Speaker 1: This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We
Speaker 1: urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline on
Speaker 1: thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them at
Speaker 1: lifeline dot org dot au.
Speaker 2: Hello, it's Allison Sandy. Welcome to Conversations three of the
Speaker 2: Trips about Amy and I am joined today. Liam is
Speaker 2: away at the moment, but we have Tim Clark and
Speaker 2: radio legend and author Greg Carey.
Speaker 3: Welcome, Hello, Alie, Hello Tim, lovely be part of it.
Speaker 4: Morning, Greg, Thanks for joining us.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to give a little bit of an
Speaker 2: introduction to Greg. Greg obviously helped us out with the
Speaker 2: Lady Banish's case as well. He's basically an oracle I
Speaker 2: find on all these sorts of cases. He really provides
Speaker 2: us with insight and just sound reasoning. And I think
Speaker 2: that's one of the things. I mean, we all get
Speaker 2: it what I do, and I does.
Speaker 5: We get a bit.
Speaker 2: Emotional sometimes with it, but you're kind of like Tom Hagen,
Speaker 2: the CONSTLIERI Godfather, you know, just keep it all very practical.
Speaker 6: They cut him out of Godfather three, remember I'm.
Speaker 2: Still I mean, that's why Godfather three was doomed it
Speaker 2: was never going to go anywhere, even though they had
Speaker 2: that great line from Alpuccino about every.
Speaker 5: Time I tried to get out, drag me back in.
Speaker 3: And congratulations of what you've done with this podcast. I
Speaker 3: think it's been magnificent, to be honest, Yeah, really really good.
Speaker 3: You know, I can only comment obviously as somebody who's
Speaker 3: listened to it all and really admired your work, and
Speaker 3: I imagine, like everybody else's listened, just become frustrated and
Speaker 3: annoyed and angered by a lot of what you've had
Speaker 3: to deal with.
Speaker 6: So well done.
Speaker 2: So, I mean, we can't say that this is something
Speaker 2: that's iol in w A, is it. I mean w
Speaker 2: A police seem to have a lot of power in
Speaker 2: wa as don't do police in every state. But one
Speaker 2: of the things I just thought I would just bring up,
Speaker 2: just on the outset before we get into general impressions,
Speaker 2: is the police commissioner. Do you know, Tim, whether the
Speaker 2: police commissioner isn't it a political appointment or whether how
Speaker 2: that works in w A.
Speaker 4: Well, it's policing and politics. I mean they do go
Speaker 4: hand in hand, don't they, Because law and order, the
Speaker 4: reality of it not the TV show is always a
Speaker 4: hot button political issue, and we have a state election
Speaker 4: coming up here in March, so I'm sure that law
Speaker 4: and order will rise to the top of the public
Speaker 4: consciousness again. But ultimately the police, it is the police
Speaker 4: Commissioner who is appointed by the Police Minister, and they
Speaker 4: do have to have a very close working relationship and
Speaker 4: so well, when when cole Blanche was appointed, it was
Speaker 4: Paul Pappollia, the Police Minister who was you know, stood
Speaker 4: by his side at that appointment. But then like any
Speaker 4: other police force, there are those rivulets of of of
Speaker 4: pressures and and and talk and pulling points that that
Speaker 4: always go through. So from my understanding, cole Blanche is
Speaker 4: liked in some quarters and he isn't in others in
Speaker 4: terms of the police ranks. So whether that will will
Speaker 4: play out during his next appointment, because the contracts, I
Speaker 4: believe go for five years, we'll we'll have to wait
Speaker 4: and see. But cole Blanche has been a very very
Speaker 4: fourth right public figure. You might remember Greg even over there, Yes,
Speaker 4: when that amazing morning unfolded when Cleo Smith was was
Speaker 4: found alive, it was actually cole Blanche, not then commissioner,
Speaker 4: but it was actually cole Blanche who did the very
Speaker 4: early morning piece to camera that was then beamed around
Speaker 4: the world announcing that this this this miracle had happened
Speaker 4: and this girl had been found alive after all those
Speaker 4: days and nights of of worry and searching. It was
Speaker 4: cole Blanche that actually was you know, was was dragged
Speaker 4: before a camera at four o'clock in the morning, and
Speaker 4: and and and did the internal sort of colms that
Speaker 4: was then sent out before Chris Dawson actually fronted a
Speaker 4: media conference up in carav And that I was that
Speaker 4: I was at later that day. So he's he's always
Speaker 4: been very front and center of this of the since
Speaker 4: Carlo Callahan resigned that the commissioner before last. He's always
Speaker 4: been very front the center, very media savvy. But unfortunately,
Speaker 4: al we've been told this week that he won't be
Speaker 4: coming on to answer questions live unfortunately.
Speaker 5: Correct.
Speaker 2: Well, I love this quote, Greg that you sent by
Speaker 2: Ralph Waldo Emerson that an institution is only the lengthened
Speaker 2: shadow of an individual. Tell me your thoughts in relation
Speaker 2: to that quote, and I guess the police commissioner.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I think it ties in with everything Timja
Speaker 3: said I read that quote of Emerson's years ago. I've
Speaker 3: always loved him as a writer and a thinker. And
Speaker 3: the second part of the quote is that his character,
Speaker 3: meaning the leader's character, determines the character of the organization,
Speaker 3: that his shadow goes over the organization. And I think
Speaker 3: at a time and we see it at close quarters
Speaker 3: in the media, where bureaucracies and governments, all kinds of
Speaker 3: institutions are getting increasingly defensive and bureaucratic, it's really important
Speaker 3: that I think that you have leaders who are forth writers,
Speaker 3: you said, Tim of the commissioner, and who were prepared
Speaker 3: for their organizations to be reflective of their character. And
Speaker 3: that's perhaps where we're missing good leadership in so many
Speaker 3: areas right now. People are so defensive, and people are
Speaker 3: so concerned about the occasional mistake that they're sometimes reluctant
Speaker 3: to do the right thing. And that to me has
Speaker 3: been one of the shadows, if you like, over this investigation,
Speaker 3: that they seem to have been so busy to cover
Speaker 3: their own bases that somehow other humanity.
Speaker 6: Has got lost along the way.
Speaker 3: And I know Elie quote you love, and I do,
Speaker 3: and probably Tim does as well, as from Michael Cromley's
Speaker 3: character Harry Bosh either everybody counts or nobody counts, and
Speaker 3: somewhere along the way here, I just think Amy got
Speaker 3: lost and the bureaucracy kind of took over, and that's sad.
Speaker 4: And I think Greg the other thing that people have
Speaker 4: spoken to me about, not necessarily by Amy's case, but
Speaker 4: in other cases, is that because the intersection of police
Speaker 4: and politics are so close, there is a danger that
Speaker 4: ministers police ministers as politicians can be then very reluctant
Speaker 4: to be seen to be critical of police forces because
Speaker 4: a they are extremely important to societies and two cabinets
Speaker 4: and to governments to have a functioning, high morale police force.
Speaker 4: But then you walk a fine line as a senior
Speaker 4: police minister or a politician in that if you're seen
Speaker 4: to be too critical of the police, are you then,
Speaker 4: whether it be on one particular case or just in general,
Speaker 4: are you then seen to be undermining them and bashing
Speaker 4: them and chipping away at the confidence of those at
Speaker 4: the coal face who do an extraordinary difficult job. Where
Speaker 4: I think we all I think we all accept, but
Speaker 4: there are cases that come along inevitably that are not
Speaker 4: handled the best, and it's when I find that there's
Speaker 4: a reluctance to criticize or call out that is when
Speaker 4: that is that is a danger because you know, every
Speaker 4: organization needs to learn from their mistakes, and I think
Speaker 4: in this particular case, there's been a distinct reluctance to
Speaker 4: even accept mistakes were made, let alone learn from them.
Speaker 3: I wonder, Elie, because you've dealt with this as well
Speaker 3: on the Lady Vanishes, the Marion Barter case, and others,
Speaker 3: where that defensiveness comes from. Why are they reluctant to
Speaker 3: admit mistakes? Why are they afraid to concede that occasionally?
Speaker 3: You know, they make errors, as we all do. It
Speaker 3: doesn't matter what organization people work in. We all as
Speaker 3: individuals make mistakes, and those organizations make mistakes. But maybe
Speaker 3: it gets back to what Tim was saying that they
Speaker 3: feel they're losing face or whatever.
Speaker 6: When they do that.
Speaker 3: I just think it makes them more normal, doesn't it.
Speaker 6: Well?
Speaker 2: Absolutely, I mean when I look at the Lady Vanishes,
Speaker 2: it's kind of interesting how that transfer because it started
Speaker 2: off with the police being so defensive. So the new
Speaker 2: teams that were brought in with Glenn Brown, who took
Speaker 2: over Missing Persons, he was like, no, they handled it
Speaker 2: badly at the beginning. They didn't follow protocols and just
Speaker 2: accepted it and said that this is what.
Speaker 5: We're doing to manage it.
Speaker 2: And in some respects WA police did that with this
Speaker 2: one when the uniformed police went against the detectives, right
Speaker 2: because the uniform police and so that what they actually
Speaker 2: offered instead was to say, well, now we have a
Speaker 2: phone number that they can call if junior police officers
Speaker 2: want to argue that they don't accept the decision that
Speaker 2: was made by their senior by the detectives in this case.
Speaker 2: But isn't that kind of too late? And I still
Speaker 2: don't think, I mean, the detectives involved with this really
Speaker 2: only got to wrap over the knuckles when you look
Speaker 2: at the findings of the internal investigation. So I don't know,
Speaker 2: it's just like they try to keep everyone happy rather
Speaker 2: than just saying, you know what, you guys stepped up here.
Speaker 2: We're going to have to fix it and then move on.
Speaker 2: But certainly the defense at the inquest the council representing
Speaker 2: police was hell being on suicide there. So the old school,
Speaker 2: I suppose, seems to still dominate in police forces now,
Speaker 2: which is I think the issue.
Speaker 6: You too were much closer to it.
Speaker 3: But as a listener, and again I'm probably asking a
Speaker 3: question the thousands who listened to it would be asking
Speaker 3: why were.
Speaker 6: They so fixed on that opinion?
Speaker 3: I mean, I understand the early bungling and early bungling
Speaker 3: can happen, but later bungling should sort that out. But
Speaker 3: why were they so keen to hold on to that?
Speaker 3: I would rather have thought they should have started from
Speaker 3: the premise that it was a crime committed by somebody
Speaker 3: else and then feed everything through that lens or that filter.
Speaker 3: It seems to make a great deal more sense. And
Speaker 3: fixating on this idea of suicide, what did you make
Speaker 3: of that?
Speaker 4: Well? In Western Australia, Greg that we've talked about this
Speaker 4: on previous episodes. In the history of the of the
Speaker 4: major miscarriages of justice that we've had here, there's a
Speaker 4: loose theme, or sometimes it's quite tight, in that the
Speaker 4: police force over here do tend to sometimes on major cases,
Speaker 4: get very blinkered and have tunnel vision to just one vision.
Speaker 4: We were talking just off are there about the case
Speaker 4: of Lloyd's Rainey, a senior barrister, top love level prosecutor
Speaker 4: for the Odpp whose wife went missing. Her body was
Speaker 4: eventually found in King's Park, which is the main green
Speaker 4: space in the middle of Perth, and Lloyd was accused
Speaker 4: of murdering his wife because of various issues, including marital
Speaker 4: problems that they were having. That was eventually disapproved in
Speaker 4: the court of law. Lloyd took the police to court
Speaker 4: himself over defamation claims because one of the senior detectives
Speaker 4: in the case fronted a press conference before Lloyd had
Speaker 4: even been charged and said that he was the prime
Speaker 4: and only suspect in this murder. Now, that could only
Speaker 4: lead to one conclusion that that's all the police were
Speaker 4: looking at. Right, So that's the rainy case. You've got
Speaker 4: the Andrew Mallard case, which we discussed last week with
Speaker 4: Liam again focused on one person. You've got the the
Speaker 4: Clarmont case. For a long time, detectives on the Macro
Speaker 4: Task Force were concentrated on a man called Lawnce Williams
Speaker 4: who ended up being and when I say concentrated, I
Speaker 4: mean years and years of surveillance on this public servant
Speaker 4: who eventually turned out to be completely innocent. So there's
Speaker 4: a history there, right. And then in this case, for
Speaker 4: whatever reason that the two detectives that have turned up
Speaker 4: have concluded suicide completely without any proper investigation, let's put
Speaker 4: it that way. And since then that has been the
Speaker 4: vision that it seems to me the wa police have
Speaker 4: either had to stick to because that's what they early concluded,
Speaker 4: or they wanted to stick to try and keep their
Speaker 4: detectives from having been proved completely wrong. So there again,
Speaker 4: there's that blinkers is that tunnel vision, even though, as
Speaker 4: Alison and Liam have teased out over over many many weeks,
Speaker 4: through many many episodes, that there is there was so
Speaker 4: much more evidence to look at, and it's a much
Speaker 4: broader picture than just Amy. Amy shot herself.
Speaker 7: We have the cars packed, the children are in the car, and.
Speaker 3: Allison, I think in the last episode you made reference
Speaker 3: to the phone call coming after the photo was taken,
Speaker 3: but again the coroner seemed to place more weight on
Speaker 3: that photo than the call coming after it and everything
Speaker 3: else that Tim was was talking about. You know, at
Speaker 3: a time one of the things I think that annoyed me,
Speaker 3: and domestic violence was something I looked at for a
Speaker 3: long time, and it's great that we're talking more about
Speaker 3: it at the moment, but I don't think this investigation
Speaker 3: was consistent or honored the understanding of domestic violence were
Speaker 3: getting these days.
Speaker 6: To me, I mean, there was clearly a.
Speaker 3: Background of the violence in this relationship.
Speaker 6: There's a violent crime. Now.
Speaker 3: I'm not making any suggestions about it. I'm just saying
Speaker 3: as a listener, it seemed to me that the investigator
Speaker 3: or some of the investigators, and perhaps even the coroner
Speaker 3: underestimated that aspect of the case.
Speaker 6: And then when you combine it all with that.
Speaker 3: Telling that extraordinary biomechanical testimony to you guys from Scott Roper,
Speaker 3: I mean, that was just compelling to listen to.
Speaker 6: It was really impressive stuff.
Speaker 4: Well you've said it before, Alie, this scene in its
Speaker 4: very early stages was never looked through the filter of
Speaker 4: a violent relationship or domestic violence, was it?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 2: See, one of the things that sort of confused me too.
Speaker 2: And we talk about new evidence, right, because that's the
Speaker 2: whole basis of this is finding new evidence that can
Speaker 2: be considered. First of all, the Office of the Director
Speaker 2: of Public Prosecutions I don't believe has seen the brief
Speaker 2: since twenty eighteen after those biomechanical reports come through, so
Speaker 2: they haven't considered it in all that time following the
Speaker 2: findings as well, because the coroner didn't refer it to
Speaker 2: the DPP, so as a result they haven't seen the information.
Speaker 2: And as we've also noted, even though there's new evidence,
Speaker 2: Scott Rhoder's being probably the most dominant new evidence. But
Speaker 2: you know, you've also got the photo of Amy that
Speaker 2: was sent to Aaron of the bruises, which the police
Speaker 2: didn't find at the time, even though we were able
Speaker 2: to find it within twenty minutes. Other information that just
Speaker 2: wasn't didn't seem to be given numbs. I suppose the
Speaker 2: priority that it should have been or at least seen
Speaker 2: as important, which is the whole basis of a coronial inquest.
Speaker 2: And we find though, and particularly in cases like this,
Speaker 2: that the very often several inquests. So anyway, Anna has
Speaker 2: written to the officer of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Speaker 2: or to the Director himself, Rob Owen, asking for a meeting,
Speaker 2: and I guess the question also she's asking is whether
Speaker 2: he can request a copy of the brief of evidence
Speaker 2: so that he can make his own analysis, because only
Speaker 2: relying on the police, which of course we've asked them
Speaker 2: as well, whether after they've followed up all these this
Speaker 2: new information this team has been put together to do
Speaker 2: following our podcast, they'll then refer it to the Office
Speaker 2: of the Director of Public Classificitions. But I mean, I
Speaker 2: guess putting it in their hands again is just the
Speaker 2: fear factor that everyone has, is that well, if they
Speaker 2: don't have the appetite to see this one solved necessarily,
Speaker 2: which we don't know. It's just that we're just going
Speaker 2: upon all previous, previous evidence. We just need to, I
Speaker 2: guess have some sort of backup that, you know, which
Speaker 2: is why Anna, you know, put it to the age,
Speaker 2: because I guess that's the other thing, right.
Speaker 5: You know, there's supposed to be a real.
Speaker 2: Separation between politics and the law, right, and we can
Speaker 2: understand that, right that that's really important. But as a family,
Speaker 2: if the justice system seems to be letting you down,
Speaker 2: you have to go to your politicians, right who represent you,
Speaker 2: because they represent the people. And that's why she's appealed
Speaker 2: to the Attorney General. And even though you General says
Speaker 2: that they have that they're not allowed to direct the
Speaker 2: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Of course, it's
Speaker 2: just a case of can you just have a look
Speaker 2: at this, you know, and just you don't make your
Speaker 2: own determination. It's not a direction, right.
Speaker 3: How hard is that Once they circle the wagons, Once
Speaker 3: those institutions of power start circling the wagons, what chance
Speaker 3: does the average person have. And we see this on
Speaker 3: a daily basis of people listening now will have their
Speaker 3: own battles with bureaucracy in different institutions.
Speaker 6: It's so very hard to the individual.
Speaker 3: I think it was the Shadow Attorney General correct me
Speaker 3: if I'm wrong, guys in one of your episodes, the
Speaker 3: Shadow Attorney General over there, and I know what he meant.
Speaker 3: He said, it's not up to the media to solve
Speaker 3: these situations. And I know what he was saying. It
Speaker 3: was more or less saying the police and politicians need
Speaker 3: to do it. But perhaps that's to misunderstand the evolving
Speaker 3: role of the media. Now, you guys are dealing with
Speaker 3: this on a day to day basis. Now, I would
Speaker 3: have thought there's enough evidence now in all the not
Speaker 3: only podcasts, but other outlets as well. The media has
Speaker 3: a key role in not just solving them, but helping
Speaker 3: police to solve them. So again, if those authorities vested
Speaker 3: with the responsibility. I'm doing that job either either can't
Speaker 3: do it, don't want to do it, or require help
Speaker 3: in doing it. And I would have thought there's an
Speaker 3: increasing role for the media, and not only the media,
Speaker 3: but to the many thousands of people podcasts like this
Speaker 3: one reach, as it did in some of the other
Speaker 3: famous ones.
Speaker 4: Well. As a journalist of too many years long standing, Greg,
Speaker 4: You're not going to have any argument with me about
Speaker 4: that point. I mean, these many cliches you can use,
Speaker 4: including you know the classic one that you know, sunlight
Speaker 4: is the best disinfectant, right, and you shine a light
Speaker 4: on some of these cases. Well, I mean, you know,
Speaker 4: just on a small scale, you see it every day
Speaker 4: talk back radio. Someone rings in, I've got an issue
Speaker 4: with my local council. It can sometimes take one or
Speaker 4: two calls from a radio producer and low and behold,
Speaker 4: there will be a council worker on your verge doing
Speaker 4: something that you've been trying to do for three months yourself. Right,
Speaker 4: So it works on that micro scale, but on a
Speaker 4: macro scale in this case and other cases. I mean,
Speaker 4: you know, we've all seen the impact of Headley Thomas's
Speaker 4: amazing work in the in the podcast Realm for the
Speaker 4: last few years, and Allison's own amazing work as well.
Speaker 4: The podcast has become a new vehicle, or a recent
Speaker 4: vehicle to dig deeper than you can in a six hundred,
Speaker 4: eight hundred and twelve hundred word article, which you know,
Speaker 4: has been my main medium for the last sort of
Speaker 4: thirty years or so, because it just gives you time, right,
Speaker 4: and I'm finding that people connect a little bit closer
Speaker 4: or a little bit deeper when they're actually listening to
Speaker 4: the people that are involved and even knowing this case
Speaker 4: as I did, and then Alison asking me, you know,
Speaker 4: to to help with the editorial, and then listening to
Speaker 4: the first few episodes, you know, it just it just
Speaker 4: brings it home in a way that that you know,
Speaker 4: unfortunately the printed medium will never do. And you turn
Speaker 4: it over to the public and say, well, what do
Speaker 4: you what do you think? Oh, you know, you know, well,
Speaker 4: I'm looking at the signatures on the on the petition
Speaker 4: that that Anna launched a few weeks ago. It's up
Speaker 4: to just over seven thousand now. And we know from
Speaker 4: the listenership over the last weeks and weeks and weeks
Speaker 4: there are many, many thousands of people that that I
Speaker 4: think are not only listening to to Amy's story, but
Speaker 4: are backing Amy's family in their in their quest for
Speaker 4: the truth because.
Speaker 3: You con front of something similar, Ellie, didn't you When
Speaker 3: you were doing The Lady Vanishes? And Tim was talking
Speaker 3: about that emotional connection that radio has always it was
Speaker 3: one of the things that attracted me to it as
Speaker 3: a kid. I was emotionally attached to these voices on
Speaker 3: the radio for all kinds of reasons. And podcasts now
Speaker 3: have that capacity that a written police statement or a
Speaker 3: bureaucratic statement, they simply don't have that kind of weight.
Speaker 3: When you were doing The Lady Vanishes, it made that
Speaker 3: connection to the extent that some of your listeners actually
Speaker 3: made breakthroughs.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, we still get so many, even with this one,
Speaker 2: not to the extent of Lady Vanishes, because I think
Speaker 2: Lady Vanishes was just one of those unique ones because
Speaker 2: it was international, and so many countries and places and
Speaker 2: people are parochial by nature, right, so they sort of
Speaker 2: like to be able to relate in some way to it.
Speaker 2: Romance scams are quite a big deal, but also with
Speaker 2: this one as well, with domestic violence, and when we
Speaker 2: had lots of domestic violence victims reach out to us
Speaker 2: as a result, and you want to help everyone, right,
Speaker 2: and it's so hard. And you look at the bombar
Speaker 2: our case as well in Western Australia recently, and there
Speaker 2: was another one in Northern Territory where I think the
Speaker 2: victim had made like two hundred calls or complaints to
Speaker 2: police recently and then ended up being killed. I think
Speaker 2: it's just being relatable as well and being able to
Speaker 2: help as many people as possible. Being able to relate
Speaker 2: it make it relatable. Obviously, people hate injustice. That's what
Speaker 2: we ourselves. We hate injustice, and that's like our main focus.
Speaker 2: Regardless of what you believe is the case here, there's
Speaker 2: no doubt or there's no issue with believing that the
Speaker 2: investigation was watched. You know that that seems to even
Speaker 2: though we saw those emails or that information comes back
Speaker 2: from ECOI where some police is still holding onto that whole. No, no,
Speaker 2: we didn't make a mistakes sort of. So I think
Speaker 2: that's I think the media has an extremely important role
Speaker 2: in this in shining a light, giving a voice to
Speaker 2: the voiceless, making all the aspects apparent so that people
Speaker 2: can make their own judgment.
Speaker 6: See Ali that's a really important point.
Speaker 3: We came to hear what Tim has to say about
Speaker 3: that too, because again, one of the things that as
Speaker 3: a listener to this really concerned me was the nature
Speaker 3: of the debate about the balance of probabilities and beyond
Speaker 3: a reasonable doubt, both of which planned this. But I
Speaker 3: don't know if it's a uniquely Western Australian thing, but
Speaker 3: it just seemed to me that they're kind of upside
Speaker 3: down a little bit. When I listened to what you
Speaker 3: guys presented, I didn't have much that at all, let
Speaker 3: alone a reasonable one, And when it came to a.
Speaker 6: Balance of probabilities about what happened, I think it.
Speaker 3: You know, again, it was pretty clear with the balance
Speaker 3: of probabilities that a.
Speaker 6: W a thing or not.
Speaker 4: Well, no it's not. I mean, they're they're two sort
Speaker 4: of cornerstones of the justice system all over the world.
Speaker 6: I'm in the interpretation over the.
Speaker 4: Prioritization of the Yeah, well, I don't know, I don't.
Speaker 4: I don't think it is and I mean I think
Speaker 4: I think you've your analysis, as Greg is the same
Speaker 4: as as is a lot of people's, and there you know,
Speaker 4: anyone who listened to last week's episode and sortably, I'm
Speaker 4: talking about his still disbelief some of the questions that
Speaker 4: were asked during the inquest and the conclusions that were
Speaker 4: that would that were drawn from the answers to those questions, Again,
Speaker 4: there's there's a reasonable doubt, would there be, Well you'll
Speaker 4: never know, Well we might know, we never know, And
Speaker 4: that's if Robert oh in the O d p P
Speaker 4: decides yeah, okay, well we'll ask for that file to
Speaker 4: be sent over to my office and I might spend
Speaker 4: a couple of hours or a couple of days reading it. Well,
Speaker 4: it's ultimately it would ultimately then be up to that
Speaker 4: office to decide a what are the ballots of probabilities?
Speaker 4: And then be if we did put this before a
Speaker 4: jury or a judge, could we prove it beyond reasonable doubt?
Speaker 3: But the jury would have to say, wouldn't I I
Speaker 3: think again, a lot of people were just like the
Speaker 3: idea of the jury having essay on all of this,
Speaker 3: not a politician, not a DPP, a jury.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Well that's the whole point, right, I Mean, we
Speaker 4: still have the juris system for a reason, because the
Speaker 4: justice system all over the world has decided that's the
Speaker 4: best system that we have twelve or fourteen of sixteen
Speaker 4: of your peers that are drawn from all aspects of
Speaker 4: life or walks of life, all measures of experience, and
Speaker 4: they bring it all together in two rooms, the courtroom
Speaker 4: and the jury room, and then come to a verdict.
Speaker 4: In this case, I'm not sure, because we do have
Speaker 4: the power to have trials by judge alone in this
Speaker 4: case if there are reasons for it, one of them
Speaker 4: being lots of pre trial publicity, so you know, but yeah,
Speaker 4: I mean, you'd hope it would even get you know,
Speaker 4: at this point, we're just hoping it would get to
Speaker 4: the point where the office of the DPP have a
Speaker 4: look at it. Let alone, let alone the next step, right, because.
Speaker 3: That's not unique either, arely is it? I mean you
Speaker 3: think back to and again, I guess we all approach
Speaker 3: these things with a different mindset. I'm thinking back to
Speaker 3: the case of Chris Dawson and the NET SIMS and
Speaker 3: the reluctance at that stage way back when the NETT
Speaker 3: went missing to lay charges. You know, as you listen
Speaker 3: to what information they had then, I can't understand the
Speaker 3: reluctance of the DPP not to have laid charges then
Speaker 3: and to pursue different avenues of investigation. Then I get
Speaker 3: really annoyed, guys when I often hear people say things
Speaker 3: were different then in.
Speaker 7: The eighties or the nineties or the seventies.
Speaker 6: When I was around in the.
Speaker 3: Seventies, eighties and nineties and things weren't different, then we
Speaker 3: lose the idea of domestic violence. Now, community attitudes have
Speaker 3: caught up a little bit in some senses, but a
Speaker 3: lot of what was around then is also around now,
Speaker 3: and I just.
Speaker 7: Don't like that idea of them.
Speaker 3: I don't know, rationalizing certain behaviors either then or now.
Speaker 4: You're absolutely right. I mean, I watched a documentary on
Speaker 4: the Yorkshire Ripper, who's a notorious probably one of the
Speaker 4: most notorious UK serial killers, and it goes to two
Speaker 4: of the points we've discussed this morning. The tunnel vision
Speaker 4: that the police had then about the fact that he
Speaker 4: was killing prostitutes and prostitutes were not worth investigating, and
Speaker 4: the fact that he actually wasn't just killing prostitutes. He
Speaker 4: attacked young women. He detacked girls from school girls in it,
Speaker 4: so called innocent victims. And it was the outrage, the
Speaker 4: growing outrage that so many women could be killed up
Speaker 4: one after the other that eventually brought about changing the
Speaker 4: squad that investigated. And then it was you know, a
Speaker 4: bobby on the beat that actually just happened across him.
Speaker 4: And that was you know, that was in the in
Speaker 4: the in the eighties, seventies and eighties in the UK.
Speaker 4: So the attitudes then were exactly the same, why are
Speaker 4: we dying? Why are women dying on the streets? Why
Speaker 4: why can't you catch this guy? And it was the
Speaker 4: same in the nineties with the Claremont case here and
Speaker 4: so many others. Amy's case is twenty fourteen, I mean,
Speaker 4: so it's the police can't even go well, you know,
Speaker 4: it was different back then, No, it wasn't. It's ten
Speaker 4: years ago, guys, and attitudes of you know, they've moved
Speaker 4: on a bit, but not you know, women dying of
Speaker 4: gunshot wounds to the head have always been a shocking
Speaker 4: to the community then and now now.
Speaker 2: I'm just putting this out there and I think we
Speaker 2: all kind of agree. We know, we've been in the
Speaker 2: media for a long time and we know.
Speaker 5: That all lives aren't equal.
Speaker 2: You touching upon the prostitutes being the victims with the
Speaker 2: Yorkshire Ripper, right and not seeming to matter as much,
Speaker 2: but in Amy's case there was that whole. I just feel,
Speaker 2: this is my opinion, if Amy had been middle class,
Speaker 2: if it had been an affluent suburb in Perth, if
Speaker 2: she had been white, I feel it would have been
Speaker 2: created differently. That's just my opinion, and I guess that's
Speaker 2: something that Sharon of Seeing touched upon as well. There
Speaker 2: was this whole basis that it was considered at some
Speaker 2: stage that Amy was indigenous. I mean, obviously David Simmons
Speaker 2: is indigenous. She's actually a quarter tie. But whether or
Speaker 2: not that would matter either because she's not, you know,
Speaker 2: a white Australian and the circumstances, whether or not there
Speaker 2: were some prejudgment, and you know that these things are
Speaker 2: always subjective, right when people come into a scene, that
Speaker 2: there is prejudgment of the circumstances in a lot of cases,
Speaker 2: and some are treated more carefully than others.
Speaker 4: Well, it's an interesting month to ponder whether if Amy's
Speaker 4: body had been found in a bedroom in Clermont or
Speaker 4: Cottislow or Pepermint Grove or one of the more affluent
Speaker 4: western suburbs of Perth, rather than in a pretty ramshackle
Speaker 4: sort of bedroom on a property in Serpentine. What would
Speaker 4: have been the reaction. I mean, you would assume there
Speaker 4: would be different officers, right, maybe more experienced, maybe more
Speaker 4: open minded. Who knows, and it's a it's a question
Speaker 4: that's asked all over the world. I would surmise whether
Speaker 4: there is Well, what's the buzzphrase two tier policing, I
Speaker 4: think was the phrase that has been kicking around in
Speaker 4: the UK recently. You know, whether some chromes are different
Speaker 4: or treated differently to others, or chrome scenes are treated
Speaker 4: different to others. Again, I'm pretty sure that if you
Speaker 4: ask the police straight out, they'd absolutely deny it, But
Speaker 4: whether that makes it true or not is another matter.
Speaker 3: They might even deny it in good faith, and they
Speaker 3: might even believe they're right, and they might have acted
Speaker 3: in a way that they believe was right. But there's
Speaker 3: so much institutionalization of these things, isn't there. And there's
Speaker 3: enough I mean, in this case Ali and Tim, you'd
Speaker 3: have to be in the minds of the investigators an
Speaker 3: all concerned, But there's enough evidence around the world just
Speaker 3: to prove the point you're making.
Speaker 6: It's just a fact.
Speaker 2: Just with that, I mean, I think the difference Obviously
Speaker 2: we had the uniform officers who were just fantastic, and
Speaker 2: we're right in there. And this is the problem with
Speaker 2: them being I guess junior, so we're obviously not casting
Speaker 2: that shadow in relation to their reaction. But I think
Speaker 2: the difference and this is where it comes back with
Speaker 2: Christopher Dawson to Chris Dawson lind Sim's murder. They have
Speaker 2: a champion in the police there, high up, Gamien Loom,
Speaker 2: and that makes a difference too, Right, It's just having
Speaker 2: somebody who is invested in a play in a position
Speaker 2: where they can do something.
Speaker 4: Well. I'm sure Greg has experienced it on that side
Speaker 4: of the country, but yeah, having someone on your side,
Speaker 4: even one person can open within, you know, the walls,
Speaker 4: can you know, it can help immeasurably. But it's finding
Speaker 4: that person. Getting someone to listen can be the hard part.
Speaker 4: And as we've seen for weeks and weeks and weeks
Speaker 4: and heard from Anna, it's not like she hasn't tried
Speaker 4: for more than ten years now to just try and
Speaker 4: get that one person, you know, in terms of high
Speaker 4: up in the hierarchy, to say yeah, okay, look I'm
Speaker 4: on your side and leave it with me. And I'll
Speaker 4: see what I can do. There's been lots of little
Speaker 4: people like you and me, Allison, sort of banging the
Speaker 4: drum and trying to push the barrow along. But yeah,
Speaker 4: I mean you're right. Sometimes you just need someone high
Speaker 4: up to say, yeah, okay, you got me.
Speaker 3: Even when the police do get passionately involved, and I
Speaker 3: mean that can lead to all kinds of internal divisions
Speaker 3: and problems, Ali and Tim from over there, you might
Speaker 3: have followed it as well. The case of the tragication
Speaker 3: little William Tyrrell Gosh and the Spider Man outfit heartbreaking.
Speaker 3: But even now opinions are divided, and we have one
Speaker 3: of the senior police who Ali, I think you know,
Speaker 3: who had very strong ideas on who did and didn't
Speaker 3: do it. Yeah, and you know that proved to be wrong.
Speaker 3: But he was passionate. I admired his passion. I admired
Speaker 3: his passion to be doing the right thing. Now, whether
Speaker 3: he was right or wrong, that's yeah for others.
Speaker 6: To be so.
Speaker 3: One or two things he was quite confident about certainly
Speaker 3: weren't true. So but I think you start with the passion,
Speaker 3: if you if you start with that idea that you
Speaker 3: know everybody does count. We're really going to try and
Speaker 3: sort the truth here, and if that means having a
Speaker 3: few fights within the force and with the press and
Speaker 3: taking some criticism, and because none of that stuff matters
Speaker 3: in the end, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: That's right, That's the whole thing, right, The politics doesn't
Speaker 2: matter if you.
Speaker 5: Just look at what your what your role is.
Speaker 2: You know about justice and you know there to serve
Speaker 2: and represent the people and ensure their safety. So just
Speaker 2: on that, I've put a couple of questions to the
Speaker 2: Police Commissioner. He hasn't got back to me yet, but
Speaker 2: it hasn't been twenty four hours yet, so I'm not
Speaker 2: going to hold them to that. But these are the
Speaker 2: questions to the Police Commissioner following up the information that's
Speaker 2: been provided into Amy Wensley's case the team that's doing that,
Speaker 2: So once investigative, will the brief of evidence be updated
Speaker 2: and passed on to the Office of the Director of
Speaker 2: Public Prosecutions to consider if not, why not, how long
Speaker 2: will this take and who makes that decision? So I
Speaker 2: we'll obviously update you in further conversations as to what
Speaker 2: those answers are. And yeah, I think that's the whole
Speaker 2: thing is from our side of things, we need to
Speaker 2: just keep that pressure on.
Speaker 5: We'll keep the petition going.
Speaker 2: Also, just a reference Peter Collier, who were talking about
Speaker 2: before Greg, So he's the actually the shadow Police Minister.
Speaker 2: People were saying, well, why didn't we put it to
Speaker 2: the Police Minister rather than the AG? Right, Well, I
Speaker 2: guess the reason we put it to the AG was
Speaker 2: in relation to the ODPP and what he could do.
Speaker 2: There is that reminder that the Police Minister is close,
Speaker 2: presumably to the Police Commissioner. Obviously he's politely declined to
Speaker 2: answer any questions on this podcast anyway. So yeah, it's
Speaker 2: it's really just trying to find that just somebody, somebody
Speaker 2: as as as Liam pointed out last week, to be accountable.
Speaker 6: They're all way too close to each other. The problems
Speaker 6: is a problem.
Speaker 4: I mean, I'm sure it's the same in Queenslanka. There's
Speaker 4: only there's only you know, so many people in those
Speaker 4: in those high positions. The current Attorney General, John Quigley,
Speaker 4: has been around politics and police and police unions for
Speaker 4: a large part of the last three decades. Cole Blanche,
Speaker 4: the current Commissioner, has been an assistant Commissioner. He's also
Speaker 4: worked closely with the a FP and National Intelligence sort
Speaker 4: of you know, on those those bigger investigations involving drugs
Speaker 4: and international So you know, there's only so many people
Speaker 4: that that can reach that achelon right, and by the
Speaker 4: time you get there, you all know each other, and
Speaker 4: you all know each other's politics, and you will probably
Speaker 4: know each other's paccadillos and the things that that you know,
Speaker 4: the investigations that you concentrate on, and so yeah, it
Speaker 4: can it can be that closeness that can become a barrier,
Speaker 4: and then trying to break in as we are we're
Speaker 4: just talking about and trying to trying to get into
Speaker 4: that circle can be it can be difficult too.
Speaker 3: Yes, we had the case of the Queensland Forensic Lab
Speaker 3: over here as a related to the case of Shandy Blackburn,
Speaker 3: and I think that was a good example of the
Speaker 3: kind of thing we're talking about that we both talk
Speaker 3: about in a sense that it's understandable that people have
Speaker 3: grown up through the Midia and they get to know
Speaker 3: each other and it's good that they can cooperate. I
Speaker 3: think the problem becomes when when the average citizen doesn't
Speaker 3: have the kind of entree that they do.
Speaker 4: I think absolutely absolutely, He's.
Speaker 5: Just got to get it back to the fundamentals.
Speaker 2: Still your role, you're what you're meant to do. And
Speaker 2: I do love that Peter Collyett sort of jumped out
Speaker 2: at it because I mean, being the shadow Police minister,
Speaker 2: you know, he's he's putting it up to the police
Speaker 2: as well, right, I mean obviously he's concentrated in quickly,
Speaker 2: but he's accepting that the police have not handled this
Speaker 2: case properly, which is brave. Whenever anyone says brave, you're
Speaker 2: going to be oh no, it's like in yes, minister.
Speaker 3: Right, says brave minister?
Speaker 7: Is it?
Speaker 3: What have I done it?
Speaker 2: So, you know, I'm really appreciative for him for you know,
Speaker 2: sticking up, just standing. And I guess that the big
Speaker 2: test will come right when you're in power.
Speaker 5: Will you still be able to do that? I hope.
Speaker 3: So that's what the great politicians do. I mean the
Speaker 3: politicians we remember, the politicians who achieve great things. They're
Speaker 3: the ones who do that kind of thing. You know.
Speaker 3: In Australia, think just in in my time, I think
Speaker 3: Bob Hawk, I think Paul Keating, I think John Howard.
Speaker 6: These were people at different points of view about all.
Speaker 7: Manner of things, but you were never in any doubt
Speaker 7: about what.
Speaker 3: They thought and they were prepared to go out there
Speaker 3: and argue their case. Is not always popular, but I
Speaker 3: think people come to respect that, I really do.
Speaker 4: And being seen to be invert come is interfering in
Speaker 4: the in the justice system. You know, there obviously there
Speaker 4: is that separation of powers that are that are vitally important.
Speaker 4: But you know, there also comes a point where you know,
Speaker 4: a quiet word can go a long way. It doesn't
Speaker 4: have to be done, you know, in a public, showy
Speaker 4: type of way. Even though the government has offered a
Speaker 4: million dollar reward right for for information that might lead
Speaker 4: to the solving or the you know, the truth, and
Speaker 4: that was a government decision, so they're invested in monetary terms.
Speaker 4: They've offered this money to anyone to come forward, so
Speaker 4: by extension, they obviously want to see it, see the
Speaker 4: truth come up themselves. And it's worth a million bucks
Speaker 4: to them, or were worth a million dollars to someone.
Speaker 3: That was interesting. I could see what they were trying
Speaker 3: to do. There's obviously somebody they hope knows or somebody
Speaker 3: has heard somebody or seeing something or whatever. But what
Speaker 3: went through in my mind when I heard that a
Speaker 3: million dollars for anybody with any information just listen to
Speaker 3: the podcast. You've got everything you need right there.
Speaker 6: Just listen to all of that.
Speaker 5: I think.
Speaker 2: Also, I mean, that's all well and good and appreciative
Speaker 2: of it. Obviously Sally Laden was pushing that for Marion
Speaker 2: a million dollar reward into her case big time, and
Speaker 2: so it is good. But it's also very passive, isn't it.
Speaker 2: It's not a real active effort to do something. I
Speaker 2: mean referring it to the ODPP, right, that is something
Speaker 2: that means something because I mean, again, no one's directing
Speaker 2: the ODPP. If you just say, hey, have a look
Speaker 2: at this, is there anything there? You know? And then
Speaker 2: it still comes down to somebody else making that decision, right,
Speaker 2: But I mean that to me shows a lot more
Speaker 2: dumption and an absolute commitment, because it's just like crossing
Speaker 2: your t's and dotting your eyes, right.
Speaker 5: I just want to make sure.
Speaker 2: I want to make sure that we're on the right
Speaker 2: track here and that this isn't getting lost along the way,
Speaker 2: because you know, we've got a situation where there will
Speaker 2: be people's noses out of joint if it is solved,
Speaker 2: potentially because it could prove those in power. I mean,
Speaker 2: somebody's got to be wrong regardless of the outcome. So
Speaker 2: you know, it's not worrying about people's feelings.
Speaker 3: And again it's they're coming from the right place. They
Speaker 3: won't care if they're wrong or you know, it's knows
Speaker 3: Is that a joint. I mean, that's that's their job.
Speaker 3: They're doing. Hopefully they're doing the best they can. We're
Speaker 3: all wrong, occasionally, learn from it, move on, try to
Speaker 3: get it right.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that function of the reward has always intrigued me because, yes,
Speaker 4: it's a it's a very large carrot to dangle in
Speaker 4: front of anyone who might have that piece of information.
Speaker 4: But at the other end of the process, as a journalist,
Speaker 4: try and get any information out of the police about
Speaker 4: a whether they that that reward was ever claimed and
Speaker 4: or awarded to anyone, and B you will never ever
Speaker 4: find find out who was was that was that person
Speaker 4: and you know, unless they become a star witness in
Speaker 4: a in a in a trial or something and you
Speaker 4: can join those dots. So yeah, it's it's it's an
Speaker 4: interesting sort of way of a gaining publicity for a
Speaker 4: case and be hopefully prompting someone to come forward.
Speaker 8: But yeah, whether they work or not, it's very hard
Speaker 8: to very hard to conclude because you never get to
Speaker 8: run that circle off really in terms of public information.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's true. I mean I can understand not finding
Speaker 2: out who they are. But you you know I have
Speaker 2: tried to FOI I think at least once. Just you
Speaker 2: know how much of these awards are actually awarded.
Speaker 5: I don't recall having much success.
Speaker 2: But look, I just wanted to say a few things
Speaker 2: to our listeners out there. If you have any questions,
Speaker 2: please send us an email to the Truth about Amy
Speaker 2: at seven spelled out seven dot com dot au. I'll
Speaker 2: put it in the show notes obviously. As always, please
Speaker 2: sign and share our petition. That link will be in
Speaker 2: the show notes too, But if you if you want,
Speaker 2: just google change dot org and Amy Wensley or Justice
Speaker 2: for Amy and that will be there. And you know,
Speaker 2: I mean, help us get justice for Amy. I mean,
Speaker 2: I think this isn't a wasted investment, a wasted investment
Speaker 2: of time or money or resources or efforts by everybody
Speaker 2: involved to us, the people in in you know, just
Speaker 2: signing a petition, but also the authorities in you know,
Speaker 2: allocating resources to get this get this result. And I
Speaker 2: want to thank you both, Tim and Greg. Thank you
Speaker 2: so much. Is there anything either of you would want
Speaker 2: to say in relation to you know, we've covered up
Speaker 2: on a lot of this and I think it's so important,
Speaker 2: But is there anything I have missed that you think
Speaker 2: we need to include.
Speaker 3: It's been a pleasure to be part of it. I
Speaker 3: think you've done an outstanding job. There are all kinds
Speaker 3: of important issues at work in this investigation and I
Speaker 3: think you're doing it really well.
Speaker 7: So well done, and thanks for having me as part
Speaker 7: of it.
Speaker 6: I enjoyed it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, lovely to chat. Greg, thanks for joining us as always,
Speaker 4: and thanks for Alison for just keeping pushing, sending letters,
Speaker 4: doing everything we can to try and try and get
Speaker 4: some justice for Amy's family.
Speaker 2: And if you like books, check out A Fascinating Investigation
Speaker 2: or An Absence of Certainty, both by Greg Carey, both
Speaker 2: stellar books. So don't miss Size and King your book
Speaker 2: as well, would you because I haven't got that one
Speaker 2: in front of me.
Speaker 4: So it's called The Enigma of the Dark, The Case
Speaker 4: of the Claimont Killer. It was based well. It was
Speaker 4: written about the case of Bradley Robert Edwards, who was
Speaker 4: eventually convicted of being the man who stalked and terrorized
Speaker 4: that western suburb of Perth in the early nineties. Covered
Speaker 4: the case for a long time before he was arrested.
Speaker 4: I certainly covered it after seven months of trial, hearings
Speaker 4: attended every day, and yeah, there's some insight there into
Speaker 4: the process that that that got him into court, which
Speaker 4: was basically the longest and most expensive police investigation in
Speaker 4: Australian history. So if you want to hear more of me,
Speaker 4: there is an audio version, but there is also a
Speaker 4: printed version too, So so yeah, it was it was
Speaker 4: a labor. It was a labor of love at times,
Speaker 4: but just the labor other times. But it's one of
Speaker 4: those cases that is imbued in Western Australian people and
Speaker 4: certainly in the justice system. And we've spent much of
Speaker 4: the morning sort of gently criticizing the w A Police
Speaker 4: and there were there are criticisms of the w A
Speaker 4: Police in the book as well, but ultimately it was
Speaker 4: an amazing piece of investigative work that that got justice
Speaker 4: for the families of two of those girls that went
Speaker 4: missing and they're still searching for the third, so so yeah,
Speaker 4: check it out if you if you're interested in in
Speaker 4: that case, it's called Enigma of the Dark.
Speaker 5: I'll order that for us, Gregg, I need to do
Speaker 5: that already. I just got distracted.
Speaker 4: Yes, what do they say in in all good bookshops
Speaker 4: and some bad ones as well.
Speaker 3: Just just just on that and thanks for the plug.
Speaker 6: Eli.
Speaker 3: If you if you are interested in those books, maybe
Speaker 3: just come to my website.
Speaker 6: Not if you want to inscribe or whatever.
Speaker 3: Great Carey dot com, Great Cary'scary with the c a
Speaker 3: r Y dot com.
Speaker 2: Wonderful. I'm just in such a illustrious company, so thank
Speaker 2: you so much. I see very privileged that between both
Speaker 2: of you and obviously Liam and all our guests, it's
Speaker 2: just it's just a real honor to be working on
Speaker 2: something so important.
Speaker 5: So thank you so much.
Speaker 6: Under his aust I get h