WEBVTT - Emergency Episode: The Big Build, IBAC and Ralph Carr

0:00:02.720 --> 0:00:05.480
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to laud the podcast. I'm Lex Lasry, I'm Greg

0:00:05.559 --> 0:00:10.240
<v Speaker 1>Barnes and Greg We last weekend did the first podcast

0:00:10.280 --> 0:00:13.000
<v Speaker 1>in front of an audience at the tell Type Winery

0:00:13.000 --> 0:00:14.960
<v Speaker 1>at Mansfield and I don't know about you, well, I

0:00:15.040 --> 0:00:16.880
<v Speaker 1>do know about you, but for myself, I had a

0:00:16.920 --> 0:00:17.400
<v Speaker 1>great time.

0:00:17.520 --> 0:00:20.840
<v Speaker 2>I thought it was fantastic. It's firstly, it's fantastic winery,

0:00:21.160 --> 0:00:26.800
<v Speaker 2>great building and magnificent wines. Secondly, and equally, it was

0:00:26.840 --> 0:00:30.760
<v Speaker 2>a terrific crowd, I mean, interesting bunch of people and

0:00:31.240 --> 0:00:39.000
<v Speaker 2>enthusiastic and of course Australian's True crime podcast. Michelle is

0:00:39.520 --> 0:00:42.240
<v Speaker 2>also an extraordinary stand up comedian.

0:00:42.560 --> 0:00:45.440
<v Speaker 1>That's right, And as musicians would say, she opened for us,

0:00:45.520 --> 0:00:47.480
<v Speaker 1>and she opened for it was a great privilege because

0:00:47.520 --> 0:00:48.839
<v Speaker 1>she was fantastic, she was brilliant.

0:00:49.360 --> 0:00:54.600
<v Speaker 2>But we will go anywhere, anytime, any day, and now

0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:55.040
<v Speaker 2>we've got.

0:00:54.960 --> 0:00:57.080
<v Speaker 1>To be careful what we wish for. Yes, that's right.

0:00:57.480 --> 0:01:00.440
<v Speaker 1>But there's an email address in the link to this podcast,

0:01:00.520 --> 0:01:03.440
<v Speaker 1>so if you're interested in having us in your region

0:01:03.600 --> 0:01:06.360
<v Speaker 1>to do a podcast in front of an audience, we're

0:01:06.400 --> 0:01:08.360
<v Speaker 1>happy to take part.

0:01:08.520 --> 0:01:11.520
<v Speaker 2>The first one we'll get us from Port Headlin Western Australia.

0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:13.560
<v Speaker 1>Well, we could do that, we could do that. We

0:01:13.640 --> 0:01:15.560
<v Speaker 1>don't mut No, we can go back to Darwin. I

0:01:15.560 --> 0:01:17.120
<v Speaker 1>could go back to Darwen. Well, I wash all the

0:01:17.160 --> 0:01:21.960
<v Speaker 1>juges I used to. No, we're not doing one at

0:01:21.959 --> 0:01:24.880
<v Speaker 1>Hobart on board with it? Yeah, okay, I didn't say that. No,

0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:29.360
<v Speaker 1>this is what might be described by Alistair Campbell and

0:01:29.400 --> 0:01:33.880
<v Speaker 1>RORYS Stewart as an emergency episode. Normally our episodes come

0:01:33.920 --> 0:01:36.119
<v Speaker 1>out on a Wednesday, first thing in the morning. It's

0:01:36.160 --> 0:01:39.800
<v Speaker 1>at about four am I've noticed, by the way. But

0:01:39.959 --> 0:01:41.840
<v Speaker 1>we're doing this one because there are some issues that

0:01:41.840 --> 0:01:44.480
<v Speaker 1>we want to talk about which are particularly topical. So

0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:45.360
<v Speaker 1>let's get into it.

0:01:45.400 --> 0:01:49.600
<v Speaker 2>So, just for the listeners, that proposed Royal Commission into

0:01:49.640 --> 0:01:53.160
<v Speaker 2>the Big Build is into allegations of corruption which have

0:01:53.320 --> 0:01:57.680
<v Speaker 2>been primarily driven by a huge number of news stories

0:01:57.800 --> 0:02:02.279
<v Speaker 2>in the Age or the nine newspapers, but elsewhere as well,

0:02:03.240 --> 0:02:06.480
<v Speaker 2>over probably more than twelve months now, and so that

0:02:06.720 --> 0:02:09.560
<v Speaker 2>is the purpose of the Royal Commission, not into you know,

0:02:09.600 --> 0:02:11.240
<v Speaker 2>should we have built this or built that?

0:02:11.280 --> 0:02:14.160
<v Speaker 1>But I know one thing that irritates you and irritates

0:02:14.240 --> 0:02:17.480
<v Speaker 1>me a bit as well, is that the opposition have

0:02:17.600 --> 0:02:21.360
<v Speaker 1>said if in government and controlling the Royal Commission. There's

0:02:21.360 --> 0:02:24.040
<v Speaker 1>a list of what they describe as twenty five non

0:02:24.040 --> 0:02:29.360
<v Speaker 1>negotiable witnesses that have to be called. So it seems

0:02:29.360 --> 0:02:32.520
<v Speaker 1>to me, just putting it in relatively neutral terms, that

0:02:32.520 --> 0:02:35.160
<v Speaker 1>they're getting way ahead of themselves, because in a royal commission,

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:37.880
<v Speaker 1>you don't decide who you're going to call, at least

0:02:37.960 --> 0:02:40.600
<v Speaker 1>until you've got settle terms of reference and know what

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:41.840
<v Speaker 1>you're investigating well.

0:02:41.880 --> 0:02:45.440
<v Speaker 2>And also you know lexis being very modest, but you have,

0:02:45.560 --> 0:02:48.280
<v Speaker 2>of course extensive experience with royal commissions. You ran one

0:02:48.320 --> 0:02:51.600
<v Speaker 2>yourself in Victoria in relation to an ambulance contract I

0:02:51.680 --> 0:02:54.720
<v Speaker 2>think twenty odd years ago. You're involved in the famous

0:02:54.760 --> 0:02:56.840
<v Speaker 2>Costic and Royal Commission. We've talked about this in the past.

0:02:57.160 --> 0:02:59.760
<v Speaker 2>My understanding is it's a matter for the Royal Commissioner

0:03:00.600 --> 0:03:04.680
<v Speaker 2>and his or her or their council assisting to determine

0:03:04.880 --> 0:03:05.840
<v Speaker 2>who's going to be called.

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:08.560
<v Speaker 1>Correct, Yes, and there's a I mean, when you start

0:03:08.600 --> 0:03:11.640
<v Speaker 1>a Royal commission, the first thing you do is issues

0:03:11.639 --> 0:03:15.600
<v Speaker 1>su poenis and get documents work out by reference to

0:03:15.720 --> 0:03:17.840
<v Speaker 1>the terms of reference, what the issues are that you're

0:03:17.880 --> 0:03:20.760
<v Speaker 1>going to have to investigate, and then as you analyze

0:03:20.760 --> 0:03:22.519
<v Speaker 1>the material, you decide who you're going to need to

0:03:22.560 --> 0:03:24.880
<v Speaker 1>hear from in the witness box. Yeah, that's how the

0:03:24.919 --> 0:03:28.919
<v Speaker 1>witness list is developed. This sort of smacks of it's

0:03:29.040 --> 0:03:32.760
<v Speaker 1>sort of a bit like manatory sentencing. It's saying, we

0:03:32.800 --> 0:03:35.480
<v Speaker 1>don't really trust the commissioner to make his own or

0:03:35.480 --> 0:03:38.360
<v Speaker 1>her own decisions about witnesses, so we're going to have

0:03:38.400 --> 0:03:41.040
<v Speaker 1>a list we want, you know, Jess Wilson saying we

0:03:41.080 --> 0:03:46.480
<v Speaker 1>want these particular people publicly flogged for our own political advantage. Yes,

0:03:46.520 --> 0:03:49.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean that's what she's saying. I mean, it's really outrageous,

0:03:49.960 --> 0:03:51.200
<v Speaker 1>but it's fairly typical.

0:03:50.880 --> 0:03:55.640
<v Speaker 2>Of politicians these days, the lack of respect for the

0:03:55.680 --> 0:03:58.960
<v Speaker 2>independence of the judiciary and Royal commissioners are independent.

0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:03.720
<v Speaker 1>Royal commissioner will almost certainly be either a serving or

0:04:03.800 --> 0:04:05.680
<v Speaker 1>acting or retired judge.

0:04:05.800 --> 0:04:09.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah what about you, Lex, No, I'm not available, and

0:04:10.080 --> 0:04:11.560
<v Speaker 2>we've got to put the podcast first.

0:04:11.600 --> 0:04:13.440
<v Speaker 1>I've just got a feeling I wouldn't be high on

0:04:13.480 --> 0:04:14.200
<v Speaker 1>anyone's list.

0:04:14.880 --> 0:04:17.359
<v Speaker 2>Well, that could be a compliment, Yeah it is, I

0:04:17.360 --> 0:04:20.239
<v Speaker 2>mean it should have been. I don't know why Jacinda

0:04:20.320 --> 0:04:23.520
<v Speaker 2>Allen didn't say, let's do it months ago because I

0:04:23.560 --> 0:04:25.440
<v Speaker 2>didn't think it was that big an issue for a while.

0:04:25.600 --> 0:04:27.120
<v Speaker 2>I know you and I have talked about this. I

0:04:27.160 --> 0:04:29.760
<v Speaker 2>mean it was in the age and Nick McKenzie, who's

0:04:29.760 --> 0:04:33.080
<v Speaker 2>a fantastic journalist, was running at hard but I didn't

0:04:33.080 --> 0:04:34.120
<v Speaker 2>think it was really resonating.

0:04:34.160 --> 0:04:35.520
<v Speaker 1>But I think over time.

0:04:35.320 --> 0:04:38.120
<v Speaker 2>What happens with those stories is that people started They

0:04:38.160 --> 0:04:40.719
<v Speaker 2>might know the details, but they just think something's wrong.

0:04:41.320 --> 0:04:43.800
<v Speaker 2>And there was a lot of momentum around it, and

0:04:44.560 --> 0:04:46.120
<v Speaker 2>Ben Carroll did the right thing in my view.

0:04:46.160 --> 0:04:46.760
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I'm a.

0:04:46.720 --> 0:04:48.800
<v Speaker 2>Huge fan of royal commissions, but I think he.

0:04:49.160 --> 0:04:51.880
<v Speaker 1>Had to do it, and look, it might well be worthwhile,

0:04:51.920 --> 0:04:53.719
<v Speaker 1>but I just think you've got to let the process

0:04:54.120 --> 0:04:57.200
<v Speaker 1>develop according to the direction of the Royal Commissioner. And

0:04:57.240 --> 0:04:58.640
<v Speaker 1>as you say, I've counseled assisting.

0:04:58.920 --> 0:05:01.440
<v Speaker 2>I thought that or well, now, what a week since

0:05:01.440 --> 0:05:04.000
<v Speaker 2>he announced it, I thought he might have moved to

0:05:05.520 --> 0:05:07.600
<v Speaker 2>had some names in mind and got it set up.

0:05:07.600 --> 0:05:07.960
<v Speaker 1>How long.

0:05:08.040 --> 0:05:12.479
<v Speaker 2>Normally after the announcement of a royal commission, is a

0:05:12.480 --> 0:05:15.680
<v Speaker 2>commissioner appointed and what's the process for appointment lex I mean,

0:05:16.120 --> 0:05:19.520
<v Speaker 2>does the Attorney General ring around or yeah.

0:05:19.839 --> 0:05:23.040
<v Speaker 1>There'd be a list of names I mean, I hear gossip,

0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:25.920
<v Speaker 1>you probably do tell I'm not going to say, am

0:05:25.920 --> 0:05:28.359
<v Speaker 1>I on the list. I've got bad news for you.

0:05:28.720 --> 0:05:30.840
<v Speaker 1>If it's bad news, it's good news because I want

0:05:30.839 --> 0:05:32.640
<v Speaker 1>to keep doing the podcast. I was thinking about how

0:05:32.640 --> 0:05:34.080
<v Speaker 1>I was going to do the podcast and be a

0:05:34.120 --> 0:05:36.280
<v Speaker 1>Royal Commissioner at the same time. I've heard two or

0:05:36.279 --> 0:05:39.760
<v Speaker 1>three names that I presume are on the A Teeney General.

0:05:39.800 --> 0:05:41.720
<v Speaker 2>When we next, when we get out of this studio,

0:05:41.839 --> 0:05:44.480
<v Speaker 2>I'll tell you, and you can tell Matthew. Yeah, but

0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:45.919
<v Speaker 2>don't just keep it between you.

0:05:46.040 --> 0:05:49.000
<v Speaker 1>Don't wear a while while I'm talking to you. I look,

0:05:49.080 --> 0:05:52.800
<v Speaker 1>the sooner someone is appointed, the better because that person,

0:05:53.240 --> 0:05:56.840
<v Speaker 1>once they've got their letters patent in terms of reference,

0:05:56.839 --> 0:05:59.200
<v Speaker 1>then they can so how much does it usually take

0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:01.159
<v Speaker 1>to Oh, I can take only a few days. Yeah,

0:06:01.200 --> 0:06:03.400
<v Speaker 1>I mean the government could decide now if they've got

0:06:03.440 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 1>someone they favor for the job, and I gather they have, and.

0:06:07.360 --> 0:06:11.240
<v Speaker 2>Then as I understand that the council assisting role, it's

0:06:11.279 --> 0:06:14.560
<v Speaker 2>generally the Royal Commissioner says, I want excess council assisting.

0:06:14.680 --> 0:06:17.760
<v Speaker 1>Yes, that's what happens. Yeah, sometimes this listen to General

0:06:17.920 --> 0:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>insist that someone that they favor be placed in that role.

0:06:21.720 --> 0:06:24.720
<v Speaker 1>But interesting, Yes, that's interesting, isn't it. And what happens

0:06:24.920 --> 0:06:30.080
<v Speaker 1>wind doesn't always work out, but normally the Commissioner will

0:06:30.120 --> 0:06:33.960
<v Speaker 1>get to choose council assisting and bring them on board

0:06:34.000 --> 0:06:36.520
<v Speaker 1>quickly because plans have to be made. I mean, this

0:06:36.600 --> 0:06:39.120
<v Speaker 1>is a Royal commission Again, we talked about this recently,

0:06:39.520 --> 0:06:41.599
<v Speaker 1>but they really are gained to need to get on

0:06:41.640 --> 0:06:43.760
<v Speaker 1>with it. I mean a big bill is huge. It's huge,

0:06:44.200 --> 0:06:45.080
<v Speaker 1>massive amount.

0:06:44.839 --> 0:06:49.520
<v Speaker 2>Of years of years of material one assumes. Yeah, I

0:06:49.520 --> 0:06:52.280
<v Speaker 2>mean a gig of the subpoenas going to the department,

0:06:52.560 --> 0:06:56.720
<v Speaker 2>to the government, to the union, to the builders politicians.

0:06:57.160 --> 0:06:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and you.

0:06:59.600 --> 0:07:04.240
<v Speaker 2>Know Nick mackenzie and the age will get drawn in

0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:08.200
<v Speaker 2>no doubt, not because they've done anything wrong. Nick is

0:07:08.240 --> 0:07:11.040
<v Speaker 2>a friend of mine and I think without them you

0:07:11.080 --> 0:07:16.040
<v Speaker 2>wouldn't have these revelations. But sometimes journalists get dragged in

0:07:16.120 --> 0:07:20.800
<v Speaker 2>about where they you know, sources, etc. And you know

0:07:20.960 --> 0:07:25.000
<v Speaker 2>it's going to be very complex. But I really hope,

0:07:25.200 --> 0:07:31.680
<v Speaker 2>for the sake of responsible politics and responsible administration of

0:07:31.720 --> 0:07:35.280
<v Speaker 2>the justice system that the opposition, once the Royal Commissioner

0:07:35.280 --> 0:07:36.600
<v Speaker 2>is appointed, just shut up.

0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:39.320
<v Speaker 1>Well, the thing is, we're not that far away from

0:07:39.320 --> 0:07:42.280
<v Speaker 1>the election. So yeah, the question is will the government

0:07:42.360 --> 0:07:45.600
<v Speaker 1>feel free to go ahead and make the arrangements for

0:07:45.640 --> 0:07:50.000
<v Speaker 1>the Royal Commission now or do they see the caretaker

0:07:50.040 --> 0:07:53.800
<v Speaker 1>period approaching and think, well, we really need the agreement

0:07:53.840 --> 0:07:56.320
<v Speaker 1>of the opposition that because they could be the government.

0:07:56.840 --> 0:07:58.720
<v Speaker 2>But what's the opposition going to do?

0:07:58.800 --> 0:07:59.320
<v Speaker 1>Let's say they.

0:07:59.240 --> 0:08:02.400
<v Speaker 2>Will have said what going to do? They've said, we've

0:08:02.440 --> 0:08:06.040
<v Speaker 2>got a set of terms of reference that we want implemented,

0:08:06.080 --> 0:08:08.679
<v Speaker 2>and we've got a list of want if you're running

0:08:08.680 --> 0:08:11.840
<v Speaker 2>a Royal commission. Let's say you're running a Royal Commission,

0:08:11.920 --> 0:08:15.880
<v Speaker 2>Lex and there's a change of government. A new attorney says, right, Lex,

0:08:16.400 --> 0:08:18.360
<v Speaker 2>we've changed the terms of reference and we've got a

0:08:18.360 --> 0:08:20.800
<v Speaker 2>bunch of people. We're going to tell you you've got a call.

0:08:21.680 --> 0:08:25.000
<v Speaker 1>Can they do that? Well, they can? I mean a

0:08:25.080 --> 0:08:27.880
<v Speaker 1>Royal commission. I might just say, I'm not copying that.

0:08:28.200 --> 0:08:31.120
<v Speaker 1>A Royal Commission is the executive it is the exercise

0:08:31.160 --> 0:08:34.960
<v Speaker 1>of the Royal prerogative. It's an instrument of executive government.

0:08:35.040 --> 0:08:37.840
<v Speaker 1>So the new government, as I understand it, would be

0:08:37.840 --> 0:08:38.959
<v Speaker 1>within their rights to do that.

0:08:39.200 --> 0:08:42.040
<v Speaker 2>There was pressure on you. You you did the Costigan

0:08:42.160 --> 0:08:45.720
<v Speaker 2>Royal Commission, which unless you're of a certain age, and

0:08:45.760 --> 0:08:47.920
<v Speaker 2>I just assumed that most people who listened to this

0:08:47.960 --> 0:08:51.120
<v Speaker 2>podcast are younger than me and certainly younger than you

0:08:51.240 --> 0:08:56.160
<v Speaker 2>Lex yes lifetime, not as young as Matthew. My memory

0:08:56.200 --> 0:08:58.640
<v Speaker 2>of that was that there was pressure on Costigan from

0:08:58.640 --> 0:08:59.920
<v Speaker 2>the Hawk government to wind it up.

0:09:00.960 --> 0:09:03.319
<v Speaker 1>Yes, while there was, and that was in the context

0:09:03.360 --> 0:09:05.480
<v Speaker 1>of the inquiries that we were conducting in relation to

0:09:05.520 --> 0:09:09.840
<v Speaker 1>Kerry Packer Goanna. Yes. The Costick and Royal Commission was

0:09:09.840 --> 0:09:13.560
<v Speaker 1>a Royal commission established by the Fraser government in nineteen eighty.

0:09:14.240 --> 0:09:17.040
<v Speaker 1>Frank Costigan was the Royal Commissioner and he was assisted

0:09:17.080 --> 0:09:20.839
<v Speaker 1>by Douglas Maher later Douglas Mark you see Rex Wild

0:09:20.880 --> 0:09:23.880
<v Speaker 1>and myself. I was only there for a part of

0:09:23.880 --> 0:09:28.240
<v Speaker 1>the time. The Royal Commission was an inquiry into generally

0:09:28.320 --> 0:09:31.800
<v Speaker 1>the activities of the Federated chip Painters and Dockers, who,

0:09:31.880 --> 0:09:35.400
<v Speaker 1>apart from being a waterside union, were also a criminal organization.

0:09:35.840 --> 0:09:40.199
<v Speaker 1>But it had in fairness, I mean Frank Costigan, who

0:09:40.240 --> 0:09:45.240
<v Speaker 1>I was a lovely man whom I admired, he felt

0:09:45.240 --> 0:09:47.280
<v Speaker 1>the pressure from the Hawk government and I think to

0:09:47.320 --> 0:09:50.960
<v Speaker 1>some degree his relationship with Bob Hawk diminished as a

0:09:50.960 --> 0:09:52.880
<v Speaker 1>result of the po he told me about it. I

0:09:52.880 --> 0:09:54.559
<v Speaker 1>didn't know that well and he told me about it.

0:09:55.520 --> 0:10:00.480
<v Speaker 1>It was really difficult, but we had been going for

0:10:00.520 --> 0:10:01.920
<v Speaker 1>three years. I think that.

0:10:02.200 --> 0:10:03.920
<v Speaker 2>But I think that, you know, just come back to

0:10:03.960 --> 0:10:05.880
<v Speaker 2>your point. You talked to used a couple of technical

0:10:05.960 --> 0:10:08.880
<v Speaker 2>terms we might need to explain. But a royal commission

0:10:08.960 --> 0:10:10.640
<v Speaker 2>is not like it's not like a course, not like

0:10:10.640 --> 0:10:10.960
<v Speaker 2>a court.

0:10:11.160 --> 0:10:12.120
<v Speaker 1>That's what people see.

0:10:12.160 --> 0:10:15.040
<v Speaker 2>I think a lot of people think. They think you

0:10:15.120 --> 0:10:17.480
<v Speaker 2>go to a royal commission and the Royal Commission says,

0:10:17.720 --> 0:10:20.480
<v Speaker 2>you know that you've been a naughty boy naughty girl.

0:10:21.520 --> 0:10:24.880
<v Speaker 2>That's equivalent to it being you know, you've found guilty

0:10:24.920 --> 0:10:25.959
<v Speaker 2>and you should go to jail.

0:10:26.480 --> 0:10:28.520
<v Speaker 1>I mean, and that's the way. That's what I've that's the.

0:10:28.480 --> 0:10:31.440
<v Speaker 2>Problem with what Jess Wilson is doing. She's basically saying,

0:10:32.440 --> 0:10:34.679
<v Speaker 2>this is a sort of star chamber stuff. You know,

0:10:34.800 --> 0:10:37.000
<v Speaker 2>this is the inquisition. These are the people that you've

0:10:37.000 --> 0:10:41.360
<v Speaker 2>got to go after their for their acts of you know,

0:10:41.559 --> 0:10:45.120
<v Speaker 2>henas acts. I mean, it's appalling behavior I've never seen.

0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:46.760
<v Speaker 2>I've never seen.

0:10:47.200 --> 0:10:47.959
<v Speaker 1>I mean, there's been a lot.

0:10:48.000 --> 0:10:50.319
<v Speaker 2>There are royal commissions every five minutes in this country,

0:10:51.000 --> 0:10:54.480
<v Speaker 2>but I've never seen one where a political party's done that.

0:10:54.640 --> 0:10:57.480
<v Speaker 1>Now, as far as I know, it's never happened. The

0:10:57.559 --> 0:11:00.960
<v Speaker 1>terms of reference are not intended to include a to witnesses. Yeah,

0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:05.520
<v Speaker 1>I think it's the opposition trying to ensure that a

0:11:05.559 --> 0:11:09.600
<v Speaker 1>commissioner who's not in favor of a public realification of

0:11:09.640 --> 0:11:13.480
<v Speaker 1>politicians can't avoid it because they'll be compelled to call

0:11:13.480 --> 0:11:15.400
<v Speaker 1>the witnesses. Yeah. But I mean it's one thing to

0:11:15.400 --> 0:11:17.880
<v Speaker 1>say these witnesses are got to be called, but when

0:11:17.880 --> 0:11:19.600
<v Speaker 1>they get into the witness box and take the oath

0:11:19.720 --> 0:11:23.439
<v Speaker 1>or affirmation, the question is what happens next. Yeah, you've

0:11:23.440 --> 0:11:25.440
<v Speaker 1>got to have material to put to them, this stuff

0:11:25.640 --> 0:11:27.600
<v Speaker 1>that they've got to be asked about which is relevant

0:11:27.600 --> 0:11:29.800
<v Speaker 1>to the terms of reference, and if there's not, then

0:11:29.840 --> 0:11:31.160
<v Speaker 1>they shouldn't be in the witness box.

0:11:31.280 --> 0:11:34.520
<v Speaker 2>I gave evidence in the Royal Commission months. It was

0:11:34.600 --> 0:11:37.199
<v Speaker 2>in Tasmania in ninety ninety four. I was chief of

0:11:37.240 --> 0:11:40.000
<v Speaker 2>staff to Ray Groomer, great Melbourne football and former premier,

0:11:40.000 --> 0:11:42.640
<v Speaker 2>and we were going to and in fact they did

0:11:42.679 --> 0:11:44.720
<v Speaker 2>after I left, reduce the size of Parliament. Was a

0:11:44.720 --> 0:11:49.120
<v Speaker 2>guy called Trevor Morling, who was a former Federal Court judge, judge,

0:11:49.160 --> 0:11:52.520
<v Speaker 2>and so my evidence was pretty benign. He was asking

0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:55.760
<v Speaker 2>what you know about the government's attitude and why would

0:11:55.760 --> 0:11:59.040
<v Speaker 2>you reduce numbers? But even that, which was a pretty

0:11:59.360 --> 0:12:03.880
<v Speaker 2>tame exercise, and you know, being a lawyer, I understood

0:12:03.920 --> 0:12:06.400
<v Speaker 2>the witness box. But it's it's not an it's not

0:12:06.440 --> 0:12:09.320
<v Speaker 2>a pleasant experience. And that was very benign, but just

0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:11.240
<v Speaker 2>not a pleasant experience or anyone.

0:12:11.520 --> 0:12:14.280
<v Speaker 1>The witness box is a very lonely, drafty place.

0:12:14.120 --> 0:12:16.440
<v Speaker 2>And there's no anesthetic, not like owing to the dentists.

0:12:16.480 --> 0:12:18.360
<v Speaker 2>And you can go to the dentist right and think,

0:12:18.600 --> 0:12:20.720
<v Speaker 2>I wish I wasn't here like a witness box, but

0:12:20.720 --> 0:12:22.040
<v Speaker 2>at least you get an anesthetic.

0:12:22.640 --> 0:12:23.400
<v Speaker 1>There should be.

0:12:23.480 --> 0:12:26.880
<v Speaker 2>There should be, like I think, I think there should

0:12:26.880 --> 0:12:31.360
<v Speaker 2>be just a little packet of half valium, just a

0:12:31.360 --> 0:12:33.880
<v Speaker 2>little cut in hard not just tissues, not just tissues,

0:12:33.880 --> 0:12:36.240
<v Speaker 2>little valium. But a psychiatrist who said to me once

0:12:36.440 --> 0:12:40.079
<v Speaker 2>this is off topic, that in her opinion, valium should

0:12:40.080 --> 0:12:44.000
<v Speaker 2>be available in supermarkets. What did the boys light up?

0:12:44.000 --> 0:12:48.079
<v Speaker 2>What did Australian crawl call it? A mother's little helper

0:12:48.200 --> 0:12:48.680
<v Speaker 2>is coming out.

0:12:49.120 --> 0:12:58.120
<v Speaker 1>It's coming out for more. As you know, the Iback

0:12:58.200 --> 0:13:01.479
<v Speaker 1>report on Operation Richmond dropped yesterday.

0:13:01.720 --> 0:13:06.400
<v Speaker 3>One of Victoria's most secretive and prolonged corruption investigations has

0:13:06.520 --> 0:13:11.800
<v Speaker 3>finally revealed damning claims of serious and concerning conduct by

0:13:11.840 --> 0:13:16.800
<v Speaker 3>former Premier Daniel Andrews and his government. Operation Richmond detailed

0:13:16.880 --> 0:13:21.960
<v Speaker 3>extraordinary abuses of power from union leader Peter Marshall that

0:13:22.120 --> 0:13:26.520
<v Speaker 3>was not only allowed but fostered by the Labor government.

0:13:26.480 --> 0:13:30.920
<v Speaker 1>Just to deal with both sides of politics. I would

0:13:30.920 --> 0:13:34.240
<v Speaker 1>have thought, my opinion is the conclusions they came to

0:13:34.640 --> 0:13:38.959
<v Speaker 1>about particular the relationship between the Andrews government and the UFU,

0:13:39.040 --> 0:13:42.320
<v Speaker 1>the United Firefighters Union and Peter Marshall was pretty concerning

0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:44.560
<v Speaker 1>and a lot of people are saying, you now have

0:13:44.640 --> 0:13:47.040
<v Speaker 1>an insight into what life under the Andrews government was

0:13:47.080 --> 0:13:49.079
<v Speaker 1>really like because that's the way they did business.

0:13:50.440 --> 0:13:52.520
<v Speaker 2>Well, I mean, they wouldn't be the first government in

0:13:52.559 --> 0:13:56.320
<v Speaker 2>Australia that's done business in that way, including governments that

0:13:56.360 --> 0:13:57.640
<v Speaker 2>do business with corporates.

0:13:57.880 --> 0:13:58.800
<v Speaker 1>But it's.

0:14:00.480 --> 0:14:02.520
<v Speaker 2>You know, I think I think what was interesting about

0:14:02.559 --> 0:14:05.600
<v Speaker 2>that was the extent to which was it. Peter Marshall,

0:14:05.640 --> 0:14:07.960
<v Speaker 2>who was the Secretary of the Union, fought to keep

0:14:08.000 --> 0:14:12.800
<v Speaker 2>it under wraps. Yes, for a long long time and

0:14:12.880 --> 0:14:16.560
<v Speaker 2>it's probably not served them well because it's now comes

0:14:16.559 --> 0:14:19.040
<v Speaker 2>out in the context of coming up to an election.

0:14:20.360 --> 0:14:25.440
<v Speaker 2>But it does say something about how this this well

0:14:25.480 --> 0:14:29.560
<v Speaker 2>the Andrews government did business. But as I say, I

0:14:29.560 --> 0:14:31.400
<v Speaker 2>think that's one of the issues in Australia as a

0:14:31.480 --> 0:14:35.080
<v Speaker 2>lack of transparency amongst governments in particularly. I mean we

0:14:35.160 --> 0:14:38.000
<v Speaker 2>talk about it in the past, but it happens now.

0:14:38.120 --> 0:14:42.880
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you know, I said, you know in Tasmania

0:14:42.880 --> 0:14:44.800
<v Speaker 2>with this football stadium they want to build, and they're

0:14:44.960 --> 0:14:49.680
<v Speaker 2>certainly not making any accusations of any nature, but you know,

0:14:49.760 --> 0:14:53.240
<v Speaker 2>the process is hardly transparent. No, you know, I mean

0:14:53.240 --> 0:14:56.160
<v Speaker 2>you've got a government that got told by every independent

0:14:56.240 --> 0:14:57.360
<v Speaker 2>expert don't build it.

0:14:57.360 --> 0:14:58.000
<v Speaker 1>It's a dud.

0:14:58.800 --> 0:15:01.800
<v Speaker 2>You know, it's a suburban ru loop of Tasmania and

0:15:01.840 --> 0:15:05.760
<v Speaker 2>the government just dismisses it all and you you know, again,

0:15:05.800 --> 0:15:11.720
<v Speaker 2>it's just a complete lack of transparency around process and

0:15:11.760 --> 0:15:13.040
<v Speaker 2>that seems to have happened here.

0:15:13.360 --> 0:15:15.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. I think one of the difficulties was that Jane Garrett,

0:15:15.720 --> 0:15:17.960
<v Speaker 1>who I think had the respect of most people.

0:15:18.360 --> 0:15:20.480
<v Speaker 2>She was a former minister, she was the response.

0:15:21.040 --> 0:15:26.840
<v Speaker 1>She died, Yes, she was sidelined by Andrews in these negotiations,

0:15:26.840 --> 0:15:30.600
<v Speaker 1>and I think that's a really people are really upset

0:15:30.640 --> 0:15:33.320
<v Speaker 1>about that. And I understand why. The thing about the

0:15:33.360 --> 0:15:36.160
<v Speaker 1>whole Iback issue, which no doubt we'll talk to Robert

0:15:36.160 --> 0:15:39.680
<v Speaker 1>Redlick about next week, is this definition of corrupt conduct.

0:15:39.720 --> 0:15:41.440
<v Speaker 1>If you look at the Iback Act and look at

0:15:41.440 --> 0:15:45.640
<v Speaker 1>the definition, you see a list of pieces of conduct

0:15:45.680 --> 0:15:48.480
<v Speaker 1>that can amount to corrupt conduct, but only if they

0:15:48.560 --> 0:15:51.560
<v Speaker 1>can be the basis of a criminal offense. And a

0:15:51.600 --> 0:15:55.920
<v Speaker 1>lot of people say, Tony Wheeley says, Anthony Wheeley says,

0:15:56.200 --> 0:15:59.840
<v Speaker 1>the level is too high. It can be lass different.

0:16:00.120 --> 0:16:02.880
<v Speaker 1>You said, well, it's the KAC Act, the I Act.

0:16:03.200 --> 0:16:05.920
<v Speaker 2>In New South they got my old political boss, Nick Grana,

0:16:06.000 --> 0:16:06.840
<v Speaker 2>I think, unfairly.

0:16:07.520 --> 0:16:08.560
<v Speaker 1>But that's a.

0:16:08.600 --> 0:16:12.080
<v Speaker 2>Very as I understand it, a very broad definition doesn't

0:16:12.120 --> 0:16:14.520
<v Speaker 2>require the establishment of a criminal offense before you can

0:16:14.560 --> 0:16:16.640
<v Speaker 2>conclude that conduct was corrupt.

0:16:17.840 --> 0:16:20.200
<v Speaker 1>I think that's the right approach. Yeah.

0:16:20.200 --> 0:16:23.520
<v Speaker 2>I mean, there's an interesting and it's it's a podcast

0:16:23.520 --> 0:16:25.920
<v Speaker 2>for another day. That's interesting to look at all of

0:16:25.960 --> 0:16:29.320
<v Speaker 2>these anti corruption commissions. I mean, the criticism of some

0:16:29.400 --> 0:16:31.920
<v Speaker 2>of them. Tasmania is one, and I think South Australia.

0:16:31.960 --> 0:16:35.360
<v Speaker 2>The other is that they're too secret. But on the

0:16:35.400 --> 0:16:40.040
<v Speaker 2>other hand, people's reputations are trashed. I acted for a

0:16:40.080 --> 0:16:43.360
<v Speaker 2>guy once once aware or in relation to what, but

0:16:43.440 --> 0:16:47.440
<v Speaker 2>he had a very minor role, as he had a

0:16:47.480 --> 0:16:52.880
<v Speaker 2>contract with a government entity and he had a minor

0:16:52.960 --> 0:16:56.520
<v Speaker 2>role in this matter in the sense that and in

0:16:56.560 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 2>fact he wasn't in any trouble at all. But you know,

0:16:59.480 --> 0:17:02.040
<v Speaker 2>he was in the newspaper the next day because you'd

0:17:02.040 --> 0:17:05.000
<v Speaker 2>given evidence and the government entity ring instead of were

0:17:05.000 --> 0:17:09.000
<v Speaker 2>canceling your contract. I felt very sorry for him. It

0:17:09.080 --> 0:17:14.800
<v Speaker 2>was just absolutely classic guilt by association. And I'm a

0:17:14.800 --> 0:17:17.199
<v Speaker 2>bit troubled by anti corruption commissions and.

0:17:17.480 --> 0:17:19.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and I think it's I think that issue has

0:17:19.760 --> 0:17:23.199
<v Speaker 1>got to be well supervised by the commissioner whoever is

0:17:23.240 --> 0:17:26.919
<v Speaker 1>hearing the evidence, to say, well, it's one thing to

0:17:26.920 --> 0:17:29.760
<v Speaker 1>get someone into the witness box and make allegations where

0:17:29.760 --> 0:17:32.639
<v Speaker 1>the allegation has become the story. It's another thing again

0:17:32.680 --> 0:17:35.600
<v Speaker 1>to have assembled a lot of evidence that demonstrate that

0:17:35.640 --> 0:17:38.080
<v Speaker 1>someone is corrupt or has committed an offense and have

0:17:38.160 --> 0:17:40.159
<v Speaker 1>that put to them. I mean, I think the public

0:17:40.160 --> 0:17:42.920
<v Speaker 1>are entitled to know when that's happened, but I agree

0:17:42.960 --> 0:17:45.520
<v Speaker 1>with you. You do need to be very careful about trashing

0:17:45.880 --> 0:17:49.080
<v Speaker 1>someone's reputation, and publicity of that kind can destroy a

0:17:49.119 --> 0:17:52.960
<v Speaker 1>reputation incredibly quickly. You never recover from it. No, no,

0:17:53.080 --> 0:17:54.280
<v Speaker 1>you never recover from it.

0:17:54.400 --> 0:17:56.720
<v Speaker 2>I had a guy ring me a few years ago.

0:17:56.760 --> 0:17:58.800
<v Speaker 1>I'd acted for him in a criminal matter. He had

0:17:58.840 --> 0:17:59.520
<v Speaker 1>been convicted.

0:17:59.520 --> 0:18:03.440
<v Speaker 2>He was then quitted on appeal, but if you googled

0:18:03.520 --> 0:18:07.639
<v Speaker 2>him seven or eight years later, came up and he

0:18:07.680 --> 0:18:12.040
<v Speaker 2>couldn't get government. It was after a couple of government

0:18:12.040 --> 0:18:14.880
<v Speaker 2>contracts for his trade. And oh no, sorry, we saw

0:18:14.960 --> 0:18:17.639
<v Speaker 2>this didn't matter that I wrote a letter saying, hang on,

0:18:17.760 --> 0:18:18.520
<v Speaker 2>he was quitted.

0:18:19.280 --> 0:18:22.520
<v Speaker 1>The damage was done. And following on from that you

0:18:22.640 --> 0:18:25.879
<v Speaker 1>see the effect of the publicity in the Ralph Carr case. So,

0:18:26.000 --> 0:18:29.600
<v Speaker 1>Ralph Carr is the man who has been found guilty

0:18:29.600 --> 0:18:31.960
<v Speaker 1>of rape in a by a county court jury and

0:18:32.040 --> 0:18:38.320
<v Speaker 1>had a suppression order on that trial for victoria. After

0:18:38.359 --> 0:18:42.520
<v Speaker 1>his conviction, the judge has lifted that suppression order. And

0:18:43.080 --> 0:18:45.639
<v Speaker 1>apart from talking about the merits of that will come

0:18:45.640 --> 0:18:48.840
<v Speaker 1>to in a minute, but the volume of material that

0:18:48.920 --> 0:18:51.639
<v Speaker 1>has been in the herald Stone of the age since

0:18:51.680 --> 0:18:54.320
<v Speaker 1>that happened about him, and about things that had nothing

0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:56.720
<v Speaker 1>to do with the rape, including that he wears a

0:18:56.760 --> 0:18:59.680
<v Speaker 1>two pa yes and bearing the nickname the Rug.

0:19:00.119 --> 0:19:00.280
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:19:00.520 --> 0:19:03.200
<v Speaker 1>But I mean, it just becomes and it just becomes vilifying,

0:19:03.240 --> 0:19:06.000
<v Speaker 1>doesn't it. Yeah, I mean, I mean this is the problem.

0:19:06.080 --> 0:19:11.760
<v Speaker 1>And newspapers and other forms of media often run these

0:19:11.800 --> 0:19:14.080
<v Speaker 1>stories on the basis of this is what we can

0:19:14.160 --> 0:19:16.840
<v Speaker 1>now tell you about this person. In other words, we

0:19:16.880 --> 0:19:18.840
<v Speaker 1>would have we would have if we could have, yeah,

0:19:19.640 --> 0:19:21.840
<v Speaker 1>which of course they never could have. Of course they couldn't.

0:19:21.840 --> 0:19:23.760
<v Speaker 1>They couldn't have. That would have been a contempt at

0:19:23.800 --> 0:19:25.879
<v Speaker 1>the court. That would have been something that would have

0:19:25.880 --> 0:19:28.000
<v Speaker 1>prejudiced his prospect of a fair trial. So none of

0:19:28.000 --> 0:19:31.159
<v Speaker 1>that material could have could have been led I noticed

0:19:31.200 --> 0:19:33.920
<v Speaker 1>in the age today.

0:19:34.160 --> 0:19:38.879
<v Speaker 2>So where what are we today? Thursday Thursday with psychiatrists

0:19:38.920 --> 0:19:43.000
<v Speaker 2>Some psychiatrists quoted saying that, you know, it's sort of

0:19:43.080 --> 0:19:46.639
<v Speaker 2>iffy science, if you like to, for a psychiatrists to

0:19:46.760 --> 0:19:49.439
<v Speaker 2>opine that a person who's charged with the criminal offense

0:19:49.440 --> 0:19:51.400
<v Speaker 2>would kill themselves if their name was mentioned.

0:19:51.440 --> 0:19:54.119
<v Speaker 1>I noticed that article too, mainly because you're quoted in

0:19:54.160 --> 0:19:56.639
<v Speaker 1>the article. I forgot that I am quoted in the article.

0:19:57.680 --> 0:19:59.080
<v Speaker 1>You should you should read it's.

0:19:58.960 --> 0:20:01.680
<v Speaker 2>By Aaron Pearson, who's to get Aaron on one day

0:20:01.680 --> 0:20:04.800
<v Speaker 2>because she's actually got a great deal of interest in

0:20:04.840 --> 0:20:06.840
<v Speaker 2>suppression orders and she keeps her own data.

0:20:07.680 --> 0:20:09.840
<v Speaker 1>Yes, but what do you think of that, lex?

0:20:09.880 --> 0:20:12.240
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you know you would have granted suppression orders

0:20:12.240 --> 0:20:14.720
<v Speaker 2>and not granted them over the years. If a psychiatrist

0:20:15.119 --> 0:20:18.360
<v Speaker 2>came to court and said this person is a serious

0:20:18.440 --> 0:20:21.240
<v Speaker 2>risk of self harm or suicide, how would that.

0:20:21.200 --> 0:20:25.679
<v Speaker 1>Have I'd take a lot of convincing. I do believe

0:20:25.720 --> 0:20:28.720
<v Speaker 1>in courts being open and I and I do think.

0:20:28.840 --> 0:20:30.359
<v Speaker 1>I think the point that was being made in that

0:20:30.480 --> 0:20:33.920
<v Speaker 1>article today was that estimating the prospects of someone trying

0:20:33.920 --> 0:20:37.679
<v Speaker 1>to kill themselves is a pretty inexact science. You've got

0:20:37.760 --> 0:20:40.720
<v Speaker 1>to have some pretty convincing evidence before you would say

0:20:40.800 --> 0:20:44.800
<v Speaker 1>there is a clear, strong, identifiable risk of this person

0:20:44.800 --> 0:20:49.600
<v Speaker 1>will take their own life if publicity is attracted to

0:20:49.640 --> 0:20:52.040
<v Speaker 1>them because of this trial. I mean it's not I

0:20:52.040 --> 0:20:54.119
<v Speaker 1>don't say it's not possible, but I think it's Did

0:20:54.200 --> 0:20:56.840
<v Speaker 1>you ever have a case I can't think of evidence

0:20:56.920 --> 0:20:59.760
<v Speaker 1>was lit. I think all the suppression orders that I

0:20:59.800 --> 0:21:03.119
<v Speaker 1>can call, we're all aimed at making sure that someone

0:21:03.200 --> 0:21:05.600
<v Speaker 1>got a fair trial, So they're all in advance of

0:21:05.640 --> 0:21:09.719
<v Speaker 1>the jury trial. They were all designed to stop the

0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:13.640
<v Speaker 1>dissemination of material that would prejudice someone's trial. I may

0:21:13.680 --> 0:21:15.879
<v Speaker 1>have made orders in relation to someone's mental health, but

0:21:15.920 --> 0:21:20.960
<v Speaker 1>I just can't recall whether it or not. I'd be

0:21:20.960 --> 0:21:24.200
<v Speaker 1>pretty dubious, I must say. But anyhow, the judge in

0:21:25.480 --> 0:21:28.760
<v Speaker 1>Ralph Carr's case made the order. He was obviously persuaded.

0:21:29.200 --> 0:21:32.000
<v Speaker 1>And under the Open Courts Act, there's a particular section

0:21:32.440 --> 0:21:34.679
<v Speaker 1>which is a pretty broad section, in the section eighteen,

0:21:35.320 --> 0:21:37.440
<v Speaker 1>and it's the section under which all these orders are made,

0:21:37.480 --> 0:21:40.720
<v Speaker 1>which is where the Act provides that the order is

0:21:40.760 --> 0:21:44.560
<v Speaker 1>necessary to protect the safety of any person. So protect

0:21:44.560 --> 0:21:46.359
<v Speaker 1>the safety of any person is pretty broad.

0:21:46.359 --> 0:21:48.120
<v Speaker 2>It's pretty broad. And this is the Victorian.

0:21:48.240 --> 0:21:51.280
<v Speaker 1>This is the Victorian. Yeah, yeah, I noticed in the.

0:21:53.240 --> 0:21:56.600
<v Speaker 2>And again we're not traversing any of the territory. I'm

0:21:56.640 --> 0:22:00.000
<v Speaker 2>just going on what was reported yesterday in the end

0:22:00.000 --> 0:22:02.760
<v Speaker 2>Allan Jones case in New South Wales. I think there

0:22:02.840 --> 0:22:10.080
<v Speaker 2>was a non publication order in relation to evidence questioning questioning, Yes.

0:22:09.920 --> 0:22:13.000
<v Speaker 1>The questioning that the Council for the accused was putting

0:22:13.000 --> 0:22:14.080
<v Speaker 1>to the complainant.

0:22:14.200 --> 0:22:18.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, what would be the reason in a court proceeding

0:22:18.280 --> 0:22:21.720
<v Speaker 2>why there might be a non publication order in relation

0:22:21.840 --> 0:22:23.520
<v Speaker 2>to some evidence or a witness.

0:22:23.880 --> 0:22:27.520
<v Speaker 1>Well, ordinarily in a situation like that, such an order

0:22:27.560 --> 0:22:30.320
<v Speaker 1>would be made, probably for the protection of the witness

0:22:31.200 --> 0:22:34.400
<v Speaker 1>or to avoid embarrassing the witness. The sort of approach

0:22:34.440 --> 0:22:37.040
<v Speaker 1>I used to take. I took in the trial of

0:22:37.320 --> 0:22:41.840
<v Speaker 1>Matthew Johnson when he murdered Carl Williams in Barwin prison.

0:22:41.960 --> 0:22:45.120
<v Speaker 1>We had a video of the killing. It was all

0:22:45.119 --> 0:22:49.800
<v Speaker 1>one so the whole the jury saw the entire event,

0:22:50.080 --> 0:22:54.680
<v Speaker 1>which was awful. And if you ever remembered seeing publicity

0:22:54.680 --> 0:22:58.359
<v Speaker 1>about this case, you'll remember seeing a photo of Matthew

0:22:58.440 --> 0:23:02.120
<v Speaker 1>Johnson looking like a baseball player holding the bicycle seat

0:23:02.119 --> 0:23:06.080
<v Speaker 1>post in his hands, about to strike Williams. And the

0:23:06.160 --> 0:23:08.159
<v Speaker 1>media wanted the video and I just said, there is

0:23:08.240 --> 0:23:11.919
<v Speaker 1>no public benefit in this is grotesque. There's no public

0:23:11.920 --> 0:23:14.880
<v Speaker 1>benefit in people seeing that, and I just never released it. Yeah,

0:23:15.000 --> 0:23:17.200
<v Speaker 1>so the best they got was that photo. Yeah, Now

0:23:17.400 --> 0:23:20.439
<v Speaker 1>that wasn't being secretive, but there are some things that

0:23:20.440 --> 0:23:21.800
<v Speaker 1>are just well, we had it.

0:23:22.359 --> 0:23:25.000
<v Speaker 2>I appeared in what I think gets known as the

0:23:25.040 --> 0:23:29.359
<v Speaker 2>Melbourne terrorism trial almost twenty years ago now with a

0:23:29.359 --> 0:23:33.960
<v Speaker 2>bunch of people accused of terrorism offenses. I'm convicted, I'm not,

0:23:34.480 --> 0:23:37.560
<v Speaker 2>but in that there was a a and I will

0:23:37.560 --> 0:23:41.879
<v Speaker 2>never forget seeing it, a particular video of a particular

0:23:41.920 --> 0:23:45.880
<v Speaker 2>form of torture which I won't go into. And Justice

0:23:45.920 --> 0:23:49.560
<v Speaker 2>broon Journer, I think rightly said look, that's got to

0:23:49.600 --> 0:23:53.679
<v Speaker 2>be it's got to be edited because it was just

0:23:53.760 --> 0:23:56.159
<v Speaker 2>so horrific. And I think his main concern, I think

0:23:56.200 --> 0:23:59.439
<v Speaker 2>it was right, was the impact on a jury. You know,

0:24:00.040 --> 0:24:03.199
<v Speaker 2>I've trained people like us who can try and put

0:24:03.240 --> 0:24:06.600
<v Speaker 2>it aside. You know, you know you've got a job

0:24:06.640 --> 0:24:09.680
<v Speaker 2>as a school teacher or a social worker, or you're

0:24:09.720 --> 0:24:12.400
<v Speaker 2>a retiree and suddenly you're confronted.

0:24:11.960 --> 0:24:15.719
<v Speaker 1>With these images. I think you're absolutely right about that,

0:24:17.119 --> 0:24:18.919
<v Speaker 1>and I've done it recently, and Darwen I did it

0:24:18.960 --> 0:24:21.639
<v Speaker 1>many times over the murder trials that I sat on

0:24:21.680 --> 0:24:25.080
<v Speaker 1>as a judge. You know there are photos coming. You

0:24:25.160 --> 0:24:29.119
<v Speaker 1>know that there are photographs taken on the post mortem

0:24:29.119 --> 0:24:31.720
<v Speaker 1>of the deceased that the prosecution are going to want

0:24:31.720 --> 0:24:36.480
<v Speaker 1>to produce. I think by and large prosecutors are pretty responsible.

0:24:36.600 --> 0:24:39.640
<v Speaker 1>Only they only choose the ones that they really need

0:24:39.680 --> 0:24:42.440
<v Speaker 1>to rely on. But you know there are times when

0:24:42.680 --> 0:24:45.960
<v Speaker 1>the cause of death is an issue and the jury

0:24:46.000 --> 0:24:50.320
<v Speaker 1>need to see them, and judges give this direction to juries,

0:24:50.320 --> 0:24:52.800
<v Speaker 1>which I've always felt was pretty lame because it can't

0:24:52.840 --> 0:24:56.159
<v Speaker 1>solve the problem, saying to the jury, look later in

0:24:56.160 --> 0:24:58.639
<v Speaker 1>this trial, you are going to see some photographs the

0:24:58.840 --> 0:25:01.119
<v Speaker 1>like of which you probably never before. You need to

0:25:01.160 --> 0:25:05.679
<v Speaker 1>prepare yourselves for the trauma. I've seeing, for example, the

0:25:05.720 --> 0:25:10.920
<v Speaker 1>inside of somebody's head. And I will tell you when

0:25:11.600 --> 0:25:15.480
<v Speaker 1>this material is coming, but be ready for it. I think,

0:25:15.560 --> 0:25:17.760
<v Speaker 1>as I'm saying those things, you know what use is that.

0:25:17.800 --> 0:25:20.240
<v Speaker 1>But at least they know it's going they can sort

0:25:20.240 --> 0:25:22.520
<v Speaker 1>of prepare themselves to some degree. But it's and you

0:25:22.560 --> 0:25:25.679
<v Speaker 1>look at the jury when the photographs are produced and

0:25:25.720 --> 0:25:28.760
<v Speaker 1>the looks on their faces, and it's horrifying. Yeah, and

0:25:29.000 --> 0:25:31.119
<v Speaker 1>the stuff is We've become a newer to it, but

0:25:31.280 --> 0:25:34.080
<v Speaker 1>it is horrifying. Yeah, no doubt. Now I want to

0:25:34.119 --> 0:25:37.400
<v Speaker 1>change tech just to something that has become a bit

0:25:37.400 --> 0:25:40.160
<v Speaker 1>dear to my heart, although I'm not totally across the detail.

0:25:40.320 --> 0:25:43.600
<v Speaker 1>So there's a barrister in the UK whose name is

0:25:44.400 --> 0:25:51.320
<v Speaker 1>Raj I've men on case he was defending I suppose

0:25:51.359 --> 0:25:55.119
<v Speaker 1>a pro Palestinian demonstrator at some installation in the United

0:25:55.200 --> 0:26:00.000
<v Speaker 1>Kingdom of organization that is alleged to be supplying military

0:26:00.200 --> 0:26:05.399
<v Speaker 1>armaments or military materials to Israel. She was one of

0:26:05.440 --> 0:26:08.879
<v Speaker 1>a number of people charged with criminal damage at the premises,

0:26:09.560 --> 0:26:13.240
<v Speaker 1>and Rajiv Menon was her counsel on the trial. Where

0:26:13.280 --> 0:26:15.639
<v Speaker 1>As the trial was coming to a conclusion, the judge

0:26:15.640 --> 0:26:19.960
<v Speaker 1>apparently made all sorts of orders about all directions as

0:26:19.960 --> 0:26:23.040
<v Speaker 1>to what defense counsel could say to the jury and

0:26:23.080 --> 0:26:27.800
<v Speaker 1>their final addresses. And it would seem that the barrister,

0:26:27.880 --> 0:26:33.239
<v Speaker 1>concerned on one view, didn't comply with those directions and

0:26:33.440 --> 0:26:36.840
<v Speaker 1>went to the jury telling them, among other things, about

0:26:36.880 --> 0:26:40.879
<v Speaker 1>the principle of jury equity, for example, the juries are

0:26:41.040 --> 0:26:44.040
<v Speaker 1>entitled to quit regardless of how strong the evidence is,

0:26:44.920 --> 0:26:47.840
<v Speaker 1>and that they can prefer their own views to anything

0:26:47.840 --> 0:26:52.200
<v Speaker 1>that the judge might say in the result. A bit

0:26:52.359 --> 0:26:55.159
<v Speaker 1>like happened in Lewis and Ogden. That's a case that

0:26:55.200 --> 0:26:58.359
<v Speaker 1>you might remember. The judge took the view that the

0:26:58.359 --> 0:27:02.920
<v Speaker 1>barrister had committed a contempt and endeavored to either deal

0:27:02.960 --> 0:27:05.280
<v Speaker 1>with the barrister summarily or refer it off to another

0:27:05.359 --> 0:27:09.760
<v Speaker 1>judge to deal with it. Summarily an appeal is now outstanding.

0:27:10.680 --> 0:27:13.560
<v Speaker 1>In fact, an appeal has been heard and a stay

0:27:13.640 --> 0:27:17.760
<v Speaker 1>imposed until the Appeal Court confinedly determined how that matters

0:27:17.760 --> 0:27:20.880
<v Speaker 1>to be disposed of. Lewis and Ogden was a case

0:27:20.920 --> 0:27:24.160
<v Speaker 1>decided by the High Court in the early nineteen eighty

0:27:24.200 --> 0:27:27.120
<v Speaker 1>about the Collingwood jump. About the Collingwood jumper, Tony Lewis

0:27:28.000 --> 0:27:30.920
<v Speaker 1>told the jury in the course of his final address

0:27:31.000 --> 0:27:33.159
<v Speaker 1>that you might think that a judge is in the

0:27:33.200 --> 0:27:36.560
<v Speaker 1>nature of a football umpire. Not so. And you know,

0:27:36.640 --> 0:27:41.000
<v Speaker 1>how would you feel if you suddenly saw an umpire

0:27:41.000 --> 0:27:43.360
<v Speaker 1>in the game that you were watching wearing a Collingwood jump. Well,

0:27:43.600 --> 0:27:45.600
<v Speaker 1>he picked the right team to pick up. He did.

0:27:46.359 --> 0:27:49.679
<v Speaker 1>Harry Ogden, who was the trial judge, got very cross

0:27:49.720 --> 0:27:53.240
<v Speaker 1>and dealt with, or attempted to deal with Tony Lewis

0:27:53.240 --> 0:27:55.040
<v Speaker 1>for contempt. It went all the way to the High

0:27:55.080 --> 0:27:59.200
<v Speaker 1>Court and the High Court. Lewis won. He won. He won.

0:27:59.240 --> 0:28:02.600
<v Speaker 1>An important thing about it was that the High Court

0:28:03.119 --> 0:28:06.920
<v Speaker 1>made some observations about when you can deal with someone

0:28:06.960 --> 0:28:10.280
<v Speaker 1>for contempt summarily, that is on the spot and really

0:28:10.320 --> 0:28:13.160
<v Speaker 1>only in circumstances where the security of the court needs

0:28:13.200 --> 0:28:17.000
<v Speaker 1>to be protected. By doing so otherwise, as in this case.

0:28:17.040 --> 0:28:19.359
<v Speaker 1>I think this barrister in England is making the same

0:28:19.400 --> 0:28:22.720
<v Speaker 1>point that if you think I contempted a case, committed

0:28:22.720 --> 0:28:26.159
<v Speaker 1>a contempt, you should you should refer it off to

0:28:26.200 --> 0:28:29.679
<v Speaker 1>be assessed by somebody else. Yeah, the DPP it's a

0:28:29.680 --> 0:28:34.959
<v Speaker 1>disgraceful case and the UK Criminal Barrow Association are very

0:28:35.040 --> 0:28:38.040
<v Speaker 1>upset about it. And I think the whole idea, unless

0:28:38.040 --> 0:28:40.600
<v Speaker 1>it's absolutely clear that a barrister can be dealt with

0:28:40.640 --> 0:28:43.280
<v Speaker 1>the contempt for what he says in a foreignal address

0:28:43.320 --> 0:28:45.560
<v Speaker 1>to a jury in a criminal trial, is horrible.

0:28:45.600 --> 0:28:48.320
<v Speaker 2>I mean, a judge, the judge, anyone who said on

0:28:48.360 --> 0:28:51.200
<v Speaker 2>the dury notes, the judge talks to you last and

0:28:51.280 --> 0:28:54.560
<v Speaker 2>can correct it. You know, mister Smith said this to you. Well,

0:28:54.840 --> 0:28:56.760
<v Speaker 2>I didn't need to tell you that. You know that's

0:28:56.760 --> 0:29:00.360
<v Speaker 2>not right. But I think that's an apport in case.

0:29:00.360 --> 0:29:01.880
<v Speaker 2>It's not the only one over there. Of course, you've

0:29:01.880 --> 0:29:06.640
<v Speaker 2>had those shocking jail sentences handed out to members of

0:29:06.640 --> 0:29:09.520
<v Speaker 2>the Palestinian Action Group, you know, five and six years.

0:29:10.000 --> 0:29:12.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, we've got to wrap it up.

0:29:12.800 --> 0:29:17.880
<v Speaker 2>But there was this week talking about that issue of

0:29:18.360 --> 0:29:21.840
<v Speaker 2>Palestine and I've just had it sent to me a

0:29:21.960 --> 0:29:26.200
<v Speaker 2>German court, very high German court, so sort of equivalent

0:29:26.200 --> 0:29:30.200
<v Speaker 2>to our Supreme Court ruling that a comparison between Nazi

0:29:30.240 --> 0:29:35.280
<v Speaker 2>Germany and Israel's conduct is not hate speech in Germany,

0:29:35.320 --> 0:29:37.880
<v Speaker 2>which is a very significant decision because the Germans, of

0:29:37.880 --> 0:29:41.280
<v Speaker 2>course are acutely sensitive on this issue for obvious three ofsourse.

0:29:42.640 --> 0:29:47.000
<v Speaker 2>And there's also that's odds with the definition of anti Semitis. Yeah, yeah,

0:29:47.040 --> 0:29:49.479
<v Speaker 2>that's right, so we might come back to that. And

0:29:49.520 --> 0:29:53.960
<v Speaker 2>also this week too, I think an academic at the

0:29:54.040 --> 0:29:59.960
<v Speaker 2>University of Bristol who was expelled or sacked for Propealestine

0:30:00.080 --> 0:30:03.440
<v Speaker 2>in remarks the universe. He won and in the university

0:30:03.520 --> 0:30:06.000
<v Speaker 2>appealed and lost the appeal. So there are a couple

0:30:06.000 --> 0:30:09.480
<v Speaker 2>of good freedom of speech issues coming up. And also

0:30:09.520 --> 0:30:12.840
<v Speaker 2>of course Pauline Hanson losing any chance she had of

0:30:12.880 --> 0:30:17.160
<v Speaker 2>appealing that decision against the Labor senator. Yeah, telling you

0:30:17.160 --> 0:30:18.160
<v Speaker 2>to go back to Pakistan.

0:30:18.440 --> 0:30:22.920
<v Speaker 1>Ye. Well, well, I'm hoping to get reel Camie Jones Casey,

0:30:22.960 --> 0:30:26.040
<v Speaker 1>who's the current president of the Criminal Bar Association in

0:30:26.040 --> 0:30:28.880
<v Speaker 1>the UK, on for a discussion about this case when

0:30:28.960 --> 0:30:31.320
<v Speaker 1>the case has been finalized. So excellent something to look

0:30:31.360 --> 0:30:35.400
<v Speaker 1>forward to all right, Greg le go Okay, see you soon.

0:30:37.920 --> 0:30:42.000
<v Speaker 1>This episode was produced by Bravecasting Media, edited by Michael Tanker.

0:30:42.320 --> 0:30:46.200
<v Speaker 1>Original music by Justin Humphries from Phoenix Sound Studios. This

0:30:46.320 --> 0:30:49.000
<v Speaker 1>podcast is recorded on the lands of the Orangerie people

0:30:49.000 --> 0:30:52.320
<v Speaker 1>of the Coolan Nation. We pay our respects to their elders, past,

0:30:52.320 --> 0:30:55.560
<v Speaker 1>present and emerging. Thank you for listening. See you next week.