1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:02,680
Speaker 1: Before we get into today's episode, a quick warning that

2
00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:07,600
Speaker 1: it contains discussion of sexual violence. Listener, discussion is advised already.

3
00:00:07,680 --> 00:00:10,160
Speaker 1: And this is the Daily This is the Daily This

4
00:00:10,240 --> 00:00:11,040
Speaker 1: is the Daily Oas.

5
00:00:11,800 --> 00:00:13,520
Speaker 2: Oh now it makes sense.

6
00:00:21,360 --> 00:00:23,840
Speaker 1: Good morning and welcome to the Daily OS. It's Thursday,

7
00:00:23,880 --> 00:00:25,960
Speaker 1: the eleventh of December. I'm Elliottlaurie.

8
00:00:26,160 --> 00:00:27,320
Speaker 2: I'm Billy Fitzimon's.

9
00:00:27,800 --> 00:00:30,240
Speaker 1: Last week, a jury in Victoria found a man guilty

10
00:00:30,280 --> 00:00:33,080
Speaker 1: of raping a woman twice in twenty twenty four. Despite

11
00:00:33,120 --> 00:00:36,080
Speaker 1: this guilty verdict, a suppression order remains in place, meaning

12
00:00:36,120 --> 00:00:39,080
Speaker 1: media outlets have been unable to publish his name. The

13
00:00:39,159 --> 00:00:41,839
Speaker 1: case comes amid grown criticism of the widespread use of

14
00:00:41,880 --> 00:00:45,479
Speaker 1: suppression orders in Victoria's court system. So in today's episode,

15
00:00:45,600 --> 00:00:47,560
Speaker 1: we're going to break down what happened in this case,

16
00:00:47,720 --> 00:00:50,760
Speaker 1: what exactly a suppression order is, and when and why

17
00:00:50,840 --> 00:00:52,720
Speaker 1: a cord would use one.

18
00:00:56,360 --> 00:01:00,319
Speaker 2: So, Elliott, we have seen this rape case unfold in

19
00:01:00,400 --> 00:01:03,920
Speaker 2: Victoria over the last couple of weeks, and what has

20
00:01:03,960 --> 00:01:06,600
Speaker 2: been so interesting about it is that there has been

21
00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:09,600
Speaker 2: this suppression order, which has meant that the media has

22
00:01:09,640 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 2: not been able to name the man who has been

23
00:01:12,920 --> 00:01:17,200
Speaker 2: found guilty of rape for those who might have missed it.

24
00:01:17,480 --> 00:01:19,360
Speaker 2: Do you want to just take us through the elements

25
00:01:19,440 --> 00:01:21,120
Speaker 2: of the case that are public.

26
00:01:21,400 --> 00:01:24,039
Speaker 1: Yes. So. Over the past few weeks, a jury in

27
00:01:24,080 --> 00:01:26,800
Speaker 1: the County Court of Victoria heard the details of an

28
00:01:26,800 --> 00:01:30,440
Speaker 1: incident that occurred in January last year. So it had

29
00:01:30,440 --> 00:01:32,400
Speaker 1: a lot of moving parts, but sort of the top

30
00:01:32,440 --> 00:01:35,560
Speaker 1: line details that we heard in the victim's testimony was

31
00:01:35,560 --> 00:01:37,520
Speaker 1: that she was sleeping in a dark bedroom when a

32
00:01:37,560 --> 00:01:41,399
Speaker 1: man will call him man A snuck in, climbed into bed,

33
00:01:41,440 --> 00:01:45,399
Speaker 1: and penetrated her without consent. Now, she testified that man

34
00:01:45,440 --> 00:01:48,080
Speaker 1: A was pretending to be another man who will call

35
00:01:48,200 --> 00:01:51,600
Speaker 1: man B, who she had actually had consensual sex with

36
00:01:51,720 --> 00:01:54,880
Speaker 1: earlier in the evening. Man B had actually left the

37
00:01:54,920 --> 00:01:57,960
Speaker 1: building in an uber. However, despite it being dark, the

38
00:01:58,000 --> 00:02:00,680
Speaker 1: woman said she knew that the man entering the bed

39
00:02:00,760 --> 00:02:03,160
Speaker 1: was not man B, and she recalls catching a glimpse

40
00:02:03,200 --> 00:02:05,320
Speaker 1: of man A as he dashed out of the room

41
00:02:05,440 --> 00:02:08,920
Speaker 1: after the incident occurred. She then later identified man A

42
00:02:08,919 --> 00:02:11,800
Speaker 1: as the person whose house they'd been staying at, and

43
00:02:11,840 --> 00:02:14,520
Speaker 1: the jury also heard how in the days after, man

44
00:02:14,520 --> 00:02:17,000
Speaker 1: A actually docted an uber receipt to make it look

45
00:02:17,080 --> 00:02:19,720
Speaker 1: like man B was still in the house at the

46
00:02:19,720 --> 00:02:22,320
Speaker 1: time that the incident occurred, so basically tried to say

47
00:02:22,360 --> 00:02:25,000
Speaker 1: that he was the one entering the bed instead of

48
00:02:25,320 --> 00:02:29,079
Speaker 1: man A. Ultimately, man A was found guilty on two

49
00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:32,440
Speaker 1: counts of rape by a jury last Friday. Despite this,

50
00:02:32,600 --> 00:02:35,240
Speaker 1: we as a media company are actually not allowed to

51
00:02:35,320 --> 00:02:37,720
Speaker 1: say his name due to a court order that's still

52
00:02:37,720 --> 00:02:38,160
Speaker 1: in place.

53
00:02:39,200 --> 00:02:42,040
Speaker 2: And this case has now received a lot of attention

54
00:02:42,200 --> 00:02:45,639
Speaker 2: because man A, who has been found guilty, has been

55
00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:49,359
Speaker 2: referred to as the son of a high profile family

56
00:02:49,560 --> 00:02:53,680
Speaker 2: by other publications, and a lot of people have questioned

57
00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:58,560
Speaker 2: why exactly his identity is still being protected following the

58
00:02:58,600 --> 00:03:01,600
Speaker 2: guilty verdict. Do you want to walk us through the

59
00:03:01,720 --> 00:03:03,000
Speaker 2: reasoning behind that.

60
00:03:03,440 --> 00:03:05,760
Speaker 1: Yeah. I've actually seeing quite a lot of commentary, especially

61
00:03:05,800 --> 00:03:08,560
Speaker 1: on social media, with people saying that the media is

62
00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:11,440
Speaker 1: potentially being evasive by not saying his name. But the

63
00:03:11,480 --> 00:03:13,440
Speaker 1: reason they're doing that is because the judge in this

64
00:03:13,600 --> 00:03:16,799
Speaker 1: case issued something called a suppression order, and that order

65
00:03:16,840 --> 00:03:18,400
Speaker 1: is very much still active.

66
00:03:18,680 --> 00:03:20,960
Speaker 2: I think we should pause and you should explain what

67
00:03:21,120 --> 00:03:22,959
Speaker 2: exactly is a suppression order?

68
00:03:23,120 --> 00:03:25,600
Speaker 1: For sure, So a suppression order sometimes you'll hear it

69
00:03:25,639 --> 00:03:28,440
Speaker 1: called a gag order is basically a direction by the

70
00:03:28,440 --> 00:03:31,440
Speaker 1: court that makes it illegal to publish certain details about

71
00:03:31,480 --> 00:03:34,400
Speaker 1: a case. Most commonly this means hiding the identity of

72
00:03:34,440 --> 00:03:37,280
Speaker 1: the victim or the alleged perpetrator, but it can also

73
00:03:37,320 --> 00:03:40,880
Speaker 1: relate to other facts of the case, so not just identities. Now,

74
00:03:40,960 --> 00:03:43,360
Speaker 1: there's a bunch of reasons why a judge might issue

75
00:03:43,400 --> 00:03:45,720
Speaker 1: a suppression order. It could be because they think the

76
00:03:45,760 --> 00:03:49,280
Speaker 1: public attention could affect the jury's decision. It could be

77
00:03:49,280 --> 00:03:51,800
Speaker 1: because a person's safety might be jeopardized, so you know,

78
00:03:52,120 --> 00:03:55,280
Speaker 1: if they know that someone is appearing in a case,

79
00:03:55,320 --> 00:03:57,680
Speaker 1: someone might come after them. And more and more commonly,

80
00:03:57,720 --> 00:04:00,360
Speaker 1: we're seeing an argument being raised by defendants that they

81
00:04:00,400 --> 00:04:03,000
Speaker 1: need to have their names suppressed because it poses a

82
00:04:03,080 --> 00:04:04,920
Speaker 1: risk to their mental health to have it out there

83
00:04:04,920 --> 00:04:05,480
Speaker 1: in the public.

84
00:04:05,920 --> 00:04:10,240
Speaker 2: And a suppression order is a legal order, so media

85
00:04:10,280 --> 00:04:14,720
Speaker 2: publications like US can't publish the name because otherwise there

86
00:04:14,720 --> 00:04:17,120
Speaker 2: are consequences. What are the consequences?

87
00:04:17,440 --> 00:04:21,080
Speaker 1: So the penalties differ between the states, but generally speaking,

88
00:04:21,120 --> 00:04:23,440
Speaker 1: if the media does not abide by the rules set

89
00:04:23,440 --> 00:04:25,600
Speaker 1: out in a suppression order, they could be fined more

90
00:04:25,600 --> 00:04:28,599
Speaker 1: than five hundred thousand dollars. So it's not nothing, and

91
00:04:28,640 --> 00:04:31,080
Speaker 1: we've actually seen it happen before. I want you to

92
00:04:31,200 --> 00:04:34,240
Speaker 1: cast your mind back to twenty eighteen when Cardinal George

93
00:04:34,279 --> 00:04:36,960
Speaker 1: Pell was facing charges of child sexual abuse. Do you

94
00:04:37,000 --> 00:04:37,720
Speaker 1: remember this case.

95
00:04:37,920 --> 00:04:38,159
Speaker 3: I do.

96
00:04:38,240 --> 00:04:40,080
Speaker 2: I was working in media at the time. It was

97
00:04:40,240 --> 00:04:43,960
Speaker 2: an absolutely massive day. Tell us about it because it

98
00:04:44,000 --> 00:04:44,640
Speaker 2: was crazy.

99
00:04:44,760 --> 00:04:45,000
Speaker 3: Yeah.

100
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:47,560
Speaker 1: Well, you'll remember at the time, a suppression order was

101
00:04:47,600 --> 00:04:50,680
Speaker 1: placed on Pell's identity because he was actually set to

102
00:04:50,720 --> 00:04:54,320
Speaker 1: face a second trial over separate allegations. And the reason

103
00:04:54,360 --> 00:04:56,680
Speaker 1: there was that the court didn't want the first case

104
00:04:56,720 --> 00:05:00,960
Speaker 1: potentially influencing a jury in the second case. Now, at

105
00:05:00,960 --> 00:05:03,400
Speaker 1: the time, Pelle was one of the highest ranking officials

106
00:05:03,440 --> 00:05:06,400
Speaker 1: globally in the Catholic Church, and when he was initially convicted,

107
00:05:06,600 --> 00:05:09,520
Speaker 1: no Ossie publications could actually write about it.

108
00:05:09,839 --> 00:05:13,440
Speaker 2: And the key word there is no Ouzsi publications because

109
00:05:13,480 --> 00:05:18,120
Speaker 2: what was so interesting is that international publications could name him.

110
00:05:18,160 --> 00:05:19,760
Speaker 2: So you could go on to the New York Times

111
00:05:19,960 --> 00:05:23,200
Speaker 2: and you could see George Pell's name everywhere, and that

112
00:05:23,279 --> 00:05:25,880
Speaker 2: was the same for all international publications. But you just

113
00:05:26,000 --> 00:05:29,000
Speaker 2: couldn't go on any Ossie publication and see it. But

114
00:05:29,080 --> 00:05:31,760
Speaker 2: it was so interesting because obviously because of the Internet,

115
00:05:32,160 --> 00:05:34,480
Speaker 2: you could access the international ones and see it.

116
00:05:34,880 --> 00:05:38,160
Speaker 1: And you might remember in particular the Herald Sun that's

117
00:05:38,200 --> 00:05:40,719
Speaker 1: a newspaper down in Melbourne. They kind of pointed to

118
00:05:40,760 --> 00:05:43,480
Speaker 1: this idea, so they completely blacked out the front page

119
00:05:43,480 --> 00:05:46,599
Speaker 1: of their newspaper and they had censored in big white writing,

120
00:05:47,000 --> 00:05:49,240
Speaker 1: and they kind of hinted to their readers that they

121
00:05:49,279 --> 00:05:51,400
Speaker 1: could go find out the details of the case by

122
00:05:51,440 --> 00:05:53,120
Speaker 1: going to international publications.

123
00:05:53,240 --> 00:05:56,200
Speaker 2: Yes, and then a lot of publications did actually get

124
00:05:56,240 --> 00:05:59,080
Speaker 2: in trouble for that because they were inferring who it

125
00:05:59,240 --> 00:06:01,720
Speaker 2: was by Dave acting them to go find.

126
00:06:01,480 --> 00:06:04,640
Speaker 1: Out who it was exactly. And the courts ended up

127
00:06:04,680 --> 00:06:07,320
Speaker 1: cracking down on all these publishers, and they actually handed

128
00:06:07,360 --> 00:06:10,400
Speaker 1: down fines of more than a million dollars to at

129
00:06:10,480 --> 00:06:13,320
Speaker 1: least twelve publications who kind of took this tactic of

130
00:06:13,680 --> 00:06:17,200
Speaker 1: sending people to where the information was so interesting.

131
00:06:17,560 --> 00:06:20,080
Speaker 2: And I think it is also worth pointing out that

132
00:06:20,080 --> 00:06:22,640
Speaker 2: that story was one from Victoria, and the one that

133
00:06:22,640 --> 00:06:25,800
Speaker 2: we are talking about today is also from Victoria. Is

134
00:06:25,839 --> 00:06:28,480
Speaker 2: there something specific to Victoria here?

135
00:06:28,960 --> 00:06:31,640
Speaker 1: Yeah, So these cases actually come up a lot in Victoria,

136
00:06:31,880 --> 00:06:34,479
Speaker 1: and it's often referred to as the suppression order capital

137
00:06:34,560 --> 00:06:37,640
Speaker 1: of the country. Why Well, according to analysis done by

138
00:06:37,680 --> 00:06:41,039
Speaker 1: the Age, in twenty twenty three, Victorian courts issued five

139
00:06:41,120 --> 00:06:43,719
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty one suppression orders. Just to put that

140
00:06:43,800 --> 00:06:46,680
Speaker 1: into context, that's almost equal to the total number of

141
00:06:46,720 --> 00:06:49,200
Speaker 1: suppression orders issued across the entire country.

142
00:06:49,320 --> 00:06:51,800
Speaker 2: That is crazy. Why is it so high?

143
00:06:52,120 --> 00:06:54,080
Speaker 1: So I actually reached out to a lawyer to try

144
00:06:54,120 --> 00:06:56,840
Speaker 1: to find out the answer about this. His name's Justin Quill.

145
00:06:56,960 --> 00:06:59,640
Speaker 1: He's from the firm Thompson Grier and in the past

146
00:06:59,640 --> 00:07:02,520
Speaker 1: twenty eight years, he says, he's challenged more suppression orders

147
00:07:02,560 --> 00:07:04,839
Speaker 1: than any other lawyer in the state. And he's done

148
00:07:04,880 --> 00:07:08,120
Speaker 1: so mainly on behalf of media organizations who are arguing

149
00:07:08,200 --> 00:07:11,440
Speaker 1: that the information in these cases is in the public interest.

150
00:07:11,760 --> 00:07:15,240
Speaker 1: So he has some ideas about why these rates are

151
00:07:15,240 --> 00:07:17,320
Speaker 1: so high in Victoria. And this is what he said.

152
00:07:17,800 --> 00:07:23,080
Speaker 3: My theory, the so called Gangland War Tony Mockbel Carl Williamson,

153
00:07:23,440 --> 00:07:28,520
Speaker 3: all sorts of crooked cops and other crooks basically shooting

154
00:07:28,600 --> 00:07:33,560
Speaker 3: each other, and they were involved in drug cases. You

155
00:07:33,640 --> 00:07:37,360
Speaker 3: had dirty coppers charging someone and then being charged themselves.

156
00:07:37,600 --> 00:07:41,280
Speaker 3: So there were all these overwapping cases like unprecedented at

157
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:45,360
Speaker 3: the time, and I think, frankly what happened is judges

158
00:07:45,720 --> 00:07:51,520
Speaker 3: and barristers almost became, if you like, conditioned to suppress orders.

159
00:07:51,880 --> 00:07:55,040
Speaker 2: Okay, so we have this precedent set during the Gangland

160
00:07:55,080 --> 00:07:58,360
Speaker 2: Wars in Melbourne in the two thousands, and that has

161
00:07:58,400 --> 00:08:02,119
Speaker 2: made suppression orders much much more common. Has the state

162
00:08:02,160 --> 00:08:04,680
Speaker 2: government done anything to intervene.

163
00:08:04,600 --> 00:08:07,440
Speaker 1: Yeah, they have actually so in twenty thirteen, the Victorian

164
00:08:07,440 --> 00:08:10,520
Speaker 1: government passed a piece of legislation called the Open Courts Act,

165
00:08:10,880 --> 00:08:12,800
Speaker 1: and it was designed to try and clamp down on

166
00:08:12,920 --> 00:08:16,720
Speaker 1: suppression orders. They did that because Australia's judicial system is

167
00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:20,160
Speaker 1: actually based on the principle of open justice. That's why

168
00:08:20,440 --> 00:08:22,640
Speaker 1: any person can go into a court room, that's why

169
00:08:22,640 --> 00:08:25,040
Speaker 1: the media can report publicly on court cases, because it's

170
00:08:25,080 --> 00:08:27,080
Speaker 1: the idea that we're able to hold the court system

171
00:08:27,200 --> 00:08:30,080
Speaker 1: to account. Now, suppression orders are supposed to be a

172
00:08:30,200 --> 00:08:33,040
Speaker 1: rare exception to this rule, but as I said, they've

173
00:08:33,120 --> 00:08:36,760
Speaker 1: kind of just been increasingly high over the past decade

174
00:08:36,880 --> 00:08:37,800
Speaker 1: or so.

175
00:08:37,800 --> 00:08:41,320
Speaker 2: So that piece of legislation came in over a decade ago,

176
00:08:41,760 --> 00:08:43,760
Speaker 2: but we've just gone through the stats and they're still

177
00:08:43,800 --> 00:08:46,440
Speaker 2: so high. So why is it still so high? I

178
00:08:46,440 --> 00:08:48,480
Speaker 2: feel like I've just asked the same question three times

179
00:08:48,720 --> 00:08:50,000
Speaker 2: and like Elliott, tell me.

180
00:08:51,240 --> 00:08:54,960
Speaker 1: Well, here's a working theory. This came from Justin as well,

181
00:08:55,240 --> 00:08:57,080
Speaker 1: and he said that it boiled down to a key

182
00:08:57,160 --> 00:08:59,960
Speaker 1: change in the wording of the legislation that allows suppression

183
00:09:00,080 --> 00:09:03,280
Speaker 1: or so, prior to twenty thirteen, you could apply to

184
00:09:03,320 --> 00:09:05,679
Speaker 1: have a suppression order put in place if you believe

185
00:09:05,720 --> 00:09:09,080
Speaker 1: there was a threat to your quote physical safety. Remember

186
00:09:09,120 --> 00:09:12,520
Speaker 1: that now the Open Courts Act changed that wording to

187
00:09:12,640 --> 00:09:15,880
Speaker 1: just say safety, so remove the physical part. This meant

188
00:09:15,960 --> 00:09:18,439
Speaker 1: anyone can now apply for a suppression order if they

189
00:09:18,440 --> 00:09:21,720
Speaker 1: believe that public scrutiny could impact their mental well being

190
00:09:21,960 --> 00:09:26,720
Speaker 1: or their mental quote safety. A cut to twenty twenty five,

191
00:09:26,760 --> 00:09:28,840
Speaker 1: and Justin actually told me that mental harm is the

192
00:09:28,880 --> 00:09:32,480
Speaker 1: most prevalent reason being given in suppression orders in Victoria

193
00:09:32,720 --> 00:09:35,120
Speaker 1: over the last few months. Now, that's not to say

194
00:09:35,120 --> 00:09:38,360
Speaker 1: that there's not genuine concerns about people's mental health being

195
00:09:38,400 --> 00:09:40,959
Speaker 1: heard before the courts, but you can imagine that it's

196
00:09:41,000 --> 00:09:43,679
Speaker 1: pretty hard for a judge who has a psychiatrist before

197
00:09:43,720 --> 00:09:45,640
Speaker 1: them to argue with that point.

198
00:09:46,920 --> 00:09:49,120
Speaker 2: Before we end, I want to go back to the

199
00:09:49,320 --> 00:09:52,280
Speaker 2: original case because one thing that is interesting. You know,

200
00:09:52,280 --> 00:09:55,200
Speaker 2: when we're talking about legislation that came in a decade ago,

201
00:09:55,320 --> 00:09:58,920
Speaker 2: social media wasn't as prevalent as it is now. This

202
00:09:59,160 --> 00:10:01,839
Speaker 2: case about the man in Melbourne, I've seen it all

203
00:10:01,880 --> 00:10:05,720
Speaker 2: over social media, some from news publications who obviously abide

204
00:10:05,720 --> 00:10:09,600
Speaker 2: by these laws, but then there is also user generated

205
00:10:09,720 --> 00:10:13,480
Speaker 2: content by people who perhaps don't necessarily know about all

206
00:10:13,520 --> 00:10:15,600
Speaker 2: of these laws, don't even know what a suppression order

207
00:10:15,800 --> 00:10:18,640
Speaker 2: is potentially, and then you have all of these comments.

208
00:10:19,160 --> 00:10:22,280
Speaker 2: How does that work with the suppression order.

209
00:10:22,840 --> 00:10:24,800
Speaker 1: It's a really interesting point, and I think we have

210
00:10:24,880 --> 00:10:27,720
Speaker 1: to remember that suppression orders were designed when the main

211
00:10:27,720 --> 00:10:30,720
Speaker 1: place that people were getting their information was traditional media.

212
00:10:30,800 --> 00:10:32,960
Speaker 1: They were pretty much only going to the news, so

213
00:10:33,280 --> 00:10:35,120
Speaker 1: it's kind of hard for them to hold up in

214
00:10:35,200 --> 00:10:38,120
Speaker 1: this modern climate. Something interesting in that though, that I

215
00:10:38,240 --> 00:10:40,840
Speaker 1: found out is that anyone who does make a comment

216
00:10:40,960 --> 00:10:43,720
Speaker 1: or a post on social media actually becomes a publisher

217
00:10:43,840 --> 00:10:46,200
Speaker 1: in the eyes of the law. What that means with

218
00:10:46,280 --> 00:10:48,480
Speaker 1: this rape case that we're talking about is if you

219
00:10:48,679 --> 00:10:51,320
Speaker 1: post on TikTok or you make a comment, you could

220
00:10:51,360 --> 00:10:53,360
Speaker 1: be in breach of the suppression order that the court

221
00:10:53,360 --> 00:10:56,680
Speaker 1: has issued at this given time. However, it would be

222
00:10:56,760 --> 00:10:58,719
Speaker 1: quite hard for a judge to crack down on the

223
00:10:58,760 --> 00:11:02,080
Speaker 1: everyday poster because they're not caught reporters. It's unlikely they

224
00:11:02,240 --> 00:11:04,679
Speaker 1: even know that the suppression order exists in the first place.

225
00:11:05,200 --> 00:11:08,000
Speaker 1: In regards to this specific case that we've just been

226
00:11:08,040 --> 00:11:11,199
Speaker 1: talking about, it's not done. We are still awaiting sentencing,

227
00:11:11,240 --> 00:11:15,840
Speaker 1: which means that suppression order stays in place for the foreseeable.

228
00:11:15,320 --> 00:11:18,720
Speaker 2: Future, but it could potentially be lifted at some point. Yes,

229
00:11:19,440 --> 00:11:22,880
Speaker 2: so interesting, Such a crazy example of you know, how

230
00:11:22,960 --> 00:11:26,760
Speaker 2: technology is moving so fast and legislation finds it hard

231
00:11:26,800 --> 00:11:29,720
Speaker 2: to try to keep up with how fast technology is.

232
00:11:29,920 --> 00:11:31,520
Speaker 1: Moving one hundred percent.

233
00:11:31,320 --> 00:11:33,000
Speaker 2: Elliott, thank you so much for taking us through that.

234
00:11:33,360 --> 00:11:36,200
Speaker 2: Thanks Billy, And if this episode has brought up any

235
00:11:36,320 --> 00:11:39,520
Speaker 2: issues for you, you can call one eight hundred respect

236
00:11:39,760 --> 00:11:42,600
Speaker 2: on one eight hundred seven three seven seven, three to two.

237
00:11:43,040 --> 00:11:45,480
Speaker 2: We'll be back this afternoon with your evening headlines. But

238
00:11:45,600 --> 00:11:50,760
Speaker 2: until then, have a good day.

239
00:11:51,160 --> 00:11:53,439
Speaker 1: My name is Lily Madden and I'm a proud Aarunda

240
00:11:53,679 --> 00:11:56,240
Speaker 1: bungelung Kalguttin woman from Gadigal Country.

241
00:11:57,080 --> 00:12:00,160
Speaker 2: The Daily oz acknowledges that this podcast is recorded it

242
00:12:00,200 --> 00:12:02,640
Speaker 2: on the lands of the Gadigal people and pays respect

243
00:12:02,679 --> 00:12:03,280
Speaker 2: to all.

244
00:12:03,200 --> 00:12:06,280
Speaker 1: Aboriginal and torrest rate island and nations. We pay our

245
00:12:06,280 --> 00:12:09,439
Speaker 1: respects to the first peoples of these countries, both past

246
00:12:09,520 --> 00:12:10,040
Speaker 1: and present