying exactly what you just said.

0:12:56.080 --> 0:12:58.320
<v Speaker 1>How would you see that the fact that it did

0:12:58.360 --> 0:13:04.840
<v Speaker 1>go to the Court of Criminal Appeal before there legislative chape.

0:13:05.480 --> 0:13:07.920
<v Speaker 2>I think it's a really important point and it's the

0:13:07.960 --> 0:13:11.360
<v Speaker 2>most important point out of all of what we've learned

0:13:11.400 --> 0:13:15.280
<v Speaker 2>so far, which is that the family's call has always

0:13:15.360 --> 0:13:20.160
<v Speaker 2>been that this person should be on trial for all

0:13:20.240 --> 0:13:25.360
<v Speaker 2>three murders, and they're exactly right. And what the Parliamentary

0:13:25.520 --> 0:13:33.880
<v Speaker 2>Inquiry foresaw was that if these legislative changes weren't made,

0:13:34.080 --> 0:13:38.240
<v Speaker 2>then what happened yesterday, the rejection of an ability to

0:13:38.320 --> 0:13:42.160
<v Speaker 2>retry this individual, was a high possibility. And I think,

0:13:42.200 --> 0:13:46.760
<v Speaker 2>in particular David Ubridge and no doubt his staff, having

0:13:46.880 --> 0:13:51.840
<v Speaker 2>studied other jurisdictions around the world, particularly in the United

0:13:51.920 --> 0:13:58.000
<v Speaker 2>king other common law jurisdictions, that what the examples show

0:13:58.400 --> 0:14:02.079
<v Speaker 2>elsewhere is that if you don't make these legislative changes,

0:14:03.040 --> 0:14:07.400
<v Speaker 2>you really don't leave the court with the ability to

0:14:07.600 --> 0:14:11.960
<v Speaker 2>make such a big finding. Because really the principle of

0:14:12.120 --> 0:14:17.480
<v Speaker 2>double jeopardy is such a cornerstone of our legal system.

0:14:18.240 --> 0:14:22.720
<v Speaker 2>So if you're going to ask a court to allow

0:14:22.840 --> 0:14:27.360
<v Speaker 2>the principle to be not so much overturned in this case,

0:14:27.840 --> 0:14:33.120
<v Speaker 2>but that another trial take place because of all the errors,

0:14:33.160 --> 0:14:37.520
<v Speaker 2>because of fresh and compelling evidence, and because of the

0:14:37.640 --> 0:14:42.800
<v Speaker 2>community's desire amand for justice, and the courts and the

0:14:42.800 --> 0:14:46.400
<v Speaker 2>Parliament should be representing all of us as a community,

0:14:47.160 --> 0:14:51.600
<v Speaker 2>then these changes needed to take place. I think what's

0:14:51.760 --> 0:14:56.560
<v Speaker 2>clear is a few things. One, the legal community in

0:14:56.560 --> 0:15:03.960
<v Speaker 2>Australia has always campaigned behind claud against changes to things

0:15:04.160 --> 0:15:09.440
<v Speaker 2>like double jeopardy. There is quite a conservative element inside

0:15:09.480 --> 0:15:14.720
<v Speaker 2>the legal community in Australia, but in most countries where

0:15:14.920 --> 0:15:18.720
<v Speaker 2>they don't want to see law changed, they particularly don't

0:15:18.760 --> 0:15:23.960
<v Speaker 2>want to see these principles like double jeopardy changed, and

0:15:24.000 --> 0:15:28.880
<v Speaker 2>I think that plant to the Attorney General's decision. I

0:15:28.920 --> 0:15:33.720
<v Speaker 2>also think that it was a very deliberate decision not

0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:38.200
<v Speaker 2>to make these changes, these lisilative changes, because it would

0:15:38.240 --> 0:15:41.920
<v Speaker 2>have taken a little bit of time to go changes

0:15:42.600 --> 0:15:45.960
<v Speaker 2>for all sides of politics in the New South Wales

0:15:46.000 --> 0:15:50.880
<v Speaker 2>Parliament to have their input, to seek advice from experts

0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:55.240
<v Speaker 2>on what the ramifications might be. But these changes needed

0:15:55.520 --> 0:15:57.920
<v Speaker 2>to be made, and if it took a little bit

0:15:57.960 --> 0:16:01.520
<v Speaker 2>of time to get it right and worth getting it right.

0:16:01.920 --> 0:16:06.440
<v Speaker 2>The family has come this far twenty seven years, they

0:16:06.480 --> 0:16:11.440
<v Speaker 2>are owed the Parliament takes that time. Instead, the Attorney

0:16:11.480 --> 0:16:16.760
<v Speaker 2>General rushed to the Court of Kriminal Appeal and I

0:16:16.800 --> 0:16:22.120
<v Speaker 2>think that was largely done because of the public attention

0:16:22.280 --> 0:16:25.240
<v Speaker 2>that had been drawn to the case through a podcast.

0:16:25.840 --> 0:16:29.560
<v Speaker 2>I think anytime the mainstream media picks us with it

0:16:29.600 --> 0:16:35.080
<v Speaker 2>for a small period of time, politicians feel the need

0:16:35.880 --> 0:16:40.080
<v Speaker 2>to act, and by acting quickly, they don't always make

0:16:40.200 --> 0:16:44.800
<v Speaker 2>the best decisions. Often their action is done simply to

0:16:44.840 --> 0:16:47.400
<v Speaker 2>get the heat off their own back that's been caused

0:16:47.440 --> 0:16:51.880
<v Speaker 2>by these issues being raised. Really, what needed to take

0:16:51.960 --> 0:16:57.280
<v Speaker 2>place is for what was raised by David Shubridge at

0:16:57.280 --> 0:17:01.800
<v Speaker 2>the time, what was recommended by the Parliamentary that did

0:17:01.840 --> 0:17:06.480
<v Speaker 2>go above and beyond that across party lines, the individuals

0:17:06.560 --> 0:17:10.920
<v Speaker 2>involved resaw what had happened here, that the families had

0:17:10.960 --> 0:17:16.000
<v Speaker 2>been failed at every turn, that they'd done anything and everything.

0:17:16.040 --> 0:17:20.560
<v Speaker 2>You could ask a family who have suffered such horrific loss,

0:17:21.080 --> 0:17:24.640
<v Speaker 2>the death and murder of their children, they'd done everything,

0:17:24.760 --> 0:17:28.400
<v Speaker 2>and yet the system, the police, are courts, the DPP,

0:17:29.000 --> 0:17:32.320
<v Speaker 2>the attorney and the Parliament had failed them. This was

0:17:32.359 --> 0:17:36.159
<v Speaker 2>the chance, after the parliamentary inquiry right to take the

0:17:36.240 --> 0:17:40.880
<v Speaker 2>time to ensure that before this everything was done right

0:17:40.960 --> 0:17:45.040
<v Speaker 2>and the legislation the judges at the Court of Criminal

0:17:45.040 --> 0:17:48.720
<v Speaker 2>Appeal to make a ruling to allow a retrial herders

0:17:49.280 --> 0:17:53.280
<v Speaker 2>could be retried. This is much as much a legal

0:17:53.359 --> 0:17:57.200
<v Speaker 2>failure and a police failure. So I really think people

0:17:57.280 --> 0:18:00.880
<v Speaker 2>need to start thinking about who they vote for. Who

0:18:00.960 --> 0:18:04.359
<v Speaker 2>is going to take the tough decisions, not just the

0:18:04.520 --> 0:18:08.679
<v Speaker 2>easy decisions when the mainstream media comes calling, Who's going

0:18:08.720 --> 0:18:11.639
<v Speaker 2>to have the guts to say, I'm not going to rush.

0:18:11.760 --> 0:18:14.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to get it right because that's what these

0:18:14.200 --> 0:18:18.000
<v Speaker 2>kids deserve and that's what the families deserve. But we've

0:18:18.040 --> 0:18:21.119
<v Speaker 2>seen a rush once again, and it means it leaves

0:18:21.160 --> 0:18:26.160
<v Speaker 2>the families in limbo again after twenty seven years. It's

0:18:26.400 --> 0:18:27.840
<v Speaker 2>completely unacceptable.

0:18:29.040 --> 0:18:31.040
<v Speaker 1>I just wanted to talk and ask you a little

0:18:31.080 --> 0:18:33.840
<v Speaker 1>bit about the fact, you know, this has been on.

0:18:34.160 --> 0:18:37.200
<v Speaker 1>We're all murdered within five each other, on the same

0:18:37.240 --> 0:18:40.439
<v Speaker 1>stretch of barable mission, and yet it has been very

0:18:40.520 --> 0:18:44.000
<v Speaker 1>hard for the families to get any media attention. The

0:18:44.040 --> 0:18:47.480
<v Speaker 1>original police investigation was originally sent in to investigate the

0:18:47.480 --> 0:18:52.320
<v Speaker 1>community themselves. It was a child protection investigation, and the

0:18:52.520 --> 0:18:58.359
<v Speaker 1>original police investigating it made crucial mistakes that you know,

0:18:58.480 --> 0:19:01.840
<v Speaker 1>as you said before, other reason why it has been

0:19:01.920 --> 0:19:05.919
<v Speaker 1>so hard to get the man accused before court yet again.

0:19:07.640 --> 0:19:11.399
<v Speaker 1>So you know, I was really disheartened this week to

0:19:11.480 --> 0:19:18.560
<v Speaker 1>see that although there was greater coverage about it, the

0:19:18.720 --> 0:19:23.520
<v Speaker 1>wider Australia just still sees Aboriginal children as disposable, and

0:19:23.560 --> 0:19:26.640
<v Speaker 1>we saw that over in Perth of the two young

0:19:26.680 --> 0:19:30.000
<v Speaker 1>Aboriginal boys who lost their life in the Swan River

0:19:30.040 --> 0:19:33.040
<v Speaker 1>as well after being chased by police. I think the

0:19:33.080 --> 0:19:36.800
<v Speaker 1>wider issue as well as the way Aboriginal children are

0:19:36.840 --> 0:19:40.600
<v Speaker 1>being seen, because to me, the idea that an alleged

0:19:40.640 --> 0:19:45.800
<v Speaker 1>serial killer has not been brought before court yet again

0:19:45.880 --> 0:19:49.080
<v Speaker 1>after twenty seven years is really disturbing and I don't

0:19:49.080 --> 0:19:52.679
<v Speaker 1>think that would happen anywhere else. If you compare to Caitler,

0:19:52.760 --> 0:19:56.199
<v Speaker 1>there were three white children who'd allegedly been killed by

0:19:56.240 --> 0:20:00.960
<v Speaker 1>one mare, you just wouldn't have that. There'd be a

0:20:01.040 --> 0:20:04.000
<v Speaker 1>community outcry that would last more than just one day

0:20:04.480 --> 0:20:07.199
<v Speaker 1>and more than just a couple of media articles. So

0:20:07.240 --> 0:20:10.320
<v Speaker 1>I think it's that wider issue as well the courts

0:20:11.359 --> 0:20:15.160
<v Speaker 1>have handled it and the way Parliament or the Attorney

0:20:15.200 --> 0:20:17.840
<v Speaker 1>General has handled it, but also the facts that Australia

0:20:18.480 --> 0:20:21.800
<v Speaker 1>still largely closes it seas in its eyes and devalues

0:20:22.160 --> 0:20:25.679
<v Speaker 1>Aboriginal children is really sad because we've seen, you know,

0:20:25.720 --> 0:20:28.520
<v Speaker 1>particularly with legislative changes. You know, you look at the

0:20:28.520 --> 0:20:30.840
<v Speaker 1>lockout laws and you look at all of the king

0:20:31.000 --> 0:20:35.359
<v Speaker 1>hits in the middle of inner city Sydney, and that

0:20:35.480 --> 0:20:39.920
<v Speaker 1>leads to legislative change which actually affects Aboriginal kids disproportionately

0:20:40.440 --> 0:20:43.040
<v Speaker 1>in regional communities. So we see that legislative change can

0:20:43.040 --> 0:20:46.119
<v Speaker 1>actually happen, but not when it comes to Aboriginal kids

0:20:46.119 --> 0:20:47.320
<v Speaker 1>and Aboriginal victims.

0:20:49.400 --> 0:20:53.359
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think sadly this week, the loss of the

0:20:53.440 --> 0:20:59.359
<v Speaker 2>life of two young Aboriginal boys in Western Australia highlights

0:20:59.480 --> 0:21:03.520
<v Speaker 2>everything that has gone wrong with this case and highlights

0:21:03.760 --> 0:21:07.919
<v Speaker 2>the reason why four hundred Aboriginal people have died in

0:21:07.960 --> 0:21:12.280
<v Speaker 2>custody in the last twenty five years and yet no

0:21:12.359 --> 0:21:16.560
<v Speaker 2>one has been charged and convicted. I think the reporting

0:21:16.800 --> 0:21:21.720
<v Speaker 2>of the way the boys died also highlights the way

0:21:22.080 --> 0:21:26.400
<v Speaker 2>the mainstream media and the general public view these cases

0:21:26.480 --> 0:21:30.960
<v Speaker 2>and these incidents. These were children in Western Australia, like

0:21:31.080 --> 0:21:35.600
<v Speaker 2>the children of Baarraville, and yet the police claim that

0:21:35.640 --> 0:21:41.240
<v Speaker 2>they were jumping fences. No one in the media bothered

0:21:41.280 --> 0:21:44.679
<v Speaker 2>to check if that was true. They just took the

0:21:44.720 --> 0:21:47.840
<v Speaker 2>police's word for what the boys had done. And this

0:21:48.040 --> 0:21:50.640
<v Speaker 2>was the worst that the police could come up with,

0:21:51.640 --> 0:21:56.480
<v Speaker 2>that these boys had jumped fences. We don't kill people

0:21:56.480 --> 0:22:00.439
<v Speaker 2>for jumping fences. And yet so far I've heard nothing

0:22:00.480 --> 0:22:04.840
<v Speaker 2>from the West Australian government or the public that he's

0:22:04.880 --> 0:22:09.200
<v Speaker 2>going to seek to hold the police to account. Once again,

0:22:09.359 --> 0:22:13.879
<v Speaker 2>it's the Aboriginal community and their families mourning a loss

0:22:14.320 --> 0:22:16.760
<v Speaker 2>and being forced to carry the load of trying to

0:22:16.800 --> 0:22:22.720
<v Speaker 2>get justice. When you look at the cases of all

0:22:22.800 --> 0:22:28.120
<v Speaker 2>three Bauerville children, as you say, their deaths occurred across

0:22:28.160 --> 0:22:33.600
<v Speaker 2>a five month period of time. Initially, the first few

0:22:34.200 --> 0:22:37.680
<v Speaker 2>first cases were handled as they were missing persons, as

0:22:37.720 --> 0:22:44.080
<v Speaker 2>you said, community themselves were investigated. How did the police

0:22:44.119 --> 0:22:48.120
<v Speaker 2>come to the conclusion before they'd done any serious investigation

0:22:49.640 --> 0:22:53.240
<v Speaker 2>that it was a missing person's case. They came that

0:22:53.320 --> 0:22:57.080
<v Speaker 2>conclusion because they have a preconceived notion of Aboriginal people.

0:22:59.160 --> 0:23:04.440
<v Speaker 2>When they walk into Bauerville with that preconceived notion, they

0:23:04.600 --> 0:23:08.680
<v Speaker 2>ensured that the likelihood of the families ever getting justice

0:23:09.320 --> 0:23:13.000
<v Speaker 2>would be nil, and the likelihood that this individual could

0:23:13.080 --> 0:23:17.800
<v Speaker 2>kill again would be near on one hundred percent. You

0:23:17.960 --> 0:23:20.800
<v Speaker 2>have to go into an engation with an open mind.

0:23:21.680 --> 0:23:25.480
<v Speaker 2>All the evidence should have been collected. When you're talking

0:23:25.520 --> 0:23:29.639
<v Speaker 2>about the murder of children. No stone should be left unturned.

0:23:30.640 --> 0:23:34.520
<v Speaker 2>If this was three children in the suburbs of Sydney,

0:23:35.680 --> 0:23:40.439
<v Speaker 2>there would be marches on the street. And yet the

0:23:40.520 --> 0:23:44.159
<v Speaker 2>attention is focused on the very families that had lost

0:23:44.280 --> 0:23:47.880
<v Speaker 2>their little kids and the pressure was put on them,

0:23:48.280 --> 0:23:53.040
<v Speaker 2>they weren't believed and the police continued to cock this up.

0:23:53.920 --> 0:23:56.800
<v Speaker 2>There is a great likelihood that there is evidence that

0:23:56.920 --> 0:24:00.320
<v Speaker 2>is yet to be discovered, that there is evidences that

0:24:00.520 --> 0:24:04.240
<v Speaker 2>existed at the time that would have made these cases

0:24:04.280 --> 0:24:07.840
<v Speaker 2>an absolute slam dunk that was never uncovered by the

0:24:07.880 --> 0:24:11.840
<v Speaker 2>police because they were too busy focusing on the families.

0:24:12.280 --> 0:24:17.160
<v Speaker 2>Focusing on this being missing persons and Aboriginal children going

0:24:17.240 --> 0:24:23.600
<v Speaker 2>walk about their preconceived ideas and racist views of Aboriginal

0:24:23.640 --> 0:24:29.919
<v Speaker 2>people cost justice, but it also cost future lives because

0:24:29.920 --> 0:24:33.280
<v Speaker 2>these didn't happen all on the same night detailings. These

0:24:33.280 --> 0:24:38.240
<v Speaker 2>were done over a period of time. A brazen serial

0:24:38.320 --> 0:24:42.879
<v Speaker 2>killer of children has to be the greatest threat that

0:24:43.080 --> 0:24:48.080
<v Speaker 2>our society and our community faces. Who would deny that

0:24:48.160 --> 0:24:52.000
<v Speaker 2>what we must protect most is the safety of our children,

0:24:52.359 --> 0:24:57.560
<v Speaker 2>of all children in our community right around Australia. And

0:24:57.640 --> 0:25:01.080
<v Speaker 2>yet the very people we pay our tax dollars that

0:25:01.160 --> 0:25:04.360
<v Speaker 2>we go to work for the police to protect us

0:25:04.480 --> 0:25:09.400
<v Speaker 2>from these people. Failed the Beauerville families and have failed

0:25:09.480 --> 0:25:13.200
<v Speaker 2>in Western Australia to the point that more young Aboriginal

0:25:13.240 --> 0:25:18.800
<v Speaker 2>people are dead. It's the complete opposite of the way

0:25:18.880 --> 0:25:22.440
<v Speaker 2>the system is supposed to work. They are supposed to protect,

0:25:22.640 --> 0:25:29.440
<v Speaker 2>not kill. And yet, as you say, where is the outrage,

0:25:29.880 --> 0:25:34.560
<v Speaker 2>we have pockets of coverage whenever there is a parliamentary inquiry,

0:25:35.520 --> 0:25:39.280
<v Speaker 2>when the families hold a protest, maybe some media in

0:25:39.320 --> 0:25:43.199
<v Speaker 2>the mainstream media will turn up. If we're going to

0:25:43.240 --> 0:25:47.639
<v Speaker 2>stop the killing of Aboriginal children, if we're going to

0:25:47.680 --> 0:25:52.720
<v Speaker 2>stop the killing of Aboriginal people in custody, the blatant

0:25:52.880 --> 0:25:56.280
<v Speaker 2>murder of some like young Elijah in Western Australia who

0:25:56.280 --> 0:25:59.199
<v Speaker 2>can be run down and the killer walking free today,

0:26:00.520 --> 0:26:03.920
<v Speaker 2>then the rest of society has wake up and ask

0:26:04.000 --> 0:26:08.640
<v Speaker 2>themselves this one question. Would they accept the same if

0:26:08.640 --> 0:26:13.320
<v Speaker 2>it was their children? If you would, there's something deeply

0:26:13.400 --> 0:26:16.919
<v Speaker 2>wrong with you If you wouldn't, Why do you allow

0:26:17.000 --> 0:26:21.400
<v Speaker 2>it for Aboriginal children. Why are Aboriginal children's lives disposable?

0:26:22.240 --> 0:26:27.480
<v Speaker 2>Why are abige others forced to mourn their children without justice,

0:26:27.520 --> 0:26:30.720
<v Speaker 2>and not only that treated in the first place, as

0:26:30.720 --> 0:26:35.240
<v Speaker 2>if they could be suspects. This will only change when

0:26:35.280 --> 0:26:39.159
<v Speaker 2>the broader public stops thinking the owners should be on

0:26:39.240 --> 0:26:45.560
<v Speaker 2>Aboriginal people, starts taking responsibility for the police, a justice

0:26:45.600 --> 0:26:49.960
<v Speaker 2>and political system, and a public that is indifferent to

0:26:50.080 --> 0:26:53.639
<v Speaker 2>the killing and the violence against Aboriginal people.

0:26:54.720 --> 0:26:57.280
<v Speaker 1>If you want to support the Oval families in their

0:26:57.280 --> 0:27:01.520
<v Speaker 1>continued quest for justice, there will be a protest on

0:27:01.640 --> 0:27:05.600
<v Speaker 1>Thursday Thursday, the twentieth September at ten a m outside

0:27:05.680 --> 0:27:10.600
<v Speaker 1>Parliament House in New South Wales on Macquarie Street. That

0:27:10.760 --> 0:27:13.000
<v Speaker 1>was episode fifty nine of Curtain