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. A twenty four year old
Speaker 1: devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationships am bags
Speaker 1: packed car, running, her daughters strapped into the backseat.
Speaker 2: Mom told me that she needed to go back inside
Speaker 2: to grab something.
Speaker 1: Panic.
Speaker 3: Amy is dead, sir By, Amy's Dead?
Speaker 1: Eight Confusion World.
Speaker 3: About five minutes they said, n's a suicide.
Speaker 4: One hundred percent.
Speaker 1: This is emmersing. What do you think is really the
Speaker 1: honest truth about Amy?
Speaker 3: The Truth About Amy.
Speaker 5: Episode fifteen. I'm Liam Bartlett and I'm Alison Sandy. In
Speaker 5: season one of the Truth About Amy, we brought you
Speaker 5: the case of a young mum attempting to flee a
Speaker 5: violent relationship whose sudden death was quickly ruled a suicide.
Speaker 5: Authorities failed to consider the possibility of murder, maintaining there
Speaker 5: wasn't enough evidence of domestic violence. But as we now know,
Speaker 5: they just weren't looking hard enough. We have photos.
Speaker 1: Erin, I've got a photograph that I believe Amy sent
Speaker 1: this to you via text.
Speaker 6: That is it.
Speaker 3: See I got told that they didn't find.
Speaker 1: This, the police didn't find it. Yeah, well we did.
Speaker 7: This is Amy saying, this is my.
Speaker 5: Story, first hand accounts from friends who witnessed the violence,
Speaker 5: even while Amy was nine months pregnant, and all I
Speaker 5: saw was David with his hands around Amy's neck. We've
Speaker 5: uncovered fresh evidence thanks to our listeners, and yeah, she
Speaker 5: was dead. We'd been pigging and we'd like founder. Then
Speaker 5: we had to burn the clothes because the cops were
Speaker 5: chasing us.
Speaker 8: No one talks about their plans for the rest of
Speaker 8: the week and the next day.
Speaker 6: To then go and do that.
Speaker 5: And we know that Amy had formulated a plan to
Speaker 5: escape with her daughters.
Speaker 3: And she was excited. It was almost done and she
Speaker 3: was ready to get the girls out.
Speaker 5: Internationally renowned crime scene expert Scott rode A weighed in, So.
Speaker 9: The left hand can't pull the trigger, the right can
Speaker 9: can't pull the trigger, and.
Speaker 1: As an investigator, Liam is becoming pretty she then pull
Speaker 1: the trigger.
Speaker 5: He's now the third independent expert to conclude that Amy
Speaker 5: could not have killed herself, as well as officers. First
Speaker 5: on seeing I said this is suspicious. This is just
Speaker 5: not a suicide.
Speaker 1: But both your colleagues agreed with you.
Speaker 7: Yes, oh yea one hundred percent And to this.
Speaker 5: Day now Wa Police has reopened the investigation and the
Speaker 5: Director of Public Prosecutions will decide whether there's enough to proceed.
Speaker 6: This has to go to trial. There's enough evidence to
Speaker 6: prove that someone killed Amy.
Speaker 5: The truth must come out.
Speaker 1: And welcome to season two of The Truth About Amy.
Speaker 5: Welcome back out, good Aliam. It's a pleasure to be back.
Speaker 1: Nice to have our podcast back. And hopefully, as we've
Speaker 1: been saying all last year, most of last year, to
Speaker 1: get a result. That's what we're here for. But so
Speaker 1: much has happened, hasn't it since our last episode?
Speaker 5: It really is. I mean, you were here for it,
Speaker 5: weren't you. The election?
Speaker 1: The WA election. Yeah, Premier Roger Cook now in his
Speaker 1: own right, romped it in with a resounding victory and
Speaker 1: that election and is now, as they say, out of
Speaker 1: Mark McGowan's shadows. So he'll be very.
Speaker 10: Happy, accompanied by his wife Carl and adult children.
Speaker 1: Labor has a new hero. Good evening Friends.
Speaker 5: David Simmons finally fronted the court. Although it seems like
Speaker 5: he had to be in prison for that to occur.
Speaker 5: He didn't actually turn up.
Speaker 1: That was amazing, wasn't it. We'll talk more about that
Speaker 1: in just a moment. The other thing that's happened, of course,
Speaker 1: with the Premier Cook now running a new cabinet announcing
Speaker 1: a new lineup, is that there is a new police minister. Yes,
Speaker 1: but anyway, we'll talk more about that too. But perhaps
Speaker 1: the most significant story of the year so far happened
Speaker 1: in February when WA's top cop, Cole Blanche, the Commissioner
Speaker 1: admittedale that his police force had well and truly, to
Speaker 1: use the vernacular, stuffed up the handling of the Mark
Speaker 1: Bombarra case.
Speaker 5: Yeah, a bit of a change in tune from when
Speaker 5: he was asked about it at the start, but let's
Speaker 5: have a listen to that.
Speaker 2: Returning now to our leads story, the Commissioner has admitted
Speaker 2: the WA police force failed in the weeks before Jennifer
Speaker 2: and Gretel Pateelche's were murdered in their flory at home
Speaker 2: last May. Cole Blanche spoke today alongside the gunman's daughter,
Speaker 2: Ariel Bombara. The bombshell report into the killings found eight
Speaker 2: officers failed to effectively perform their duties, James Carmody has more.
Speaker 1: So before we continue, it's worth noting the significance of
Speaker 1: the Bombarra story and what we've learned from it. Now
Speaker 1: we already knew Amy's case and the way it was
Speaker 1: treated by authorities. We knew that wasn't an anomaly, but
Speaker 1: examining just how and why Mark Bombara was able to
Speaker 1: do what he did is I think pretty critical in
Speaker 1: understanding the current cop culture here in the West and
Speaker 1: the level of integrity of those at the top. Now,
Speaker 1: Amy's family is still fearful and not without reason, I
Speaker 1: think fair to say the focus of WA Police in
Speaker 1: reinvestigating Amy's death is more about being seen to do
Speaker 1: the right thing rather than actually doing it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we're at a critical juncture with Amy's case, rightly,
Speaker 5: so it's being re examined by WA Police. So now
Speaker 5: our listeners, who are very vocal on social media if
Speaker 5: you're not already please follow us on Facebook and Instagram,
Speaker 5: will undoubtedly all agree their cynicism is not unreasonable.
Speaker 1: No, I don't think it's unreasonable either, which brings us
Speaker 1: back to the Bombara tragedy and the way it unfolded
Speaker 1: has been voluntarily laid out in this new report, and
Speaker 1: for the very first time we're able to see the
Speaker 1: issues at the center of modern day policing playing out
Speaker 1: almost as if in slow which gives us a sort
Speaker 1: of post mortem on WA police, detailing every aspect that
Speaker 1: tragically went wrong. Now to be Devil's advocate for a moment,
Speaker 1: the issues being experienced by police in Western Australia are
Speaker 1: not dissimilar to those from other states. And we've said
Speaker 1: this before right that handling DV related cases, domestic violence
Speaker 1: related cases is not easy for any police force in
Speaker 1: any part of not just Australia or Australia's jurisdictions, but
Speaker 1: the entire world. It's a very difficult thing. But the
Speaker 1: difference here, I think in WA, as it seems, is
Speaker 1: the force's appetite for change and to get better and
Speaker 1: to actually reform so that these things have a much
Speaker 1: lower chance of happening again. It's much more reticent, I
Speaker 1: think in Western Australia than that of their counterparts in
Speaker 1: New South Wales and also in Queensland, which we've seen
Speaker 1: some substantial changes for the better, but thanks to a
Speaker 1: very very brave lady, and I think that's probably an understatement,
Speaker 1: but the very vocal Ariel Bombara, we know that her
Speaker 1: father Mark was a time bomb waiting to go off,
Speaker 1: and when that happened, he made sure that he caused
Speaker 1: maximum damage. Now it's not to say that his actions
Speaker 1: were premeditated, so let's not get that confused. He was
Speaker 1: just completely unhinged and as Ariel had warned, any degree
Speaker 1: of disappointment or distress could set him off, and that's
Speaker 1: exactly what happened, and as we now know, death and
Speaker 1: destruction lay in his wake. Now there was no chance
Speaker 1: of justice. All that was left to do was to
Speaker 1: pick up the pieces, microanalyze everything that happened, and put
Speaker 1: in whatever safeguards possible to prevent it from happening again.
Speaker 1: So a complete investigation was inevitable and ultimately there'd be
Speaker 1: no hiding the fact that those responsible, whose core responsibility
Speaker 1: was to protect the community. I remember, that's what police
Speaker 1: officers al are sworn to do.
Speaker 9: Right.
Speaker 1: That's the difference. Because we talk about duty of care
Speaker 1: in lots of different workplaces, don't we these days. It's
Speaker 1: a bit of a key phrase, But for the police,
Speaker 1: it's the ultimate They are sworn under oath to protect.
Speaker 1: That's their whole rais ondetra. That's it, that's their job,
Speaker 1: and in this case they utterly and completely failed. That's
Speaker 1: not going too far. But before I get two worked up,
Speaker 1: let's return to James Carmody from the seven Perth newsroom,
Speaker 1: who covered the investigation report's release on the day, good afternoon.
Speaker 11: This report makes a series of important findings and recommendations
Speaker 11: about how WA police deal with the victims of family
Speaker 11: and domestic violence, and how police let down Ariol Bombara
Speaker 11: and her mother when they came to officers and warned
Speaker 11: them that Mark bomb Barra was dangerous and armed, just
Speaker 11: weaked before he shot dead his wife's friend and her
Speaker 11: daughter in Floreat Jennifer and Gretel Petelcher's here's what Ariel
Speaker 11: Bombara had to say about her dealings with officers.
Speaker 6: We told you that he was going to murder us.
Speaker 6: So did you not believe us or did you just
Speaker 6: not give a shit? I can have empathy for human
Speaker 6: beings making mistakes, but that is a lot of human
Speaker 6: beings making a lot of mistakes.
Speaker 11: The report details that fifteen officers in total had direct
Speaker 11: dealings with arial Bombara and her mother and more than
Speaker 11: half of them. Eight officers failed in performing their duties
Speaker 11: to varied levels of seriousness. None were sacked, but they
Speaker 11: have all received internal disciplinary action, the details of which
Speaker 11: have not been made public. Commissioner Cole Blanche says he's
Speaker 11: confident his officers do care, but they failed and were
Speaker 11: also failed themselves by a system that isn't working, failures
Speaker 11: that let the Bombarra family down. From the time Ariel
Speaker 11: and her mother first walked into me You're a Book
Speaker 11: at police station and told officers they feared Mark Bombara
Speaker 11: would use his licensed firearms to murder them, and she.
Speaker 7: Said, if Mum and I came in screaming and bleeding,
Speaker 7: it would have made a very different outcome.
Speaker 1: I've got to agree with that.
Speaker 7: That's why we've got our risk assessment wrong, because two
Speaker 7: composed professional people came in and said the same thing
Speaker 7: and we didn't see it. We got it wrong. But
Speaker 7: I own that system and it's my job to fix it,
Speaker 7: and my job is to support our officers so we
Speaker 7: never do it again.
Speaker 11: The report makes eighteen recommendations. Eleven are complete, seven are
Speaker 11: still in progress.
Speaker 5: Just a bit of background here. Bombara was licensed to
Speaker 5: own thirteen guns at the time of his murderous rampage
Speaker 5: thirteen thirteen. He was licensed for thirteen. Yes, yes, he
Speaker 5: was unbelievable. The book Government has since passed new firearm
Speaker 5: laws restricting license holders two between five and ten firearms,
Speaker 5: as well as the requirement for mental health checks and
Speaker 5: mandatory safety training. Other recommendations include the immediate removal of
Speaker 5: a person's firearms when a report of family or domestic
Speaker 5: violence has been made against them, and the introduction of
Speaker 5: a family violence coordinator to be present at the WA
Speaker 5: Police State Operations Command Center at all times to allow
Speaker 5: officers to see expert advice. So what's the significance of
Speaker 5: this in the context of Amy. Well, as you know,
Speaker 5: Amy's case was also mishandled by police officers, and this
Speaker 5: has been accepted and acknowledged by WA Police. But there's
Speaker 5: a new twist to our investigation, something admittedly we suspected
Speaker 5: but now have proof. In order to show you though,
Speaker 5: we have to provide some context and explore the handling
Speaker 5: of other cases so that you can see how it
Speaker 5: works in Western Australia and indeed in many other police jurisdictions.
Speaker 5: In Season one, we touched upon the brotherhood and the
Speaker 5: pressure put on officers to conform, but at the time
Speaker 5: we didn't really understand all the inner machinations and internal
Speaker 5: politics of the season will reveal what it's like to
Speaker 5: be a police officer in the wild West. But before
Speaker 5: we go into all that, let's lay the foundation. He's
Speaker 5: Commissioner cole Blanche again. This time, though he's talking less
Speaker 5: than a week after the tragedy.
Speaker 7: The information that the police had on the night, the
Speaker 7: circumstances would not have met the threshold of a seventy
Speaker 7: to our police order. There was a family violence incident
Speaker 7: report submitted, so it did I know, there are suggestions
Speaker 7: that we did not act. We did act.
Speaker 5: Now we all know hindsight is twenty twenty, but there
Speaker 5: really seems to be a stark difference between what cole
Speaker 5: Blanche said a week after the incident to what he
Speaker 5: said almost a year later after the report. What do
Speaker 5: you think, LIAMB Yeah, well.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm glad you asked that.
Speaker 7: Olt.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, this is a classic. It won't
Speaker 1: surprise many of our listeners that this is a constant,
Speaker 1: isn't it. This is all about stand and rebut defend, defend, defend,
Speaker 1: no matter what. So as soon as something happens, no
Speaker 1: matter what you think or believe or any of the
Speaker 1: potential scenarios, just get up there and say, we didn't
Speaker 1: do anything wrong, nothing happened. You know, nothing to see here, folks,
Speaker 1: Please move on. This is this part of the culture
Speaker 1: that we're talking about. And then, obviously, after an investigation
Speaker 1: that's done by an independent body or authority of some
Speaker 1: description that is detailed in its analysis that then you
Speaker 1: can't stand up and say the same thing, can you.
Speaker 1: You have to respond to what the conclusions are. And
Speaker 1: obviously cole Blanche has been caught in that classic pincer
Speaker 1: where he has to then say, okay, well we got
Speaker 1: it wrong. Now we apologize. Now we say we're going
Speaker 1: to reform. You know, let's go through exactly what happened.
Speaker 1: So here's two level headed, articulate, smart, distressed women telling
Speaker 1: police on several occasions that a dangerous, gun wielding, violent
Speaker 1: man with deteriorating mental health issues is going to kill them.
Speaker 1: Not only that, on top of that, they are related
Speaker 1: to him. One is the wife and the other one
Speaker 1: is the daughter. So that to me, that makes even
Speaker 1: more impact on what they're saying, and that that plea
Speaker 1: for help doesn't even warrant a seventy two hour protection order. Now,
Speaker 1: just you know, think about that in your mind for
Speaker 1: a moment. I mean, let's put it another way. An angry, cruel,
Speaker 1: vicious abuse of sick mentally sick and a rational man
Speaker 1: remains free and in possession of a loaded gun. And
Speaker 1: as you've just pointed out out, he had no less
Speaker 1: than thirteen registered firearms. So the police can dial that
Speaker 1: up on a computer at any moment, any instant, in
Speaker 1: any police station around Western Australia, so they know exactly
Speaker 1: what they're dealing with, right, they know how many guns
Speaker 1: he's got. But this bloke, this bloke is still permitted
Speaker 1: and this is not overstating it to threaten the lives
Speaker 1: of his family, because his family is telling the police
Speaker 1: that he's threatening them and nothing is done about it.
Speaker 1: So even before an investigation, you've got to be thinking,
Speaker 1: hang on, hang on, there's something wrong here, isn't there.
Speaker 1: He's got to be something wrong with that process if
Speaker 1: you've got half a brain. But the Commissioner WA Police says, no,
Speaker 1: they took appropriate action, that's what he said, And this
Speaker 1: is even with the rear view mirror having been cleaned,
Speaker 1: because at that stage when he said that, remember two
Speaker 1: people were dead. So he then goes on to defend
Speaker 1: his officer's actions or inaction, saying an internal investigation is
Speaker 1: underway as some sort of acquiescence on his part. That's
Speaker 1: sort of something from nineteen sixty eight. I don't worry,
Speaker 1: internals are looking after it. It'll be fine, because that's
Speaker 1: meant to make you feel better. Then six months later,
Speaker 1: the Commissioner again fronts the media following the conclusion of
Speaker 1: the investigation, which is undertaken by WA Police but overseen
Speaker 1: by the Triple C, by the State Coroner and the Ombudsman, acknowledging,
Speaker 1: as we've just discussed our yes, mistakes were made. And
Speaker 1: this is after the investigation report states very very clearly
Speaker 1: and concisely WA Police is completely to blame and eighteen
Speaker 1: new recommendations will be introduced to minimize the risk of
Speaker 1: this ever happening again. I mean, does he have any
Speaker 1: other choice but to copy it on the chin? Clearly not?
Speaker 1: Clearly not, And that's what worries me. So does what's right,
Speaker 1: what the right actions are? Does that have to be
Speaker 1: completely spelled out to WA Police before they do do
Speaker 1: the right thing. That's the very simple question. It sounds
Speaker 1: like something out of an episode of the Simpsons, but
Speaker 1: it's pretty obvious. I have a copy of the internal
Speaker 1: investigation report, not the full one that wasn't released publicly,
Speaker 1: but the sanitized one given to the media, and that's
Speaker 1: bad enough. And it starts with the summary of WA
Speaker 1: Police's contact with Ariel Bombara and her mother Rowena, including
Speaker 1: here we go, I'll give you this in bullet points.
Speaker 1: Their initial attendance at mirror Booker Police Station, then a
Speaker 1: telephone call from Ariel to Perth Police Station while she
Speaker 1: was still at mirror Booker Police Station. A subsequent telephone
Speaker 1: call from Ariel to the Perth Family Violence Team, then
Speaker 1: the triage process by the Fremantle Family Violence Team, then
Speaker 1: the police attendants at the Bombara family home to allow
Speaker 1: Ariel and her mum to retrieve personal items, and finally,
Speaker 1: last but not least, the inability of support services to
Speaker 1: contact the Bombarra family to provide follow up support. So literally,
Speaker 1: you know, if you go around the monopoly board, it's
Speaker 1: from start to go, you do the full lap. Do
Speaker 1: not pass anything straight to jail.
Speaker 6: I mean.
Speaker 1: The report states that WA Police was warned on multiple
Speaker 1: occasions about the risk post by Mark Bombara, and those
Speaker 1: warnings were legitimate. That's what the report says. Now that's
Speaker 1: not me. I'll say that again. Those warnings were legitimate.
Speaker 1: That's what the report says. So I think what they're
Speaker 1: saying here is that what they were told at the time,
Speaker 1: as opposed to what they know now was enough. It
Speaker 1: was enough to meet the threshold of the seventy two
Speaker 1: hour police order. And it goes on to say WA
Speaker 1: Police was aware that and I'll give you these in
Speaker 1: headline form again, Ariel's parents had recently split. WA Police
Speaker 1: knew that. WA Police also knew Ariel and her mum
Speaker 1: feared Mark Bombarra's mental state was deteriorating, partly due to
Speaker 1: a recent minor stroke, and he was capable of murdering them.
Speaker 5: That's a big one, isn't it.
Speaker 1: WA Police also was aware that they had a long
Speaker 1: history of abusive, controlling and coercive behavior which was escalating.
Speaker 1: They were also aware that, as well as access to
Speaker 1: licensed firearms and a history of not securing them properly.
Speaker 1: That was all on the record and WA Police was
Speaker 1: also aware that they were concerned that one of his
Speaker 1: guns could not be accounted for. How many more red
Speaker 1: flags do you need?
Speaker 9: So?
Speaker 1: The report concluded, have a listened to this.
Speaker 12: WA Police attended approximately sixty thousand family and domestic violence
Speaker 12: related matters in twenty twenty four, often involving dangerous and
Speaker 12: complex circumstances. Whilst officers endeavored to make the best decision
Speaker 12: every time, the consequences of wrong decisions can be catastrophic.
Speaker 12: Police systems, policies and procedures must provide clarity to officers
Speaker 12: so they can make the best decision in every circumstance.
Speaker 12: WA Police have completed eleven of the recommendations and are
Speaker 12: progressing well with the remaining seven. We are committed to
Speaker 12: implementing all eighteen recommendations, supported by the highly valued input
Speaker 12: and guidance from specialist women's domestic and family violence services
Speaker 12: and those with lived experience. The Bombara and Patelchez families
Speaker 12: have met with the Commissioner of Police to discuss the
Speaker 12: outcomes of this investigation. The Commissioner has personally apologized to
Speaker 12: the families for the shortcomings of the police response. Repeat
Speaker 12: offenders who cannot demonstrate a change in their behavior have
Speaker 12: no place in our community and police will always recommend
Speaker 12: to the courts that they remain in prison.
Speaker 1: Thank you everyone, Thank you for being here now, just
Speaker 1: so you're getting the full picture. Here included almost everything
Speaker 1: that Commissioner Blanche had to say at that media conference
Speaker 1: on the first of February.
Speaker 7: Sadly, we estimate only twenty percent of victims of domestic
Speaker 7: violence report those incidents to police. Eighty percent of those
Speaker 7: in a violent relationship are often living in silence.
Speaker 1: So, going back to those stats, the statistics cited in
Speaker 1: the report, WA police attended sixty thousand DV incidents.
Speaker 5: That figure is incredible, Liam. So dividing that by the
Speaker 5: number of days in a year, it equates to police
Speaker 5: attending about one hundred and sixty five a day. But
Speaker 5: that's just the ones we know about. If that's just
Speaker 5: twenty percent of the totality, we're actually looking at eight
Speaker 5: hundred and twenty domestic violence incidents every single day. That's
Speaker 5: three hundred thousand a year. Astonishing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's incredible, isn't it. It is incredible. Really puts
Speaker 1: into context, I think are the extent of Australia's domestic
Speaker 1: violence problem. When you look at these figures, and remember
Speaker 1: these figures are just for one state. So it begs
Speaker 1: the question too, if you're a police officer looking into
Speaker 1: one of these one hundred and sixty five incidents that
Speaker 1: happen every day, how do you choose which one should
Speaker 1: take priority?
Speaker 5: According to the commissioner, it's those considered to be the
Speaker 5: highest risk. But who makes that determination.
Speaker 1: Well precisely, And of course we weren't at the press conference.
Speaker 1: We haven't had much luck getting on Cold Lanche's mailing
Speaker 1: list for obvious reasons. But this is what the police
Speaker 1: commissioner told journalists who were there.
Speaker 7: The finding is that officers did not correctly assess the risk.
Speaker 7: Therefore the available powers under the Restraining Orders Act and
Speaker 7: the Firearms Act were not exercised appropriately. A correct risk
Speaker 7: assessment would have provided sufficient grounds to issue a police
Speaker 7: order to Mark Bombarra, and that power then extended to
Speaker 7: seizing lawful firearms. The second key finding from the investigation
Speaker 7: is that insufficient action was taken by police to explore
Speaker 7: whether Mark Bombarrow was a fit and proper person to
Speaker 7: hold a firearms license based on medical grounds, despite police
Speaker 7: being told of his deteriorating medical condition by the family.
Speaker 7: And the third and final key finding is that insufficient
Speaker 7: action was taken by police to identify and investigate alleged
Speaker 7: firearm offenses, which included a report of an unsecure firearm.
Speaker 7: That investigation then took the entire organization, including myself, to
Speaker 7: look for recommendations on how we can ensure that this
Speaker 7: never happens again.
Speaker 5: So my reading of this is, upon receiving a family
Speaker 5: violence complaint, if the alleged perpetrator has firearms, they will
Speaker 5: automatically be seized, regardless of the risk assessment made by
Speaker 5: the police officer who was recording the details. The police
Speaker 5: still get to use their own discretion to determine other aspects,
Speaker 5: such as whether to consult the new family violence coordinator.
Speaker 5: It's also worth noting that even though WA Police recognized
Speaker 5: the error of detectives calling off forensics in Amy's case,
Speaker 5: that choice remains discussionary. I contacted WA Police to verify
Speaker 5: and was told in the event of a sudden death,
Speaker 5: officers on site will determine the cause and circumstances. However,
Speaker 5: if it's an obvious murder, whatever that is, forensics will attend.
Speaker 5: Following Amy's death, new regulations relating to firearm related deaths
Speaker 5: were introduced, ensuring officers consulted with homicide who, along with
Speaker 5: uniform police and district detectives, would make a decision as
Speaker 5: to whether forensics were required. But a forensics team still
Speaker 5: doesn't automatically attend a scene in the event of an
Speaker 5: unexpected sudden death involving a firearm like Amy's aerial Bombara
Speaker 5: remained skeptical and intensely critical of WA police. Despite the
Speaker 5: concessions made.
Speaker 6: For women in domestic violence relationships, the most dangerous time
Speaker 6: for them is when they decide to leave and the
Speaker 6: weeks and months that follow. Often they've chosen to stay
Speaker 6: longer than they wanted to for this exact fear of
Speaker 6: the danger, and are finally leaving because the danger of
Speaker 6: staying outweighs the danger of leaving. After receiving countless messages
Speaker 6: from women sharing their own stories of police not taking
Speaker 6: them seriously, resulting in real violent consequences for these women
Speaker 6: and children, I'm not at all surprised that no action
Speaker 6: was taken against my father. I think this was the
Speaker 6: perfect storm of apathy and compassion fatigue from officers, combined
Speaker 6: with shoddy systems, outdated policies and insufficient training and support
Speaker 6: that resulted in a lethal outcome. Jenny and Grettel Ptelcius
Speaker 6: should not have been murdered. They should not have had
Speaker 6: to die in order for the police to start taking
Speaker 6: domestic violence seriously.
Speaker 3: But here we are.
Speaker 6: The sad reality is that had my father come to
Speaker 6: the correct location and murdered my mum and me, we
Speaker 6: would have become just another domestic violence statistic that disappears
Speaker 6: was little for the investigation. So whilst I'm torn because
Speaker 6: I want to shout and swear on behalf of all
Speaker 6: the women who were murdered and the people who were
Speaker 6: left behind to deal with the devastating aftermath, I know
Speaker 6: that won't change anything. So I want to say that
Speaker 6: I truly appreciate the work that has gone into this investigation.
Speaker 6: I appreciate that you listened to me. Well, I didn't
Speaker 6: give you much of a choice, but you listened and
Speaker 6: you allowed me to have input into this process. And
Speaker 6: I am truly grateful, and I am supportive of the
Speaker 6: recommendations that have come out of this, and I appreciate
Speaker 6: that you will continue to keep the door open to me.
Speaker 6: Because whilst this report focused largely on the guns due
Speaker 6: to these specific circumstances of the case. We know that
Speaker 6: this isn't a gun issue, it's a domestic violence issue.
Speaker 6: So what I want to see as the next step
Speaker 6: is how WA Police can learn from our case and
Speaker 6: apply it across the board, because every woman and child
Speaker 6: deserves equal protection and the system shouldn't be set up
Speaker 6: to rely on victim survivors raising these issues.
Speaker 5: I asked WA Police about the apology to the Bombara
Speaker 5: and Pateelchez families, in particular the timing, and was advised
Speaker 5: to seek access to the audio of a media conference
Speaker 5: held by the Commissioner, which you've just heard and told
Speaker 5: there was quote nothing further to add at this time now.
Speaker 5: I couldn't find any reference to an apology at the
Speaker 5: media conference. The commissioner did have, however, answer many other questions,
Speaker 5: including the disciplinary action taken against the officers involved, and
Speaker 5: said none of them were sacked.
Speaker 7: One of the things I didn't provide them was a
Speaker 7: system where they could make a correct risk assessment. They
Speaker 7: deal as you know, and this is not an excuse.
Speaker 7: We made errors here and we are standing here. I
Speaker 7: am standing here admitting those errors for these humans what's
Speaker 7: going through their head at the moment. They are very,
Speaker 7: very so hard on themselves. I've had them in tears.
Speaker 7: I think they are all reflecting on the impact they've
Speaker 7: had on many families. I think they are good people.
Speaker 7: They made errors, they work hard, they stepped forward to
Speaker 7: support our community. But there is a disciplinary process. They
Speaker 7: have to be held accountable for making the wrong decision,
Speaker 7: and they were. I can guarantee you those officers will
Speaker 7: know exactly how to respond to.
Speaker 11: This in the future.
Speaker 5: Now, Liam, I don't know about you, but I couldn't
Speaker 5: help but reflect back to the reaction of detectives who's
Speaker 5: stuffed up in Amy's case. They didn't appear apologetic at all.
Speaker 5: In fact, they remained adamant that Amy took her own life,
Speaker 5: and the force didn't just back this but agreed wholeheartedly.
Speaker 9: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, as you know, neither detectives Kirkman nor Weedman ever
Speaker 1: appeared to be apologetic, and despite all the evidence making
Speaker 1: it clear that Amy was unable to shoot herself, WA
Speaker 1: Police continued to support them right up until the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one inquest. Only after the inquest did WA Police
Speaker 1: issue a letter of regret so that wasn't a formal apology.
Speaker 1: I mean, some people might think we're splitting straws here, Allison,
Speaker 1: but a letter of regret to the mother of a
Speaker 1: dead daughter, he's not the same as a personal apology
Speaker 1: in my opinion. Especially you'll recall the letter of regret
Speaker 1: got one of the dates wrong within the letter, so
Speaker 1: clearly whoever fact checked and looked at the typos didn't
Speaker 1: do it very closely or didn't really care too much
Speaker 1: about it. So it was done pretty ad hoc, you've
Speaker 1: got to say. So it was all a bit, you know,
Speaker 1: to me, it was as a bit of a bottom
Speaker 1: covering exercise. But you know, again that was because forensics
Speaker 1: were called off at the scene in Amy's case, you know,
Speaker 1: so they didn't have anything else to go on. I mean,
Speaker 1: so in the Bombara case, you've got two women who
Speaker 1: were dead, and no policeman loses their job. Nobody is sacked,
Speaker 1: No one is sacked. The commissioner still stands up and says,
Speaker 1: I stand by my officers. What does that say about
Speaker 1: the culture in the police force If you can still
Speaker 1: do that. We've already acknowledged that it's a very very
Speaker 1: difficult job that they're facing and DV cases are very
Speaker 1: very difficult to deal with. But we've also acknowledged and
Speaker 1: you have to be blind, Freddie, not to have this
Speaker 1: sort of shoved in your face that independent authorities have
Speaker 1: said they got it wrong, got it wrong, got it wrong,
Speaker 1: got it wrong. So where is the accountability? I'll say
Speaker 1: it again. These people are not only it's not just
Speaker 1: their job to keep people safe, they are sworn under
Speaker 1: oath to protect. That is the whole reason. That is
Speaker 1: their mission statement in life. That is the job of
Speaker 1: a policeman. Now, if you get the job wrong and
Speaker 1: you still keep your job, what does that say to
Speaker 1: the rest of the people in the ranks.
Speaker 5: Yeah, well, I mean obviously the way that they handled
Speaker 5: Amy's case, I mean that was disgraceful and they close ranks.
Speaker 5: But also remember that Cole Blanche, that was the name
Speaker 5: on the letter of regret, who was Deputy Commissioner at
Speaker 5: the time and the police Commissioner presiding over WA Police
Speaker 5: throughout the investigation into Amy's death prior to the one
Speaker 5: now being undertaken was Chris Dawson, who is now the
Speaker 5: Governor of Western Australia. You had some dealings with him,
Speaker 5: didn't you, Liam.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I did, and I think you can see some
Speaker 1: patterns emerging here that Chris Dawson has passed on well
Speaker 1: and truly to Cole Blanche. I mean, Cole's learned some
Speaker 1: valuable lessons, I think because with Chris Dawson, he's a
Speaker 1: marvelous political player. And it's really all about the top echelon,
Speaker 1: you know, the top tiers, the hierarchy of the police force.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you keep in suite with the government
Speaker 1: of the day, you will eventually be rewarded. As you've
Speaker 1: just pointed out, Chris Dawson is now the Governor of
Speaker 1: Western Australia. So the police and the state government and
Speaker 1: the people at the top, Chris Dawson's the Mark McGowan's
Speaker 1: had very close relationships, very close relationships, and so they
Speaker 1: end up getting rewarded. But what happens to the rank
Speaker 1: and file and what they're doing to the public, you know,
Speaker 1: how's that culture going? As we discussed, and I mean
Speaker 1: we end up having in this state a Minister for police.
Speaker 1: We don't have a Minister of Police now. The police
Speaker 1: minister has just been changed because of the cabinet lineup reshuffle.
Speaker 1: As we've discussed at the start of the program. Perhaps
Speaker 1: you know, in a blue moon you might hear the
Speaker 1: minister come out and criticize the police or call for
Speaker 1: change or call for reform or something. That's what a
Speaker 1: minister of the crowd is supposed to do because they
Speaker 1: get paid by the taxpayer, not by the rank and
Speaker 1: file that's called a police union. But I think cole
Speaker 1: Blanche has learned those lessons very well. That not that
Speaker 1: he didn't know them before he took the top job,
Speaker 1: because to get to that level in those sort of
Speaker 1: paramilitary organizations such as a police force, you know, you
Speaker 1: have to be very conscious of politics. And so I
Speaker 1: think in that sense he's done a very good job.
Speaker 1: But that doesn't necessarily mean that the culture of the
Speaker 1: forces any better.
Speaker 5: Well, you think you'd also have to protect the reputation
Speaker 5: and the integrity of w a police and I would
Speaker 5: say at this stage he's not, particularly in relation to
Speaker 5: Amy's case, not doing a good job at that.
Speaker 1: Well. I think the reputation has been severely dented by
Speaker 1: a whole stack of failings, you know, litany of failings
Speaker 1: over the past fifteen twenty years our So you know,
Speaker 1: I think there's a lot of work to be done
Speaker 1: on that. But can we just go back to this
Speaker 1: investigation and the investigation report into the bombar A killings,
Speaker 1: because there's one more thing I noticed about it, and
Speaker 1: it was this last line.
Speaker 12: Repeat offenders who cannot demonstrate the change in their behavior
Speaker 12: have no place in our community, and police will always
Speaker 12: recommend to the courts that they remain in prison.
Speaker 1: Okay, So let's look at that in context of Amy
Speaker 1: Wensley's case. Now her partner at the time of her death,
Speaker 1: David Simmons, who has a history of violent behavior, has
Speaker 1: been imprisoned once for assaulting a police officer, and that
Speaker 1: officer being Larry Blandford, who was the first on the
Speaker 1: scene at Amy's death. David Simmons served nine months for that,
Speaker 1: then he was released and charged again for allegedly assaulting
Speaker 1: another police officer. And every time this matter was due
Speaker 1: before court, he just decided he wouldn't turn up. They
Speaker 1: then issue an arrest warrant and then cancel it when
Speaker 1: he turns up late and he schedules a new time.
Speaker 1: So it fits in with David simmons last style in
Speaker 1: which the same thing happens. I mean, he's just routing
Speaker 1: the system, isn't he isn't he just gaming the system
Speaker 1: at taxpayers expense?
Speaker 5: Yeah? That's been a real concern to me too. So
Speaker 5: I contacted the WA Justice Department and asked them what measures,
Speaker 5: if any, would be put in place to ensure he
Speaker 5: turns up next time, or could constant no shows just
Speaker 5: continue indefinitely? This was the reply.
Speaker 13: David Simmons appeared in Perth Magistrates Court on eight January
Speaker 13: twenty twenty five, where the arrest warrant was canceled. He
Speaker 13: was granted bail with conditions and a five thousand dollars
Speaker 13: personal undertaking and a three thousand dollars surety. The matter
Speaker 13: is next listed in Perth Magistrates Court on fifteen May
Speaker 13: at nine point thirty am for.
Speaker 12: A call over.
Speaker 1: Okay, so, as it turns out the fifteenth of Mayors
Speaker 1: is now no longer happening l because surprisingly this was
Speaker 1: brought forward again after David Simmons ended up at Hakia
Speaker 1: Prison is the three man prison in wa for breaching bail.
Speaker 1: So on the twenty ninth of February, via video link
Speaker 1: from Hakia, Simmons appear before Magistrate Melita Medcalf. He was
Speaker 1: represented by defense lawyer Rhys Mohler while Sergeant Keyes appeared
Speaker 1: for the police prosecution. Now we obtained a copy of
Speaker 1: the transcript of exactly what happened in that case.
Speaker 12: Have a listen staying with Hakia from the s list.
Speaker 10: Simmons, David Robert Simmons.
Speaker 3: Is your name, David Robert Simmons. Can you hear us?
Speaker 2: Okay, mister Simmons, Yes, okay, thank you. I've got your
Speaker 2: lawyer here.
Speaker 3: I will speak to him and come back to you.
Speaker 14: Please the court, your honor. I am mister Molar, I
Speaker 14: appear for mister Simmons, your honor. This is a prosecution
Speaker 14: Form six application in effect. If Charge one one eight
Speaker 14: eight of twenty twenty four is put to mister Simmons,
Speaker 14: a plea of guilty will be entered thereafter. I anticipate
Speaker 14: the prosecution will have an application to make with respect
Speaker 14: to one four one eighty nine. There are pleas of
Speaker 14: guilty to the two remaining charges. We can proceed to
Speaker 14: sentence today and then we would seek for a trial hearing,
Speaker 14: which I believe is listed on fifteen may to be vacated.
Speaker 2: All right, mister Simmons, I will read the one charge
Speaker 2: to you. That's a previous plea of not guilty on
Speaker 2: May thirteen. The allegation is on March eighth, twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: in north Bridge, you obstructed a police auxiliary officer in
Speaker 2: the performance of that officer's function. Do you understand the charge?
Speaker 5: Yes, your honor?
Speaker 3: How do you wish to plead?
Speaker 14: What was that?
Speaker 5: Sorry?
Speaker 1: That was the one I pled not guilty to.
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, so you've previously pleaded not guilty to it.
Speaker 2: But I understand you're changing your plea now that's the
Speaker 2: obstruct police officer charge.
Speaker 1: The yes, no pardon? Sorry? Can you read that again?
Speaker 2: On March eighth, t twenty four in north Bridge, the
Speaker 2: allegation is that you obstructed a police auxiliary officer in
Speaker 2: the performance of the officer's function.
Speaker 3: Do you understand the charge?
Speaker 1: Yes?
Speaker 3: Okay, how do you wish to plead guilty? Thank you?
Speaker 2: And on that basis, then, Sergeant, I understand that the
Speaker 2: assault public officer one four one eight nine.
Speaker 3: Will be dismissed. Yes, your honor, all right, so an
Speaker 3: order will.
Speaker 2: Be made to dismiss that charge pursuant to Section twenty five,
Speaker 2: and I will hear the facts.
Speaker 10: Thank you, your honor. At seven ten pm on the
Speaker 10: eighth of March twenty twenty four, the accused is conveyed
Speaker 10: by police to the Perth Watchhouse. Whilst there, the accused
Speaker 10: was physically restrained by police auxiliary officers against the wall
Speaker 10: as he is abusive, resisting and made threats towards one
Speaker 10: of them. While the police auxiliary officers were bringing the
Speaker 10: accused into the admission room through a corridor, the accused
Speaker 10: began to struggle with Ko Greenham, causing his shoulder to
Speaker 10: impact the corner of a door frame. The accused was
Speaker 10: then brought to a padded cell due to his previous behavior.
Speaker 10: He was then informed by the Chaos that under Section
Speaker 10: one three five of the CIA, the strip search would
Speaker 10: be conducted and asked if he would comply. He was
Speaker 10: then asked several times if he would comply, However, he
Speaker 10: refused to. As a result, under Section sixteen of the CIA,
Speaker 10: reasonable forces used to conduct the search. The KO sustained
Speaker 10: cuts and abrasions to his arm during the incident. That's
Speaker 10: the facts, your honor. Thank you, there is a record,
Speaker 10: I believe.
Speaker 2: Yes, I've got a copy of that. Thanks hang on, yes,
Speaker 2: I do, Thank you, mister Moler.
Speaker 14: Does your honor need to hear the facts in relation
Speaker 14: to the disorderly Yes, I do, sorry, and I imagine
Speaker 14: the breach.
Speaker 3: Of bail and a breach of bail can be added
Speaker 3: to the prosecution notice. Yes, Missus Simmons.
Speaker 2: I just want to let you know that we actually
Speaker 2: pressed mute on the video link at the moment because
Speaker 2: we've got a lot of background noise. So if for
Speaker 2: some reason you needed to say something, just wave your
Speaker 2: hand and we will come back to you.
Speaker 3: Okay, thanks Sergeant.
Speaker 10: At five point thirty one on the eighth of March
Speaker 10: twenty twenty four, the accused was at twenty three in Armadale.
Speaker 10: Police located the address in relation to an incident that
Speaker 10: had happened between the accused and other occupants of the house.
Speaker 10: The accused is deemed to be heavily intoxicated. Upon police arrival,
Speaker 10: and whilst police was speaking to the other people at
Speaker 10: the scene, the accused started to shout and be abusive
Speaker 10: towards those people, despite police asking him to lower his
Speaker 10: voice and behave himself multiple times. During the incident, multiple
Speaker 10: people from the neighborhood were out on the street and
Speaker 10: the incident was captured on police body worn camera. That's
Speaker 10: the facts, your honor.
Speaker 3: Thank you all right, Thank you, mister Moler, thank you.
Speaker 1: Your honor.
Speaker 14: And just to clarify, the disorderly behavior preceded the.
Speaker 3: Obstruct defense, right, I figured that, Thank you.
Speaker 1: Your honor.
Speaker 14: Having regard to the seriousness of the offending and the
Speaker 14: matters of mitigation, I will soon address. The Defense says
Speaker 14: that a financial penalty or community based order is appropriate
Speaker 14: in all the circumstances. In determining the appropriate penalty, Defense
Speaker 14: would urge the court to have regard to the following. Firstly,
Speaker 14: mister simmons pleas for the disorderly and the breach of
Speaker 14: bail were entered at an early stage of proceedings last year.
Speaker 14: Given the history of the obstruct charge, Defense accepts that
Speaker 14: less utility attaches to the guilty plea, but we do
Speaker 14: point out that a plea was entered after mister Simmons
Speaker 14: engaged council earlier this year and following negotiations with the prosecution. Nevertheless,
Speaker 14: defense says, mister Simmons, please remain indicative of an acceptance
Speaker 14: of responsibility and a willingness to facilitate the course of justice. Secondly,
Speaker 14: mister Simmons has spent at least a month in custody
Speaker 14: in relation to these matters. Throughout my involvement in these matters,
Speaker 14: mister Simmons has served two separate periods of time in
Speaker 14: Hakia due to his failure to comply with bail conditions
Speaker 14: and his surety being unwilling to resign. Mister simmons time
Speaker 14: in custody has served as another stark reality check that
Speaker 14: he has had time to reflect on his actions and
Speaker 14: the type of person he wants and needs to be. Thirdly,
Speaker 14: mister simmons record does him no favours. However, this appears
Speaker 14: to be mister simons first conviction of obstructing police officers.
Speaker 14: Prior to the commission of these offenses, mister Simmons had
Speaker 14: not committed a substantive offense since about April twenty twenty two.
Speaker 14: And Fourthly, mister Simmons has spoken candidly about his regret
Speaker 14: and disappointment. Mister Simmons has also demonstrated insight into his
Speaker 14: culpability and some victim empathy. Mister Simmons appreciates that the
Speaker 14: safety of police officers carrying out their duties is a
Speaker 14: matter of prime importance, and thus weight must be placed
Speaker 14: on the sentencing consideration of general deterrence. The facts are
Speaker 14: accepted by mister Simmons and he accepts his behavior and
Speaker 14: resistance was unnecessary and simply inexcusable. He instructs he was
Speaker 14: heavily intoxicated at the time. The offending is aggravated by
Speaker 14: mister simmons prolonged unwillingness to comply with police directions, and
Speaker 14: of course his actions also interfered with the health and
Speaker 14: safety of officers. Having regard to all theircumstances, Defense says
Speaker 14: that mister symonds conduct does not fall toward the highest
Speaker 14: end of the scale of seriousness. Turning to mister simons
Speaker 14: background and personal circumstances, I will simply underscore the following.
Speaker 14: Mister Simonds continues to enjoy the support of his mother
Speaker 14: and father, who reside in the Midwest region of the state.
Speaker 14: Mister Simmons reported a good upbringing. Mister Simmons ordinarily resides
Speaker 14: in Perth's eastern suburbs and is currently in receipt of
Speaker 14: payments from Centilink. Mister Simmons instructs he suffers from PTSD
Speaker 14: and depression. Mister Simmons has won the biological daughter and
Speaker 14: has limited access to her. Mister Simmons typically lives a
Speaker 14: quiet life and tends to avoid a lot of interaction
Speaker 14: with other people. Mister Simmons left school at the age
Speaker 14: of fifteen and worked with his father as a machine
Speaker 14: operator on the mines for South thirty two for a
Speaker 14: period of time. He later undertook work as a shearer.
Speaker 14: Mister Simons, I'm told was also a talented sportsman at school.
Speaker 14: And finally, mister Simmonds had a motorbike accident in his
Speaker 14: early twenties which resulted in some head trauma and mister
Speaker 14: Simmons losing his spleen. Unless your honor requires further clarification,
Speaker 14: I have no further submissions.
Speaker 3: Thanks, mister Molar.
Speaker 10: Sergeant I don't wish to be heard, Your honor.
Speaker 3: Mister Moler.
Speaker 2: The only other question I did have in relation to
Speaker 2: obviously the level of intoxication, and I appreciate that that
Speaker 2: was a factor to be considered in terms of his behavior.
Speaker 3: Is there anything that mister Simmons is doing or has
Speaker 3: done to address that.
Speaker 14: I understand there has been some counseling previously, Your Honor,
Speaker 14: perhaps by way of some background, mister Simmons long term
Speaker 14: partner was found dead at their home in twenty fourteen
Speaker 14: with a fatal head wound from a shotgun round. After
Speaker 14: three separate police investigations, mister Simmons was cleared of any
Speaker 14: involvement in his partner's death, and he also gave evidence
Speaker 14: in what was a fairly harrowing coronial inquiry in twenty
Speaker 14: twenty one, and in my ultimate submission, he has never
Speaker 14: been the same since. I'm told by his father that
Speaker 14: his family has facilitated some counseling for him, but perhaps
Speaker 14: those circumstances shed low on his background and in terms
Speaker 14: of the timing of the current offending, it was at
Speaker 14: the same time when mister simmons partner's death was being
Speaker 14: reinvestigated in the Channel seven news podcast The Truth About Amy,
Speaker 14: and as part of that investigation, he had been tracked
Speaker 14: down by an investigative journalist and that is what I'm
Speaker 14: told was the catalyst for the escalation in his alcohol
Speaker 14: consumption and agitation at the time of offending. So put simply,
Speaker 14: I think he has struggled to cope with the emotion
Speaker 14: and trauma, the public attention and the false claims that
Speaker 14: were being spread. So in the circumstances, I think I
Speaker 14: would be urging your honor to perhaps go down a
Speaker 14: fine pathway. I'm a little bit wary that a community
Speaker 14: based order in the circumstances, Whilst it may benefit mister Simmons,
Speaker 14: I'm also mindful of setting him up to fail as well, all.
Speaker 2: Right, which is precisely why I asked the question. So
Speaker 2: thanks mister Mola for picking that up. All right, mister Simmons,
Speaker 2: in relation to these matters, the reason I just asked
Speaker 2: about what you've done to address both the alcoholism and
Speaker 2: the underlying PTSD diagnosis was to see whether it would
Speaker 2: be appropriate for my court to deal with the matter
Speaker 2: by way of a community based order today so that
Speaker 2: you could get those adequate supports. It seems to me, though,
Speaker 2: that you've got family in the background that are willing
Speaker 2: to assist you to ensure that you follow through with
Speaker 2: that support, and hopefully, mister Simmons, you do so, because
Speaker 2: the background that mister Mola has just outlined to me
Speaker 2: is nothing short of tragic, and I have no doubt
Speaker 2: that that's had a huge impact on your life. The
Speaker 2: reality for you, mister Simmonds, is while that might seem
Speaker 2: unfair and horrible to have gone through. If you don't
Speaker 2: choose to address it, you're going to continue to come
Speaker 2: back through to the courts because alcohol is very clearly
Speaker 2: a default position for you when these traumas keep coming back,
Speaker 2: and they will keep coming back until you look into them,
Speaker 2: mister Simmonds and.
Speaker 3: Get the rehabilitation that you effectively need. So, as I say,
Speaker 3: whilst it does feel quite.
Speaker 2: Unfair, if you don't do it, then it prevents you
Speaker 2: from moving forward and we will see you back in
Speaker 2: the courts. It's very important mister Simmons that you follow
Speaker 2: that up. But given the support of your family, I
Speaker 2: will allow that to happen. In relation to the obstruct
Speaker 2: police officer charge, that's the most serious that I need
Speaker 2: to sentence today. It's concerning, mister Simmons that you didn't
Speaker 2: cooperate with police. Had you done so, obviously you wouldn't
Speaker 2: be in the position that you are, but uneducated by
Speaker 2: the level of intoxication. Not that that's any excuse for you,
Speaker 2: mister Simmons, but the reality is it puts it into context,
Speaker 2: certainly in the circumstances where there was essentially relived trauma
Speaker 2: going on in the background at the time for you.
Speaker 2: It is a serious offense, and generally deterrence is the
Speaker 2: most predominant sentencing factor in relation to the charge. But
Speaker 2: I don't find it to be something that is at
Speaker 2: the high end, and I am satisfied it is appropriate
Speaker 2: mister Simmons, to deal with the matter by way of fine,
Speaker 2: taking into account your plea of guilty, the fact you've
Speaker 2: spent some time in custody and there is that acceptance
Speaker 2: and remorse in relation to it. It's evident, mister Simmons,
Speaker 2: on your face today that there is remorse there so
Speaker 2: to the breach of bail with undertaking Section forty six.
Speaker 2: Given the time in custody, there's two nights in police
Speaker 2: custody that I will take into account in relation to
Speaker 2: that breach of bail, in relation to the obstruct police
Speaker 2: officer and the disorderly behavior, it's appropriate in my view
Speaker 2: to deal with it by way of a fine. It
Speaker 2: will be a fine of one thousand dollars that has
Speaker 2: been reduced taking into account the fact that mister Simmons
Speaker 2: has been in custody for one month.
Speaker 3: All right, mister Simmons, you.
Speaker 2: Take care and go and get the help that you
Speaker 2: need because it's obvious to me that that still remains unaddressed.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 2: You will be released once you sign your fine slips.
Speaker 2: Mister Simmons, Thank you, your honor, thank you, Thank you,
Speaker 2: mister Moler.
Speaker 5: Now I don't know about you, Liam, but the thing
Speaker 5: that jumped out at me is that David Simmons is
Speaker 5: yet again able to say exactly what he wants and
Speaker 5: remain unchallenged.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't know where I start on this. I'm
Speaker 1: just I'm absolutely fascinated by this, but I can tell
Speaker 1: you what, Allison, here's my immediate reaction. And it doesn't
Speaker 1: take a Rhodes scholar to figure this out. Somebody needs
Speaker 1: to get in contact with Magistrate Medcalf. Look, perhaps even
Speaker 1: we could do that. I'm not suggesting that she knows
Speaker 1: about this or was aware about this for one moment,
Speaker 1: but if she does know about it, I'd love to
Speaker 1: know what she thinks about it, because, as you know
Speaker 1: and all our listeners would know, in a court room,
Speaker 1: it's all about honesty, right, You have to be honest
Speaker 1: under the law. It's the first tenant. So that the
Speaker 1: stuff that goes on and he's given to a magistrate,
Speaker 1: the information, the evidence, that's given to a magistrate in
Speaker 1: this case in mitigation from his lawyer, from David simmons
Speaker 1: lawyer has to be an honest representation of what's happened. Now,
Speaker 1: let me point out exactly what's gone on here, Rhys Moler,
Speaker 1: and I'm just going to go back to I'm going
Speaker 1: to go back to the transcript of what happened when
Speaker 1: he got up to tell magistrate that David Simmons should
Speaker 1: not be punished very severely for this at all. Right,
Speaker 1: before I get to the key stroke here, he also says,
Speaker 1: as our listeners have heard, he makes this comment. He says,
Speaker 1: mister Simmons, please remain indicative of an acceptance of responsibility,
Speaker 1: an acceptance of responsibility. So let's be completely transparent about this.
Speaker 1: A plea deal has been done, and I'm very surprised
Speaker 1: that the police prosecutor agreed to this. A plea deal
Speaker 1: has been done. So there's two charges. Initially, there's a
Speaker 1: charge of assaulting a public officer and there's a charge
Speaker 1: of obstructing a public officer. And David Simmons has agreed
Speaker 1: to plead guilty to obstructing a public officer, a plea
Speaker 1: that incidentally he pleaded not guilty too when he first appeared.
Speaker 1: So he's changed his plea in return for the more
Speaker 1: serious charge of assaulting a public officer being dropped. And
Speaker 1: this is a bloke. Just remind us again, this is
Speaker 1: a bloke who has already been imprisoned previously for the
Speaker 1: same charge assaulting a public officer. That charge has been
Speaker 1: dropped in order for him to plead guilty on the
Speaker 1: other one. Now in mitigation, he goes on, mister Moler
Speaker 1: on behalf of his client. He goes on to tell
Speaker 1: Magistrate Medcalf about how David Simmons is in a whole
Speaker 1: world of hurt because he's emotionally in turmoil. Allison, it's incredible,
Speaker 1: and he says this, and I'm quoting from the transcript,
Speaker 1: mister Mohler says, and in terms of the timing of
Speaker 1: the current offending, the current offending, so that's obstructing the
Speaker 1: public officer. Mister Moler tells the magistrate quote. It was
Speaker 1: at a time when mister simmons partner's death, that's Amy
Speaker 1: was being reinvestigated in the Channel seven news podcast The
Speaker 1: Truth About Amy, And as part of that investigation, he
Speaker 1: had been tracked down by an investigative journalist. He means me,
Speaker 1: and that is what I'm told was the catalyst for
Speaker 1: the escalation in his alcohol consumption and agitation at the
Speaker 1: time of this offending. Let me repeat that, at the
Speaker 1: time of this offending. So put, simply says mister Molar
Speaker 1: to the magistrate. I think he struggled to cope with
Speaker 1: the emotion and trauma, the public attention and the false
Speaker 1: claims that were being spread. That's our claims. So this
Speaker 1: is pretty serious stuff. So all that emotional turmoil and
Speaker 1: all the pressure we put on him all led him
Speaker 1: to obstructing a public officer and being, as they said,
Speaker 1: very deeply intoxicated. Ok. One problem, mister Molar with this argument.
Speaker 5: Yes, big problem.
Speaker 1: We began work on this investigation on the ground in
Speaker 1: Western Australia and the podcast on the sixth of May
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, almost exactly three months after David Simmons
Speaker 1: was drunk as are skunk and running around obstructing police
Speaker 1: officers in the course of their duty. We first met
Speaker 1: David Simmons a week after that, on the thirteenth of May.
Speaker 1: That's when David Simmons first found out that we were
Speaker 1: investigating how are over three months after the offense. And
Speaker 1: that was at the surprise surprise the Perth Central Law Courts,
Speaker 1: in which David Simmons was very happy to have a
Speaker 1: conversation and it went something like this, f off. That
Speaker 1: was the end of the conversation. So can I just
Speaker 1: come back to the point here, I would say to
Speaker 1: the court, you've got a real problem because you have
Speaker 1: been entirely misled. Now this wasn't challenged by the magistrate
Speaker 1: because the magistrate understandably would have thought Magistrate metcalf would
Speaker 1: have thought, okay, well, you know I'm being told by
Speaker 1: Rhese Mohler. He's an associate at t Han Legal Group,
Speaker 1: the t Han Legal Group. Prior to that, he was
Speaker 1: a senior Federal prosecutor at the Commonwealth DPP Office.
Speaker 5: Of course, it certainly looks like a play deal, but
Speaker 5: I thought I'd better check with Waypole And this time
Speaker 5: they did respond kind of. They said charge negotiations are
Speaker 5: a common practice in criminal proceedings in this state, as
Speaker 5: recognized in the DPP's Statement of Prosecution Policy and Guidelines.
Speaker 5: So neither confirming nor denying.
Speaker 1: So I'm just completely flabbagasted by all this that's.
Speaker 5: The thing, right, Moler should have done checks. I would
Speaker 5: so I sent him an email to find out if
Speaker 5: he would seek to correct the record, and he replied,
Speaker 5: Dear Allison, Unfortunately, I have not acted for mister Simmonds
Speaker 5: since the conclusion of those proceedings. Any submissions were made
Speaker 5: in accordance with the instructions given to me. In these circumstances,
Speaker 5: I won't be providing any official comment on the matter.
Speaker 5: Any queries should be directed to mister Simmons. Well, that's
Speaker 5: easier said than done. Anyway, Moving on, apologies for being
Speaker 5: unable to assist with your inquiries. I hope you have
Speaker 5: a great long weekend. Kind regards real.
Speaker 1: Smaller I mean Simmons, time and time and time again,
Speaker 1: when are people going to wake up? He gets treated
Speaker 1: as an endangered species and it's about time it stopped.
Speaker 1: And if he's going to be in court, it needs
Speaker 1: to be honest.
Speaker 5: Now then you have Sergeant Keys right, the police prosecutor.
Speaker 5: It would have been really easy for him to come
Speaker 5: back and say, actually hang on, you know, like if
Speaker 5: he'd had any inclination or anything.
Speaker 1: Is a great point. There is no challenge to this whatsoever,
Speaker 1: No challenge to this whatsoever. And that's from the police
Speaker 1: prosecutor now coming back to you know, the commissioner representing
Speaker 1: his troops and giving them albeit I think, false confidence.
Speaker 1: Where is the role of the prosecutor in this spot
Speaker 1: on al It's a great point to bring up. Why
Speaker 1: aren't they jumping up? I mean, if you really want
Speaker 1: to defend your troops at ground level, obstructing it an
Speaker 1: assaulting in the course of your duty is bread and
Speaker 1: butter stuff, isn't it. Why isn't he jumping up and
Speaker 1: caught and challenging things. You see, the prosecutor's already made
Speaker 1: an agreement. This is part of the plea deal. I
Speaker 1: can't believe that. And nowhere, nowhere does the prosecutor remind
Speaker 1: the magistrate that, in actual fact, you're honor, this is
Speaker 1: his second conviction along these lines. He was previously convicted
Speaker 1: of assaulting a police officer. This whole hearing, it's just ridiculous.
Speaker 5: But the other thing is I mean, as the magistrate
Speaker 5: said in her response, all of a sudden full sympathy
Speaker 5: for David Simmons because none of this was challenge no one.
Speaker 5: I mean, I suppose as a magistrate you'd expect somebody
Speaker 5: would challenge this if there was inaccuracies, but it wasn't.
Speaker 5: Just like police opposed a bench warrant to arrest him
Speaker 5: when he didn't turn up for Amy's in quest. You know,
Speaker 5: it's just like what is going on here with WA Police.
Speaker 5: I mean, not to mention all the stuff we're going
Speaker 5: to cover off in this second season, you know, beggars
Speaker 5: belief and obviously it's really really concerning watch his space.
Speaker 5: But in the meantime we have purposely laid low for
Speaker 5: a bit, so WA Police has time to continue its
Speaker 5: reignited investigation into Amy's death in preparation of an update
Speaker 5: de brief for the state's Director of Public Prosecution, Rob Owen.
Speaker 4: Once this investigation is complete, WA Police will present all
Speaker 4: findings of the task force to the Office of the
Speaker 4: Director of Public Prosecutions for his consideration.
Speaker 5: That's what WA Police told us in a statement late
Speaker 5: last year. We then contacted the Office of the Director
Speaker 5: of Public Prosecutions and we're told this.
Speaker 8: The ODPP also provides a formal charge advice function at
Speaker 8: the request of an investigative agency, predominantly WA Police. The
Speaker 8: ODPP and investigative agencies have an independent function within the
Speaker 8: criminal justice system, and it is a matter for the
Speaker 8: investigative agency as to whether they accept that advice and
Speaker 8: decide whether to lay charges or not.
Speaker 1: So al they seem to be saying that it's still
Speaker 1: up to wa police as to whether charges are laid,
Speaker 1: if any. Now if they are, the Director then decides
Speaker 1: whether the case is strong enough to prosecute.
Speaker 8: It is the odpp's policy to provide reasons to a
Speaker 8: court for the discontinuance of a prosecution unless the discontinuance
Speaker 8: is for administrative purposes only, or to do so would
Speaker 8: prejudice the administration of justice or cause harm to a victim, witness,
Speaker 8: or accused. It is proper to publicly explain the odpp's
Speaker 8: approach to the question of whether a prosecution is to
Speaker 8: continue or be terminated by reference to the factors in
Speaker 8: the DPP Statement of Prosecution Policy and guard lines, for example,
Speaker 8: by reference to the lack of a prima facie case,
Speaker 8: lack of reasonable prospects of conviction, or that there is
Speaker 8: no public interest in proceeding so.
Speaker 1: In other words, whether they think there's enough evidence to
Speaker 1: secure a conviction. Should Amy's case proceed to trial, And
Speaker 1: that's what we'll be discussing in season two L We've
Speaker 1: already established that Amy could not have shot herself, but
Speaker 1: are the circumstances of Amy having been killed by another
Speaker 1: person by a third party enough for her case to
Speaker 1: go to trial.
Speaker 5: Over the course of this season, we will be revealing
Speaker 5: yet more evidence proving Amy couldn't have killed herself. I mean,
Speaker 5: if there wasn't enough, but also the way the evidence
Speaker 5: has been weighted so far, and there are clear issues
Speaker 5: with that, which we will talk to some high caliber
Speaker 5: people of integrity who will provide their opinions on it.
Speaker 5: And we'll also speak to those who thought that right
Speaker 5: from the beginning Amy's supposed suicide didn't make sense, but
Speaker 5: were sidelined by others who were committed to the suicide
Speaker 5: theory being pushed through no matter what. We will also
Speaker 5: evaluate the case for the prosecution and what it means
Speaker 5: should the DPP and WA police decide not to pursue
Speaker 5: a conviction.
Speaker 1: Yes, bucking the system. What happened to the detective who
Speaker 1: stuck her neck out and refused to agree that Amy's
Speaker 1: death was a suicide.
Speaker 9: I then started to put the coronial file together and
Speaker 9: I identified what outstanding lines of inquiry should be followed,
Speaker 9: for instance, a forensic So I started looking at that
Speaker 9: and then I asked Major Crime for a memo giving
Speaker 9: their critical decisions on what actually how they deemed it
Speaker 9: non suspicious.
Speaker 1: Also new evidence putting the integrity and the reputation of
Speaker 1: WA police under further threat.
Speaker 5: He was so angry and stood so close to her
Speaker 5: that she remembered feeling his spit on her face.
Speaker 1: That's coming up. Great to be back.
Speaker 5: Oh absolutely, Liam. We've got a big job ahead of us,
Speaker 5: and trust me, there's a long way to go here.
Speaker 5: And I tell you we are not giving up on this.
Speaker 5: Amy did not kill herself. The evidence is overwhelming. Then
Speaker 5: we also have a person of interest who had means,
Speaker 5: motive and opportunity. So hang on to your hats. We
Speaker 5: have a lot coming up. You won't want to miss it.
Speaker 14: So listen see.
Speaker 5: Sodation We both know.
Speaker 6: Thenay untill me.
Speaker 5: Hunt.
Speaker 1: If you knew Amy and have information, any information about
Speaker 1: her death, we'd love to hear from you. Just email
Speaker 1: us at the Truth about Amy at seven dot com
Speaker 1: dot au. That's s e v E N The Truth
Speaker 1: about Amy at seven dot com dot Au, or visit
Speaker 1: our website sevenews dot com dot AU, forward slash The
Speaker 1: Truth about Amy. You can also send us an anonymous
Speaker 1: tip at www dot the Truth about Amy dot com.
Speaker 1: If you're on Facebook or Instagram, you can follow us
Speaker 1: to see photos and updates relevant to the case, but
Speaker 1: for legal reasons, unfortunately, you won't be able to make
Speaker 1: any comments. And remember, if you like what you're hearing,
Speaker 1: don't for get to subscribe. Please rate and review our
Speaker 1: series because it really helps new listeners to find us.
Speaker 1: Presenter and executive producer Alison Sandy, Presenter and investigative journalist
Speaker 1: Liam Bartlett, Sound design Mark Wright, Assistant producer Cassie Woodward,
Speaker 1: Graphics Jason Blanford, and special thanks to Brian Seymour. This
Speaker 1: is a seven News production.