Speaker 1: Just before nine o'clock last night, the jury returned guilty
Speaker 1: verdicts against all three defendants.
Speaker 2: It was absolute shambles, to tell you the truth, just
Speaker 2: absolutely really honant.
Speaker 1: Blood on his clothing the day after the alleged attap
Speaker 1: on a shallow mud bank and if fits through a river.
Speaker 2: Basically, I think most of the people are used to me,
Speaker 2: there are good people.
Speaker 1: I think a really important question we need to ask
Speaker 1: is how many Indigenous prisoners in Australia are innocent.
Speaker 2: This is Curtain, a podcast where we pulled back the
Speaker 2: blinds to shine a light on the darkest parts of
Speaker 2: our justice system and ask who are the victims.
Speaker 1: I'm Amy Maguire and I'm Martin Hodgson, a senior advocate
Speaker 1: for the Foreign Prisoner Support Service. And a warning. This
Speaker 1: series contains the names of deceased peoples and has distressing
Speaker 1: content that might upset some listeners.
Speaker 2: Even the victim's mother, Ingrid Bishop, met clear she didn't
Speaker 2: believe Gibson killed her son has publicly reported the push
Speaker 2: for an appeal.
Speaker 1: Blind Freddie can see that there is some significant issues
Speaker 1: in regard to the sentencing of Jene Gibson.
Speaker 2: Welcome to Curtin the podcast, it proved to be that
Speaker 2: a mother's instinct was right. She knew the man convicted
Speaker 2: of her son's murder was not involved. Jeene Gibson, an
Speaker 2: Aboriginal man from the Western Desert of Western Australia, spent
Speaker 2: nearly five years in prison after being wrongfully convicted over
Speaker 2: the death of her son Joshua Ecki. This week, Jene
Speaker 2: Gibson was awarded one point three million dollars by the
Speaker 2: Western Australian government for the time nearly five years that
Speaker 2: he spent in prison for a crime he had no
Speaker 2: involvement in. If it was so obvious to the mother
Speaker 2: of the victim, why wasn't it obvious to the police.
Speaker 2: In fact, there were flaws throughout this case, and they're
Speaker 2: going to largely mirror those you've heard about in Curtain,
Speaker 2: the podcast about Kevin Henry and other Aboriginal peoples around
Speaker 2: Australia who have been imprisoned for crimes they did not commit.
Speaker 2: For those not aware of the case, Joshua Necki's body
Speaker 2: was found on the side of the road in twoenty
Speaker 2: and ten in a February after leaving a nightclub. Mister
Speaker 2: Gibson was implicated in witness statements and was arrested by
Speaker 2: police and held right up until the day he was released.
Speaker 2: Along the way, he was interviewed, but the police didn't
Speaker 2: bring in a proper translator. Mister Gibson speaks his traditional language.
Speaker 2: In fact, he speaks many languages, but English is not
Speaker 2: a language that he is familiar with. It's not one
Speaker 2: that's spoken widely in his community. And yet somehow he
Speaker 2: would come to admit to his involvement in a crime
Speaker 2: he wasn't even present. For the fact is the police
Speaker 2: still have large questions to answer. In fact, those answers
Speaker 2: have never come. How did a man who was not
Speaker 2: in the vicinity of the crime, who had no involvement
Speaker 2: or connection to the victim, where there was no forensic
Speaker 2: evidence to link him to the crime, where all there
Speaker 2: was was the statements of two witnesses whose evidence could
Speaker 2: barely be relied upon, would result in a man spending
Speaker 2: nearly five years in prison for a crime he did
Speaker 2: not commit. Partially, this happened because mister Gibson was forced
Speaker 2: to plead guilty. He confessed to his role in the crime,
Speaker 2: a role he took no part in. That occurred because,
Speaker 2: just like Kevin Henry. There were no lawyers present. Just
Speaker 2: like Kevin Henry, there was two police officers who were
Speaker 2: desperate to get a conviction. Just like Kevin Henry, there
Speaker 2: was people who knew more about this case than they
Speaker 2: were letting on, who were pointing the finger without any
Speaker 2: evidence to match. Just like Kevin Henry, the police failed
Speaker 2: to investigate what really happened on that night, and had
Speaker 2: they bothered to do so, they may have had a
Speaker 2: chance to catch the real killer. Sadly, for his mother
Speaker 2: and for mister Warnecki, his killer has never been caught.
Speaker 2: That is clearly the fault of the police. And it's
Speaker 2: also the fault of the police that Jean Gibson, an
Speaker 2: innocent man, spent nearly five years in prison. Perhaps one
Speaker 2: point three million dollars does not even come close to
Speaker 2: rectifying the damages that have been done to his life,
Speaker 2: to his family's life, to the family of the victim,
Speaker 2: and to the greater community, who once again are reminded
Speaker 2: how incompetent the police can be, and worse that they
Speaker 2: can collude to send an innocent man to prison. This week,
Speaker 2: I want to spend a little bit of time on
Speaker 2: this case and look at where the failings are occurring
Speaker 2: because this continues to happen right around Australia. There's been
Speaker 2: calls following the release of mister Gibson, and once again
Speaker 2: with the payment made to him this week, that further
Speaker 2: changes need to be made about the way police interview
Speaker 2: Aboriginal and Torrestrait Islander people, the way they conduct themselves
Speaker 2: in those interviews, and the way those interviews are managed.
Speaker 2: But once again there's a complete failure to look at
Speaker 2: what the real reason is. Mister Gibson should never have
Speaker 2: been interviewed in the first place, let alone be forced
Speaker 2: to confess to a crime he did not commit. Nowhere
Speaker 2: else to someone who is not within the vicinity of
Speaker 2: a crime, has no links whatsoever to a crime, end
Speaker 2: up being accused by police in an interview room of
Speaker 2: committing murder. That's specially true when there is no other
Speaker 2: evidence to suggest their involvement, not a single shred. And
Speaker 2: of course the police couldn't know what mister Gibson was
Speaker 2: saying because he was attempting to speak in his own language.
Speaker 2: Mister Gibson is so good at his own traditional languages
Speaker 2: that before this was done to him by the police
Speaker 2: of Western Australia. He was the frontman of a successful
Speaker 2: Aboriginal band that toured the Pilber region. All that was
Speaker 2: taken away from mister Gibson, despite all his talent and
Speaker 2: all his ability. The fact that he was an Aboriginal
Speaker 2: man meant that he was instantly targeted by police. The
Speaker 2: fact he was an Aboriginal man meant that two dodgy
Speaker 2: witness statements were all these police needed to be sure
Speaker 2: he'd committed a crime, a crime so serious it was murder.
Speaker 2: But of course he had not committed that crime. The
Speaker 2: question is not about working around the edges of what
Speaker 2: takes place. There's been calls that mister Gibson should have
Speaker 2: been able to have a proper interpreter. At some point
Speaker 2: he was provided an interpreter, but only to read to
Speaker 2: him the statement of his own confession. Once again, as
Speaker 2: we've spoken about in this podcast, whether it's from Western
Speaker 2: Australia and cases like Kevin Henry to a client of mine,
Speaker 2: I've spoken about in the United States, we have people
Speaker 2: confessing to crimes in written statements in languages they were
Speaker 2: not able to write in, meaning quite clearly the arresting
Speaker 2: police and those supposed to be investigating and serving us
Speaker 2: as a community. Wrote those statements knowing full well that
Speaker 2: the details in those statements could not be confirmed, could
Speaker 2: not be known to the person who was going to
Speaker 2: put their name to that statement, and knowing full well
Speaker 2: that when that person put their name their signature to
Speaker 2: that false statement under severe uress by those very police,
Speaker 2: that that person would go to prison for many years.
Speaker 2: As we've spoken about in this podcast, that meant Jane
Speaker 2: Gibson spent five years of his life behind bars. For
Speaker 2: Kevin Henry, It's meant twenty six years behind bars, and
Speaker 2: in Florida in the United States, it meant unheldy As
Speaker 2: was executed, murdered for a crime he did not commit.
Speaker 2: Tinkering around the edges as to whether and when interpreters
Speaker 2: abrought in for such clients, Tinkering around the edges as
Speaker 2: to whether and when lawyers are permitted to enter the
Speaker 2: interview room will not change these very conditions. It's fair
Speaker 2: to say that the police and the justice system work
Speaker 2: on the basis of punishing those who commit the most
Speaker 2: heinous crimes short of cold blooded murder. What more heinous
Speaker 2: crime could a police officer commit than sending an innocent
Speaker 2: man or woman to prison for a crime they knew
Speaker 2: had not been committed by that person. At what point
Speaker 2: is a police officer not just given deak duty for
Speaker 2: a few weeks, but themselves sent to prison for what
Speaker 2: is quite clearly a criminal act. When will the laws
Speaker 2: that are applied to everyone else in this country apply
Speaker 2: to those who wear a badge. They're tasked with protecting
Speaker 2: and serving our community. They're given an enormous responsibility that
Speaker 2: is to find and seek justice for them those who
Speaker 2: have been most wronged. And yet time and time again
Speaker 2: we find examples where they are the ones doing the wrong,
Speaker 2: where the lives of many people, victims of their worst
Speaker 2: crimes and new victims because of their actions, are being destroyed.
Speaker 2: Perhaps it's time to set an example by imprisoning the
Speaker 2: police who commit these criminal acts. This week, rightly, the
Speaker 2: taxpayers of Western Australia paid Gene Gibson one point three
Speaker 2: million dollars plus an extra two hundred thousand dollars dollars
Speaker 2: to manage the trust in which that will be held
Speaker 2: for mister Gibson so he can access that money throughout
Speaker 2: his lifetime. But this is not the first time it's
Speaker 2: happened in Australia, nor is it the first time it's
Speaker 2: happened in WA. In fact, the Attorney General who this
Speaker 2: week signed off on the check for mister Gibson was
Speaker 2: himself active in seeking the release of an innocent man
Speaker 2: a number of years ago, so he knows all too
Speaker 2: well how often the police get it wrong, and perhaps
Speaker 2: that played on mister Quigley's mind as to why he
Speaker 2: did sign this check for Jane and why it is
Speaker 2: an ex gratia payment allowing mister Gibson to take further
Speaker 2: actions and seek further damages from those who wrongfully convicted him.
Speaker 2: The case mister Quigley was involved in was when he
Speaker 2: was himself a member of Parliament and lobbied for the
Speaker 2: release of Andrew Mallard, who spent twelve years in prison
Speaker 2: for a two thousand and six murder of a Perth jeweler,
Speaker 2: Pamela Lawrence, that he didn't commit. It was finally quashed
Speaker 2: by the Western Australian High Court and the taxpayers handed
Speaker 2: over three point twenty five million dollars to mister Mallard.
Speaker 2: Once again, it might sound like a large amount of money,
Speaker 2: but given the torment and torture mister Mallard had gone through.
Speaker 2: Given the more than a decade of his life he
Speaker 2: wrongly spent in prison, is it enough? And once again
Speaker 2: nothing was done to the police officers who caused this
Speaker 2: grave injustice to occur. When mister Ward, an Aboriginal man,
Speaker 2: died of heatstroke in two thousand and eight while being
Speaker 2: transported in a prison van in horrific conditions, three point
Speaker 2: two million dollars was awarded by the West Australian government.
Speaker 2: That's the value the West Australian government placed on the
Speaker 2: life of an Aboriginal elder, three point two million dollars.
Speaker 2: Yet no life of a police officer was detained for
Speaker 2: one day. Those transporting the prison van in which mister
Speaker 2: Ward was held where he died in horrific circumstances, were
Speaker 2: not charged with murder and sent to prison for twenty
Speaker 2: five years, like was the conviction for so many others
Speaker 2: who have been wrongfully convicted, like the Mickelberg brothers also
Speaker 2: in Western Australia, who spent eight and six years in
Speaker 2: prison for the Perth Mint scandal and robbery that they
Speaker 2: didn't commit. John Button, also in Western Australia, spent five
Speaker 2: years in prison after being wrongfully convicted of manslaughter. He
Speaker 2: was awarded just four hundred and sixty thousand dollars. Darryl Beamish,
Speaker 2: a death man, was originally sentenced to death but spent
Speaker 2: fifteen years in prison for the nineteen fifty nine murder
Speaker 2: of a chocolate heiress. The payment he received just four
Speaker 2: hundred and twenty five thousand dollars. The real killer, a
Speaker 2: serial killer known as Eric Edgar Cook, had already confessed.
Speaker 2: Once again. In all these cases, the evidence was available
Speaker 2: from day one. Mister Mallard couldn't have committed the murder.
Speaker 2: In the case of mister Ward, it was a minor crime.
Speaker 2: There was no need for him to be transported. The
Speaker 2: fact he died on that trip is criminal. Mister Button
Speaker 2: and Mickelberg brothers too, served their time in prison despite
Speaker 2: there being virtually no evidence of their guilt and their
Speaker 2: conviction all quashed. And yet despite this, and despite the
Speaker 2: Royal Commission into black debts in custody, we still have
Speaker 2: these cases occurring largely to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,
Speaker 2: but not exclusively. But before I move on and give
Speaker 2: some suggestions as to ways we can overcome some of
Speaker 2: these issues. I want to point to one final, deeply
Speaker 2: disturbing aspect of some of the cases I've mentioned in
Speaker 2: the podcast today. Not only was mister Gibson not able
Speaker 2: to speak English and required and interpret us so that
Speaker 2: the police officers could speak to him clearly, thoughtfully and
Speaker 2: properly over such a serious matter. When mister Gibson spoke
Speaker 2: a number of traditional languages, he also suffered a mental impairment.
Speaker 2: This should have been known to police and probably was,
Speaker 2: and yet their treatment of him then forcing him into
Speaker 2: this confession continued Andrew Mallard as I spoke about, who
Speaker 2: served twelve years in a Western Australian prison for a
Speaker 2: murder he didn't commit, also suffered serious mental health issues.
Speaker 2: None of this was taken into account. In fact, there
Speaker 2: were grave problems along the way with his case, not
Speaker 2: only the interviewing process that took place of him his
Speaker 2: mental state at the time, but also a forensic report
Speaker 2: that was not disclosed to his defense team. Justice Michael Kirby,
Speaker 2: when the case finally made the High Court of Australia,
Speaker 2: said that just that forensic place report alone and the
Speaker 2: fact that it was withheld, should have meant mister Mallard
Speaker 2: was given a retrial, but even after those comments from
Speaker 2: High Court Justice Kirby, the DPP would say that they
Speaker 2: still considered mister Malliard the primary suspect for the murder
Speaker 2: and that should any credible evidence come up in the future,
Speaker 2: that they would seek to prosecute him again. Imagine having
Speaker 2: that hanging over your head, having already served all this
Speaker 2: time in prison for a crime you did not commit,
Speaker 2: suffering a mental illness as he did, having been brutalized
Speaker 2: by the state. The DPP, having got it wrong, already
Speaker 2: having been told how wrong they got it by High
Speaker 2: Court Justice Michael Kirby, still were going to chase this man,
Speaker 2: an innocent man, Andrew Mallard. That was until the pressure
Speaker 2: mounted so heavily that there was a review of the
Speaker 2: case and the Commission on Crime and Corruption in Western
Speaker 2: Australia began looking at a cold case review. What it
Speaker 2: uncovered was the truth mister Mallard had not committed the crime.
Speaker 2: In fact, very early on in the review, a palm
Speaker 2: print was discovered. It matched a mister Roachford. He'd already
Speaker 2: confessed to murdering his girlfriend seven weeks after Miss Lawrence
Speaker 2: was killed in the murder that mister Mallard would be
Speaker 2: charged with. Why wasn't this followed up on? In fact,
Speaker 2: mister Roachford's appearance, in particular, his beer, was far more
Speaker 2: consistent with the original accounts of eyewitnesses than that of
Speaker 2: the appearance of mister Mallard. Their appearances were strikingly different,
Speaker 2: one being that mister Mallard is very tall, and yet
Speaker 2: this did not come up. Further examination of the evidence
Speaker 2: discovered more forensic material, blue paint and flakes of it
Speaker 2: that had been found in missus Lawrence's wounds that were
Speaker 2: present at the crime scene were found on the rucksack
Speaker 2: of mister Roachford. Finally, the police were going to get
Speaker 2: their chance to charge the right man, but on the
Speaker 2: same day he was announced as a person of significant
Speaker 2: interest in the murder, mister Roachford took his own life,
Speaker 2: where he was already spending time as a convicted murderer
Speaker 2: in Albany Maximum security prison. How did the police miss
Speaker 2: a known murderer where there was forensic material to show
Speaker 2: he'd committed the murder, where his description matched that of
Speaker 2: the murderer, and when the man they had mister Andrew Mallard,
Speaker 2: was not present, whose description did not match, where there
Speaker 2: was no forensic evidence, and who suffered a severe mental illness.
Speaker 2: So how can we prevent these tragedies from occurring? Clearly,
Speaker 2: from all the cases we've mentioned today and the ones
Speaker 2: we've spoken about previously in the podcast, such as that
Speaker 2: of Brenton Butler, who was finally found innocent but spent
Speaker 2: considerable time in prison for a murder he did not commit.
Speaker 2: A young boy, teenage boy, an African American boy, who
Speaker 2: was assaulted by police and forced to confess that was
Speaker 2: detailed in the documentary that won an Academy Award Murder
Speaker 2: on a Sunday morning, and we heard earlier on in
Speaker 2: this podcast series from his defense attorney, Patrick McGinnis. What's
Speaker 2: evident is that in many of these cases, in fact,
Speaker 2: all of those I've spoken about today, as well as
Speaker 2: Kevin Henry's and Brenton Butler's, Ahl Diaz's, Gene Gibson's, and
Speaker 2: Andrew Mallard's, the issue begins in the interview room. The
Speaker 2: issue begins when police officers are left alone with innocent people.
Speaker 2: The issue begins when police officers are left alone with
Speaker 2: these people needing to solve a murder, a murder for
Speaker 2: which they currently have no forensic evidence, so they are assuming, suggesting, coercing,
Speaker 2: and under duress, often forcing people to confess to murders
Speaker 2: without any supporting evidence. The original crime that leads to
Speaker 2: these innocent people spending years in prison Kevin Henry still
Speaker 2: behind bars, occurs in that interview room. It's quite clear
Speaker 2: that the police in Australia cannot be trusted when it
Speaker 2: comes to interviewing aboriginal and other vulnerable people one on one,
Speaker 2: whether a person declines legal assistance or not. That interview
Speaker 2: room requires reques hoarding all of the time by CCTV
Speaker 2: and audio. Unlike in the case of mister Henry, those
Speaker 2: video cameras should be turned on. Unlike in the case
Speaker 2: of mister Henry, those audio tapes should not be allowed
Speaker 2: to be tampered with or ever in the possession of
Speaker 2: the police officers who conduct that interview. In fact, the
Speaker 2: cassette tapes that recorded Kevin Henry's false confession were purchased
Speaker 2: by one of the police officers in Rockhampton. They were
Speaker 2: then given to him after the interview was conducted. He
Speaker 2: then held them in his personal possession and we don't
Speaker 2: know for how long. What we do know is that
Speaker 2: those tapes sound very funny. They sound as if they
Speaker 2: could been tampered with. These are not just our own claims,
Speaker 2: but what the judge believed at the initial trial. What
Speaker 2: was also on those tapes was cleared that Kevin Henry
Speaker 2: was coerced into confessing. Again, these are not just our
Speaker 2: claims or the claims of mister Henry. This was backed
Speaker 2: up at trial when the judge found that this evidence
Speaker 2: was inadmissible. Clearly, we need highly trained, highly qualified individuals
Speaker 2: to independently monitor interviews when it comes to police conducting
Speaker 2: an interview around a serious crime. We also need those
Speaker 2: who were qualified in interpreting Aboriginal languages so that people
Speaker 2: like mister Henry and mister Gibson, who speak traditional language
Speaker 2: and who are either illiterate or not proficient in English
Speaker 2: have someone there to guide them through what is being
Speaker 2: written down. Just like Cavin Henry, Jene Gibson put his
Speaker 2: name to a statement he couldn't read, forced by the
Speaker 2: police to do so without knowing that what he was
Speaker 2: signing was a piece of paper that would send him
Speaker 2: to prison for years. An independent person needs to be
Speaker 2: in that room to ensure that each and every individual
Speaker 2: understands fully what is being placed on that paper and
Speaker 2: what a person is signing up to. Where there is
Speaker 2: mental health issues involved, particularly when as in all these cases,
Speaker 2: the police are abundantly aware that a mental health issue
Speaker 2: is clearly involved with the person who is being interviewed.
Speaker 2: That person should be assessed by an independent psychologist and
Speaker 2: it be decided how much support they need for that
Speaker 2: interview to take place and when the appropriate time is
Speaker 2: for that interview to be conducted. Police also need special training,
Speaker 2: and not just around the edges one off training where
Speaker 2: they learn a little bit of cultural competence taught to them,
Speaker 2: often by a football player, a former NRL star or
Speaker 2: the like. If we're going to send people to prison
Speaker 2: for the rest of their life, this has to be
Speaker 2: a process we take seriously. This has to involve people
Speaker 2: with the highest education in the field, people who understand
Speaker 2: these issues. It has to be people that the police
Speaker 2: can't intimidate. In all these cases, police not only intimidated
Speaker 2: the person that would confess, but intimidated witnesses as well,
Speaker 2: people who could have had they not been interfered with
Speaker 2: by the police. Divided the very evidence that would free
Speaker 2: the innocent man. The police might like to think of
Speaker 2: themselves as watching society and watching the community, picking out
Speaker 2: the bad ones amongst us and ensuring they end up
Speaker 2: in court. The problem is where that court case begins,
Speaker 2: where innocence is presumed, where a jury of the peers
Speaker 2: will find a person innocent or guilty, is not a
Speaker 2: fair process because before any of that takes place, the
Speaker 2: police have ensured that the result will only go one way.
Speaker 2: How else do you explain the overincarceration of Aboriginal people
Speaker 2: in Australia and throughout the Torres Strait. That means Aboriginal
Speaker 2: interstrat Island people's are the most imprisoned on planet Earth.
Speaker 2: This is a cold hard fact. These are just the
Speaker 2: very basics and all these relate to is the initial interview.
Speaker 2: But I suggest if we start to get the professionals
Speaker 2: into the interview room, if the police are not allowed
Speaker 2: to conduct their business like a shakedown rather than a
Speaker 2: search for truth, which it should be, we will start
Speaker 2: to see further flaws open up in the process. A
Speaker 2: community should rightly be able to demand justice when the
Speaker 2: most horrific crimes are committed, but a community like Josh's
Speaker 2: mother and Linda's family. The victims left behind should also
Speaker 2: have the confidence that the person who goes to prison
Speaker 2: for the rest of their life is in fact the killer.
Speaker 2: Anything less cannot be tolerated, and this will only change
Speaker 2: when we begin to we lacked the politicians who administer
Speaker 2: and write the legislation that governs police activity. Who watches
Speaker 2: the watchers start to serve the community and not the
Speaker 2: police force or the police union. This means being aware
Speaker 2: of where your politicians stand on these issues. This means
Speaker 2: lobbying your politicians to ensure that these practices are put
Speaker 2: into place. This means making sure your local politician understands
Speaker 2: that they, as well as the police, serve you and
Speaker 2: not the other way around. We intend to continue to
Speaker 2: expose these injustices, to continue to expose the way the
Speaker 2: police continually get murder cases in Australia wrong and continue
Speaker 2: to send innocent people like Kevin Henry to prison, And
Speaker 2: I'll leave you with just one life message. Gene Gibson
Speaker 2: was awarded one point three million dollars for five years
Speaker 2: wrongly behind bars for a murder he did not commit.
Speaker 2: The same level of evidence used to convict him wrongly
Speaker 2: is the same level of evidence used to convict Kevin Henry,
Speaker 2: that is none. The State of Queensland is going to
Speaker 2: have to pay a large sum of money. I suggest
Speaker 2: the sooner Kevin Henry is released the better. The sooner
Speaker 2: that happens, Kevin can get on with his life. The
Speaker 2: sooner that happens, the police officers that conducted this investigation
Speaker 2: can themselves be investigated, that the failings in this case
Speaker 2: can be further exposed, and that perhaps finally the real
Speaker 2: killer will be found and Linda's family can have justice.
Speaker 2: Make no mistake behind the scenes, as this podcast goes on,
Speaker 2: we are doing the work to ensure that happens, and
Speaker 2: we'll leave no stone unturned until Kevin Henry walks free
Speaker 2: an innocent man, and the State of Queensland and the
Speaker 2: government will pay a large sum of money for what
Speaker 2: they've done. That was episode fifty two of Curtain the Podcast.
Speaker 2: To support our work, please go to our Facebook page
Speaker 2: and Twitter page Curtain the Podcast, check out our website
Speaker 2: www dot curtinthepodcast dot com, and please consider a monetary
Speaker 2: contribution to this podcast and our behind the scenes work
Speaker 2: to help Kevin Henry and many other Aboriginal and Torrestrait
Speaker 2: Islander people wrongfully convict. You'll find the link for our
Speaker 2: Patreon page on our website