15: A Shot to the System

The new WA Police investigation, triggered by Season 1 of this podcast, is drawing to a close. However, despite proof Amy couldn’t kill herself, there’s fresh claims Amy’s case has become too political for those involved to hold anyone to account. The team reveals what’s going on behind the scenes.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We
urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline on
thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them at
lifeline dot org dot AU. A twenty four year old

(00:29):
devoted mother of two fleeing a violent relationships am bags
packed car, running, her daughters strapped into the backseat.

Speaker 2 (00:45):
Mom told me that she needed to go back inside
to grab something.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
Panic.

Speaker 3 (00:50):
Amy is dead, sir By, Amy's Dead?

Speaker 1 (00:53):
Eight Confusion World.

Speaker 3 (00:54):
About five minutes they said, n's a suicide.

Speaker 4 (00:56):
One hundred percent.

Speaker 1 (00:58):
This is emmersing. What do you think is really the
honest truth about Amy?

Speaker 3 (01:06):
The Truth About Amy.

Speaker 5 (01:15):
Episode fifteen. I'm Liam Bartlett and I'm Alison Sandy. In
season one of the Truth About Amy, we brought you
the case of a young mum attempting to flee a
violent relationship whose sudden death was quickly ruled a suicide.

(01:38):
Authorities failed to consider the possibility of murder, maintaining there
wasn't enough evidence of domestic violence. But as we now know,
they just weren't looking hard enough. We have photos.

Speaker 1 (01:52):
Erin, I've got a photograph that I believe Amy sent
this to you via text.

Speaker 6 (01:59):
That is it.

Speaker 3 (02:01):
See I got told that they didn't find.

Speaker 1 (02:03):
This, the police didn't find it. Yeah, well we did.

Speaker 7 (02:06):
This is Amy saying, this is my.

Speaker 5 (02:09):
Story, first hand accounts from friends who witnessed the violence,
even while Amy was nine months pregnant, and all I
saw was David with his hands around Amy's neck. We've
uncovered fresh evidence thanks to our listeners, and yeah, she
was dead. We'd been pigging and we'd like founder. Then
we had to burn the clothes because the cops were

(02:32):
chasing us.

Speaker 8 (02:32):
No one talks about their plans for the rest of
the week and the next day.

Speaker 6 (02:36):
To then go and do that.

Speaker 5 (02:37):
And we know that Amy had formulated a plan to
escape with her daughters.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
And she was excited. It was almost done and she
was ready to get the girls out.

Speaker 5 (02:49):
Internationally renowned crime scene expert Scott rode A weighed in, So.

Speaker 9 (02:53):
The left hand can't pull the trigger, the right can
can't pull the trigger, and.

Speaker 1 (02:57):
As an investigator, Liam is becoming pretty she then pull
the trigger.

Speaker 5 (03:02):
He's now the third independent expert to conclude that Amy
could not have killed herself, as well as officers. First
on seeing I said this is suspicious. This is just
not a suicide.

Speaker 1 (03:14):
But both your colleagues agreed with you.

Speaker 7 (03:15):
Yes, oh yea one hundred percent And to this.

Speaker 5 (03:18):
Day now Wa Police has reopened the investigation and the
Director of Public Prosecutions will decide whether there's enough to proceed.

Speaker 6 (03:28):
This has to go to trial. There's enough evidence to
prove that someone killed Amy.

Speaker 5 (03:33):
The truth must come out.

Speaker 1 (03:40):
And welcome to season two of The Truth About Amy.

Speaker 5 (03:44):
Welcome back out, good Aliam. It's a pleasure to be back.

Speaker 1 (03:48):
Nice to have our podcast back. And hopefully, as we've
been saying all last year, most of last year, to
get a result. That's what we're here for. But so
much has happened, hasn't it since our last episode?

Speaker 5 (03:58):
It really is. I mean, you were here for it,
weren't you. The election?

Speaker 1 (04:02):
The WA election. Yeah, Premier Roger Cook now in his
own right, romped it in with a resounding victory and
that election and is now, as they say, out of
Mark McGowan's shadows. So he'll be very.

Speaker 10 (04:13):
Happy, accompanied by his wife Carl and adult children.

Speaker 1 (04:19):
Labor has a new hero. Good evening Friends.

Speaker 5 (04:25):
David Simmons finally fronted the court. Although it seems like
he had to be in prison for that to occur.
He didn't actually turn up.

Speaker 1 (04:33):
That was amazing, wasn't it. We'll talk more about that
in just a moment. The other thing that's happened, of course,
with the Premier Cook now running a new cabinet announcing
a new lineup, is that there is a new police minister. Yes,
but anyway, we'll talk more about that too. But perhaps
the most significant story of the year so far happened
in February when WA's top cop, Cole Blanche, the Commissioner

(04:58):
admittedale that his police force had well and truly, to
use the vernacular, stuffed up the handling of the Mark
Bombarra case.

Speaker 5 (05:09):
Yeah, a bit of a change in tune from when
he was asked about it at the start, but let's
have a listen to that.

Speaker 2 (05:15):
Returning now to our leads story, the Commissioner has admitted
the WA police force failed in the weeks before Jennifer
and Gretel Pateelche's were murdered in their flory at home
last May. Cole Blanche spoke today alongside the gunman's daughter,
Ariel Bombara. The bombshell report into the killings found eight
officers failed to effectively perform their duties, James Carmody has more.

Speaker 1 (05:39):
So before we continue, it's worth noting the significance of
the Bombarra story and what we've learned from it. Now
we already knew Amy's case and the way it was
treated by authorities. We knew that wasn't an anomaly, but
examining just how and why Mark Bombara was able to
do what he did is I think pretty critical in

(06:02):
understanding the current cop culture here in the West and
the level of integrity of those at the top. Now,
Amy's family is still fearful and not without reason, I
think fair to say the focus of WA Police in
reinvestigating Amy's death is more about being seen to do
the right thing rather than actually doing it.

Speaker 5 (06:24):
Yeah, we're at a critical juncture with Amy's case, rightly,
so it's being re examined by WA Police. So now
our listeners, who are very vocal on social media if
you're not already please follow us on Facebook and Instagram,
will undoubtedly all agree their cynicism is not unreasonable.

Speaker 1 (06:43):
No, I don't think it's unreasonable either, which brings us
back to the Bombara tragedy and the way it unfolded
has been voluntarily laid out in this new report, and
for the very first time we're able to see the
issues at the center of modern day policing playing out
almost as if in slow which gives us a sort
of post mortem on WA police, detailing every aspect that

(07:07):
tragically went wrong. Now to be Devil's advocate for a moment,
the issues being experienced by police in Western Australia are
not dissimilar to those from other states. And we've said
this before right that handling DV related cases, domestic violence
related cases is not easy for any police force in

(07:27):
any part of not just Australia or Australia's jurisdictions, but
the entire world. It's a very difficult thing. But the
difference here, I think in WA, as it seems, is
the force's appetite for change and to get better and
to actually reform so that these things have a much
lower chance of happening again. It's much more reticent, I

(07:52):
think in Western Australia than that of their counterparts in
New South Wales and also in Queensland, which we've seen
some substantial changes for the better, but thanks to a
very very brave lady, and I think that's probably an understatement,
but the very vocal Ariel Bombara, we know that her

(08:13):
father Mark was a time bomb waiting to go off,
and when that happened, he made sure that he caused
maximum damage. Now it's not to say that his actions
were premeditated, so let's not get that confused. He was
just completely unhinged and as Ariel had warned, any degree

(08:34):
of disappointment or distress could set him off, and that's
exactly what happened, and as we now know, death and
destruction lay in his wake. Now there was no chance
of justice. All that was left to do was to
pick up the pieces, microanalyze everything that happened, and put
in whatever safeguards possible to prevent it from happening again.
So a complete investigation was inevitable and ultimately there'd be

(08:58):
no hiding the fact that those responsible, whose core responsibility
was to protect the community. I remember, that's what police
officers al are sworn to do.

Speaker 9 (09:09):
Right.

Speaker 1 (09:10):
That's the difference. Because we talk about duty of care
in lots of different workplaces, don't we these days. It's
a bit of a key phrase, But for the police,
it's the ultimate They are sworn under oath to protect.
That's their whole rais ondetra. That's it, that's their job,
and in this case they utterly and completely failed. That's

(09:32):
not going too far. But before I get two worked up,
let's return to James Carmody from the seven Perth newsroom,
who covered the investigation report's release on the day, good afternoon.

Speaker 11 (09:43):
This report makes a series of important findings and recommendations
about how WA police deal with the victims of family
and domestic violence, and how police let down Ariol Bombara
and her mother when they came to officers and warned
them that Mark bomb Barra was dangerous and armed, just
weaked before he shot dead his wife's friend and her

(10:06):
daughter in Floreat Jennifer and Gretel Petelcher's here's what Ariel
Bombara had to say about her dealings with officers.

Speaker 6 (10:13):
We told you that he was going to murder us.
So did you not believe us or did you just
not give a shit? I can have empathy for human
beings making mistakes, but that is a lot of human
beings making a lot of mistakes.

Speaker 11 (10:28):
The report details that fifteen officers in total had direct
dealings with arial Bombara and her mother and more than
half of them. Eight officers failed in performing their duties
to varied levels of seriousness. None were sacked, but they
have all received internal disciplinary action, the details of which
have not been made public. Commissioner Cole Blanche says he's
confident his officers do care, but they failed and were

(10:51):
also failed themselves by a system that isn't working, failures
that let the Bombarra family down. From the time Ariel
and her mother first walked into me You're a Book
at police station and told officers they feared Mark Bombara
would use his licensed firearms to murder them, and she.

Speaker 7 (11:07):
Said, if Mum and I came in screaming and bleeding,
it would have made a very different outcome.

Speaker 1 (11:12):
I've got to agree with that.

Speaker 7 (11:14):
That's why we've got our risk assessment wrong, because two
composed professional people came in and said the same thing
and we didn't see it. We got it wrong. But
I own that system and it's my job to fix it,
and my job is to support our officers so we
never do it again.

Speaker 11 (11:28):
The report makes eighteen recommendations. Eleven are complete, seven are
still in progress.

Speaker 5 (11:34):
Just a bit of background here. Bombara was licensed to
own thirteen guns at the time of his murderous rampage
thirteen thirteen. He was licensed for thirteen. Yes, yes, he
was unbelievable. The book Government has since passed new firearm
laws restricting license holders two between five and ten firearms,
as well as the requirement for mental health checks and

(11:55):
mandatory safety training. Other recommendations include the immediate removal of
a person's firearms when a report of family or domestic
violence has been made against them, and the introduction of
a family violence coordinator to be present at the WA
Police State Operations Command Center at all times to allow

(12:17):
officers to see expert advice. So what's the significance of
this in the context of Amy. Well, as you know,
Amy's case was also mishandled by police officers, and this
has been accepted and acknowledged by WA Police. But there's
a new twist to our investigation, something admittedly we suspected
but now have proof. In order to show you though,

(12:39):
we have to provide some context and explore the handling
of other cases so that you can see how it
works in Western Australia and indeed in many other police jurisdictions.
In Season one, we touched upon the brotherhood and the
pressure put on officers to conform, but at the time
we didn't really understand all the inner machinations and internal
politics of the season will reveal what it's like to

(13:02):
be a police officer in the wild West. But before
we go into all that, let's lay the foundation. He's
Commissioner cole Blanche again. This time, though he's talking less
than a week after the tragedy.

Speaker 7 (13:13):
The information that the police had on the night, the
circumstances would not have met the threshold of a seventy
to our police order. There was a family violence incident
report submitted, so it did I know, there are suggestions
that we did not act. We did act.

Speaker 5 (13:30):
Now we all know hindsight is twenty twenty, but there
really seems to be a stark difference between what cole
Blanche said a week after the incident to what he
said almost a year later after the report. What do
you think, LIAMB Yeah, well.

Speaker 1 (13:43):
I'm I'm glad you asked that.

Speaker 7 (13:44):
Olt.

Speaker 1 (13:45):
I mean, you know, this is a classic. It won't
surprise many of our listeners that this is a constant,
isn't it. This is all about stand and rebut defend, defend, defend,
no matter what. So as soon as something happens, no
matter what you think or believe or any of the

(14:08):
potential scenarios, just get up there and say, we didn't
do anything wrong, nothing happened. You know, nothing to see here, folks,
Please move on. This is this part of the culture
that we're talking about. And then, obviously, after an investigation
that's done by an independent body or authority of some
description that is detailed in its analysis that then you
can't stand up and say the same thing, can you.

(14:30):
You have to respond to what the conclusions are. And
obviously cole Blanche has been caught in that classic pincer
where he has to then say, okay, well we got
it wrong. Now we apologize. Now we say we're going
to reform. You know, let's go through exactly what happened.
So here's two level headed, articulate, smart, distressed women telling

(14:58):
police on several occasions that a dangerous, gun wielding, violent
man with deteriorating mental health issues is going to kill them.
Not only that, on top of that, they are related
to him. One is the wife and the other one
is the daughter. So that to me, that makes even

(15:19):
more impact on what they're saying, and that that plea
for help doesn't even warrant a seventy two hour protection order. Now,
just you know, think about that in your mind for
a moment. I mean, let's put it another way. An angry, cruel,

(15:39):
vicious abuse of sick mentally sick and a rational man
remains free and in possession of a loaded gun. And
as you've just pointed out out, he had no less
than thirteen registered firearms. So the police can dial that
up on a computer at any moment, any instant, in
any police station around Western Australia, so they know exactly

(16:03):
what they're dealing with, right, they know how many guns
he's got. But this bloke, this bloke is still permitted
and this is not overstating it to threaten the lives
of his family, because his family is telling the police
that he's threatening them and nothing is done about it.
So even before an investigation, you've got to be thinking,
hang on, hang on, there's something wrong here, isn't there.

(16:26):
He's got to be something wrong with that process if
you've got half a brain. But the Commissioner WA Police says, no,
they took appropriate action, that's what he said, And this
is even with the rear view mirror having been cleaned,
because at that stage when he said that, remember two
people were dead. So he then goes on to defend

(16:49):
his officer's actions or inaction, saying an internal investigation is
underway as some sort of acquiescence on his part. That's
sort of something from nineteen sixty eight. I don't worry,
internals are looking after it. It'll be fine, because that's
meant to make you feel better. Then six months later,
the Commissioner again fronts the media following the conclusion of

(17:11):
the investigation, which is undertaken by WA Police but overseen
by the Triple C, by the State Coroner and the Ombudsman, acknowledging,
as we've just discussed our yes, mistakes were made. And
this is after the investigation report states very very clearly
and concisely WA Police is completely to blame and eighteen

(17:34):
new recommendations will be introduced to minimize the risk of
this ever happening again. I mean, does he have any
other choice but to copy it on the chin? Clearly not?
Clearly not, And that's what worries me. So does what's right,
what the right actions are? Does that have to be

(17:56):
completely spelled out to WA Police before they do do
the right thing. That's the very simple question. It sounds
like something out of an episode of the Simpsons, but
it's pretty obvious. I have a copy of the internal
investigation report, not the full one that wasn't released publicly,
but the sanitized one given to the media, and that's

(18:18):
bad enough. And it starts with the summary of WA
Police's contact with Ariel Bombara and her mother Rowena, including
here we go, I'll give you this in bullet points.
Their initial attendance at mirror Booker Police Station, then a
telephone call from Ariel to Perth Police Station while she
was still at mirror Booker Police Station. A subsequent telephone

(18:42):
call from Ariel to the Perth Family Violence Team, then
the triage process by the Fremantle Family Violence Team, then
the police attendants at the Bombara family home to allow
Ariel and her mum to retrieve personal items, and finally,
last but not least, the inability of support services to

(19:04):
contact the Bombarra family to provide follow up support. So literally,
you know, if you go around the monopoly board, it's
from start to go, you do the full lap. Do
not pass anything straight to jail.

Speaker 6 (19:16):
I mean.

Speaker 1 (19:17):
The report states that WA Police was warned on multiple
occasions about the risk post by Mark Bombara, and those
warnings were legitimate. That's what the report says. Now that's
not me. I'll say that again. Those warnings were legitimate.
That's what the report says. So I think what they're
saying here is that what they were told at the time,

(19:39):
as opposed to what they know now was enough. It
was enough to meet the threshold of the seventy two
hour police order. And it goes on to say WA
Police was aware that and I'll give you these in
headline form again, Ariel's parents had recently split. WA Police
knew that. WA Police also knew Ariel and her mum

(20:00):
feared Mark Bombarra's mental state was deteriorating, partly due to
a recent minor stroke, and he was capable of murdering them.

Speaker 5 (20:08):
That's a big one, isn't it.

Speaker 1 (20:11):
WA Police also was aware that they had a long
history of abusive, controlling and coercive behavior which was escalating.
They were also aware that, as well as access to
licensed firearms and a history of not securing them properly.
That was all on the record and WA Police was
also aware that they were concerned that one of his

(20:31):
guns could not be accounted for. How many more red
flags do you need?

Speaker 9 (20:36):
So?

Speaker 1 (20:37):
The report concluded, have a listened to this.

Speaker 12 (20:40):
WA Police attended approximately sixty thousand family and domestic violence
related matters in twenty twenty four, often involving dangerous and
complex circumstances. Whilst officers endeavored to make the best decision
every time, the consequences of wrong decisions can be catastrophic.
Police systems, policies and procedures must provide clarity to officers

(21:04):
so they can make the best decision in every circumstance.
WA Police have completed eleven of the recommendations and are
progressing well with the remaining seven. We are committed to
implementing all eighteen recommendations, supported by the highly valued input
and guidance from specialist women's domestic and family violence services
and those with lived experience. The Bombara and Patelchez families

(21:28):
have met with the Commissioner of Police to discuss the
outcomes of this investigation. The Commissioner has personally apologized to
the families for the shortcomings of the police response. Repeat
offenders who cannot demonstrate a change in their behavior have
no place in our community and police will always recommend
to the courts that they remain in prison.

Speaker 1 (21:55):
Thank you everyone, Thank you for being here now, just
so you're getting the full picture. Here included almost everything
that Commissioner Blanche had to say at that media conference
on the first of February.

Speaker 7 (22:07):
Sadly, we estimate only twenty percent of victims of domestic
violence report those incidents to police. Eighty percent of those
in a violent relationship are often living in silence.

Speaker 1 (22:21):
So, going back to those stats, the statistics cited in
the report, WA police attended sixty thousand DV incidents.

Speaker 5 (22:31):
That figure is incredible, Liam. So dividing that by the
number of days in a year, it equates to police
attending about one hundred and sixty five a day. But
that's just the ones we know about. If that's just
twenty percent of the totality, we're actually looking at eight
hundred and twenty domestic violence incidents every single day. That's

(22:53):
three hundred thousand a year. Astonishing.

Speaker 1 (22:56):
Yeah, that's incredible, isn't it. It is incredible. Really puts
into context, I think are the extent of Australia's domestic
violence problem. When you look at these figures, and remember
these figures are just for one state. So it begs
the question too, if you're a police officer looking into
one of these one hundred and sixty five incidents that
happen every day, how do you choose which one should

(23:19):
take priority?

Speaker 5 (23:21):
According to the commissioner, it's those considered to be the
highest risk. But who makes that determination.

Speaker 1 (23:27):
Well precisely, And of course we weren't at the press conference.
We haven't had much luck getting on Cold Lanche's mailing
list for obvious reasons. But this is what the police
commissioner told journalists who were there.

Speaker 7 (23:40):
The finding is that officers did not correctly assess the risk.
Therefore the available powers under the Restraining Orders Act and
the Firearms Act were not exercised appropriately. A correct risk
assessment would have provided sufficient grounds to issue a police
order to Mark Bombarra, and that power then extended to
seizing lawful firearms. The second key finding from the investigation

(24:06):
is that insufficient action was taken by police to explore
whether Mark Bombarrow was a fit and proper person to
hold a firearms license based on medical grounds, despite police
being told of his deteriorating medical condition by the family.
And the third and final key finding is that insufficient
action was taken by police to identify and investigate alleged

(24:29):
firearm offenses, which included a report of an unsecure firearm.
That investigation then took the entire organization, including myself, to
look for recommendations on how we can ensure that this
never happens again.

Speaker 5 (24:44):
So my reading of this is, upon receiving a family
violence complaint, if the alleged perpetrator has firearms, they will
automatically be seized, regardless of the risk assessment made by
the police officer who was recording the details. The police
still get to use their own discretion to determine other aspects,

(25:04):
such as whether to consult the new family violence coordinator.
It's also worth noting that even though WA Police recognized
the error of detectives calling off forensics in Amy's case,
that choice remains discussionary. I contacted WA Police to verify
and was told in the event of a sudden death,

(25:24):
officers on site will determine the cause and circumstances. However,
if it's an obvious murder, whatever that is, forensics will attend.
Following Amy's death, new regulations relating to firearm related deaths
were introduced, ensuring officers consulted with homicide who, along with
uniform police and district detectives, would make a decision as

(25:46):
to whether forensics were required. But a forensics team still
doesn't automatically attend a scene in the event of an
unexpected sudden death involving a firearm like Amy's aerial Bombara
remained skeptical and intensely critical of WA police. Despite the
concessions made.

Speaker 6 (26:07):
For women in domestic violence relationships, the most dangerous time
for them is when they decide to leave and the
weeks and months that follow. Often they've chosen to stay
longer than they wanted to for this exact fear of
the danger, and are finally leaving because the danger of
staying outweighs the danger of leaving. After receiving countless messages

(26:29):
from women sharing their own stories of police not taking
them seriously, resulting in real violent consequences for these women
and children, I'm not at all surprised that no action
was taken against my father. I think this was the
perfect storm of apathy and compassion fatigue from officers, combined

(26:50):
with shoddy systems, outdated policies and insufficient training and support
that resulted in a lethal outcome. Jenny and Grettel Ptelcius
should not have been murdered. They should not have had
to die in order for the police to start taking
domestic violence seriously.

Speaker 3 (27:09):
But here we are.

Speaker 6 (27:11):
The sad reality is that had my father come to
the correct location and murdered my mum and me, we
would have become just another domestic violence statistic that disappears
was little for the investigation. So whilst I'm torn because
I want to shout and swear on behalf of all
the women who were murdered and the people who were

(27:31):
left behind to deal with the devastating aftermath, I know
that won't change anything. So I want to say that
I truly appreciate the work that has gone into this investigation.
I appreciate that you listened to me. Well, I didn't
give you much of a choice, but you listened and
you allowed me to have input into this process. And

(27:53):
I am truly grateful, and I am supportive of the
recommendations that have come out of this, and I appreciate
that you will continue to keep the door open to me.
Because whilst this report focused largely on the guns due
to these specific circumstances of the case. We know that
this isn't a gun issue, it's a domestic violence issue.

(28:15):
So what I want to see as the next step
is how WA Police can learn from our case and
apply it across the board, because every woman and child
deserves equal protection and the system shouldn't be set up
to rely on victim survivors raising these issues.

Speaker 5 (28:37):
I asked WA Police about the apology to the Bombara
and Pateelchez families, in particular the timing, and was advised
to seek access to the audio of a media conference
held by the Commissioner, which you've just heard and told
there was quote nothing further to add at this time now.
I couldn't find any reference to an apology at the

(28:57):
media conference. The commissioner did have, however, answer many other questions,
including the disciplinary action taken against the officers involved, and
said none of them were sacked.

Speaker 7 (29:09):
One of the things I didn't provide them was a
system where they could make a correct risk assessment. They
deal as you know, and this is not an excuse.
We made errors here and we are standing here. I
am standing here admitting those errors for these humans what's
going through their head at the moment. They are very,
very so hard on themselves. I've had them in tears.

(29:32):
I think they are all reflecting on the impact they've
had on many families. I think they are good people.
They made errors, they work hard, they stepped forward to
support our community. But there is a disciplinary process. They
have to be held accountable for making the wrong decision,
and they were. I can guarantee you those officers will

(29:56):
know exactly how to respond to.

Speaker 11 (29:57):
This in the future.

Speaker 5 (29:59):
Now, Liam, I don't know about you, but I couldn't
help but reflect back to the reaction of detectives who's
stuffed up in Amy's case. They didn't appear apologetic at all.
In fact, they remained adamant that Amy took her own life,
and the force didn't just back this but agreed wholeheartedly.

Speaker 9 (30:16):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (30:18):
Well, as you know, neither detectives Kirkman nor Weedman ever
appeared to be apologetic, and despite all the evidence making
it clear that Amy was unable to shoot herself, WA
Police continued to support them right up until the twenty
twenty one inquest. Only after the inquest did WA Police

(30:39):
issue a letter of regret so that wasn't a formal apology.
I mean, some people might think we're splitting straws here, Allison,
but a letter of regret to the mother of a
dead daughter, he's not the same as a personal apology
in my opinion. Especially you'll recall the letter of regret
got one of the dates wrong within the letter, so

(31:01):
clearly whoever fact checked and looked at the typos didn't
do it very closely or didn't really care too much
about it. So it was done pretty ad hoc, you've
got to say. So it was all a bit, you know,
to me, it was as a bit of a bottom
covering exercise. But you know, again that was because forensics
were called off at the scene in Amy's case, you know,

(31:24):
so they didn't have anything else to go on. I mean,
so in the Bombara case, you've got two women who
were dead, and no policeman loses their job. Nobody is sacked,
No one is sacked. The commissioner still stands up and says,
I stand by my officers. What does that say about
the culture in the police force If you can still

(31:45):
do that. We've already acknowledged that it's a very very
difficult job that they're facing and DV cases are very
very difficult to deal with. But we've also acknowledged and
you have to be blind, Freddie, not to have this
sort of shoved in your face that independent authorities have
said they got it wrong, got it wrong, got it wrong,
got it wrong. So where is the accountability? I'll say

(32:06):
it again. These people are not only it's not just
their job to keep people safe, they are sworn under
oath to protect. That is the whole reason. That is
their mission statement in life. That is the job of
a policeman. Now, if you get the job wrong and
you still keep your job, what does that say to
the rest of the people in the ranks.

Speaker 5 (32:23):
Yeah, well, I mean obviously the way that they handled
Amy's case, I mean that was disgraceful and they close ranks.
But also remember that Cole Blanche, that was the name
on the letter of regret, who was Deputy Commissioner at
the time and the police Commissioner presiding over WA Police
throughout the investigation into Amy's death prior to the one

(32:45):
now being undertaken was Chris Dawson, who is now the
Governor of Western Australia. You had some dealings with him,
didn't you, Liam.

Speaker 1 (32:54):
Yeah, I did, and I think you can see some
patterns emerging here that Chris Dawson has passed on well
and truly to Cole Blanche. I mean, Cole's learned some
valuable lessons, I think because with Chris Dawson, he's a
marvelous political player. And it's really all about the top echelon,
you know, the top tiers, the hierarchy of the police force.

(33:14):
I mean, if you keep in suite with the government
of the day, you will eventually be rewarded. As you've
just pointed out, Chris Dawson is now the Governor of
Western Australia. So the police and the state government and
the people at the top, Chris Dawson's the Mark McGowan's
had very close relationships, very close relationships, and so they
end up getting rewarded. But what happens to the rank

(33:37):
and file and what they're doing to the public, you know,
how's that culture going? As we discussed, and I mean
we end up having in this state a Minister for police.
We don't have a Minister of Police now. The police
minister has just been changed because of the cabinet lineup reshuffle.
As we've discussed at the start of the program. Perhaps

(33:58):
you know, in a blue moon you might hear the
minister come out and criticize the police or call for
change or call for reform or something. That's what a
minister of the crowd is supposed to do because they
get paid by the taxpayer, not by the rank and
file that's called a police union. But I think cole
Blanche has learned those lessons very well. That not that
he didn't know them before he took the top job,

(34:20):
because to get to that level in those sort of
paramilitary organizations such as a police force, you know, you
have to be very conscious of politics. And so I
think in that sense he's done a very good job.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that the culture of the
forces any better.

Speaker 5 (34:35):
Well, you think you'd also have to protect the reputation
and the integrity of w a police and I would
say at this stage he's not, particularly in relation to
Amy's case, not doing a good job at that.

Speaker 1 (34:48):
Well. I think the reputation has been severely dented by
a whole stack of failings, you know, litany of failings
over the past fifteen twenty years our So you know,
I think there's a lot of work to be done
on that. But can we just go back to this
investigation and the investigation report into the bombar A killings,
because there's one more thing I noticed about it, and
it was this last line.

Speaker 12 (35:08):
Repeat offenders who cannot demonstrate the change in their behavior
have no place in our community, and police will always
recommend to the courts that they remain in prison.

Speaker 1 (35:18):
Okay, So let's look at that in context of Amy
Wensley's case. Now her partner at the time of her death,
David Simmons, who has a history of violent behavior, has
been imprisoned once for assaulting a police officer, and that
officer being Larry Blandford, who was the first on the

(35:38):
scene at Amy's death. David Simmons served nine months for that,
then he was released and charged again for allegedly assaulting
another police officer. And every time this matter was due
before court, he just decided he wouldn't turn up. They
then issue an arrest warrant and then cancel it when
he turns up late and he schedules a new time.

(36:01):
So it fits in with David simmons last style in
which the same thing happens. I mean, he's just routing
the system, isn't he isn't he just gaming the system
at taxpayers expense?

Speaker 5 (36:10):
Yeah? That's been a real concern to me too. So
I contacted the WA Justice Department and asked them what measures,
if any, would be put in place to ensure he
turns up next time, or could constant no shows just
continue indefinitely? This was the reply.

Speaker 13 (36:27):
David Simmons appeared in Perth Magistrates Court on eight January
twenty twenty five, where the arrest warrant was canceled. He
was granted bail with conditions and a five thousand dollars
personal undertaking and a three thousand dollars surety. The matter
is next listed in Perth Magistrates Court on fifteen May
at nine point thirty am for.

Speaker 12 (36:48):
A call over.

Speaker 1 (36:49):
Okay, so, as it turns out the fifteenth of Mayors
is now no longer happening l because surprisingly this was
brought forward again after David Simmons ended up at Hakia
Prison is the three man prison in wa for breaching bail.
So on the twenty ninth of February, via video link
from Hakia, Simmons appear before Magistrate Melita Medcalf. He was

(37:13):
represented by defense lawyer Rhys Mohler while Sergeant Keyes appeared
for the police prosecution. Now we obtained a copy of
the transcript of exactly what happened in that case.

Speaker 12 (37:26):
Have a listen staying with Hakia from the s list.

Speaker 10 (37:29):
Simmons, David Robert Simmons.

Speaker 3 (37:40):
Is your name, David Robert Simmons. Can you hear us?

Speaker 2 (37:43):
Okay, mister Simmons, Yes, okay, thank you. I've got your
lawyer here.

Speaker 3 (37:46):
I will speak to him and come back to you.

Speaker 14 (37:49):
Please the court, your honor. I am mister Molar, I
appear for mister Simmons, your honor. This is a prosecution
Form six application in effect. If Charge one one eight
eight of twenty twenty four is put to mister Simmons,
a plea of guilty will be entered thereafter. I anticipate
the prosecution will have an application to make with respect
to one four one eighty nine. There are pleas of

(38:10):
guilty to the two remaining charges. We can proceed to
sentence today and then we would seek for a trial hearing,
which I believe is listed on fifteen may to be vacated.

Speaker 2 (38:21):
All right, mister Simmons, I will read the one charge
to you. That's a previous plea of not guilty on
May thirteen. The allegation is on March eighth, twenty twenty four,
in north Bridge, you obstructed a police auxiliary officer in
the performance of that officer's function. Do you understand the charge?

Speaker 5 (38:38):
Yes, your honor?

Speaker 3 (38:39):
How do you wish to plead?

Speaker 14 (38:41):
What was that?

Speaker 5 (38:42):
Sorry?

Speaker 1 (38:42):
That was the one I pled not guilty to.

Speaker 3 (38:44):
Yes, yes, so you've previously pleaded not guilty to it.

Speaker 2 (38:47):
But I understand you're changing your plea now that's the
obstruct police officer charge.

Speaker 1 (38:52):
The yes, no pardon? Sorry? Can you read that again?

Speaker 2 (38:58):
On March eighth, t twenty four in north Bridge, the
allegation is that you obstructed a police auxiliary officer in
the performance of the officer's function.

Speaker 3 (39:07):
Do you understand the charge?

Speaker 1 (39:09):
Yes?

Speaker 3 (39:09):
Okay, how do you wish to plead guilty? Thank you?

Speaker 2 (39:13):
And on that basis, then, Sergeant, I understand that the
assault public officer one four one eight nine.

Speaker 3 (39:18):
Will be dismissed. Yes, your honor, all right, so an
order will.

Speaker 2 (39:21):
Be made to dismiss that charge pursuant to Section twenty five,
and I will hear the facts.

Speaker 10 (39:26):
Thank you, your honor. At seven ten pm on the
eighth of March twenty twenty four, the accused is conveyed
by police to the Perth Watchhouse. Whilst there, the accused
was physically restrained by police auxiliary officers against the wall
as he is abusive, resisting and made threats towards one
of them. While the police auxiliary officers were bringing the

(39:47):
accused into the admission room through a corridor, the accused
began to struggle with Ko Greenham, causing his shoulder to
impact the corner of a door frame. The accused was
then brought to a padded cell due to his previous behavior.
He was then informed by the Chaos that under Section
one three five of the CIA, the strip search would
be conducted and asked if he would comply. He was

(40:10):
then asked several times if he would comply, However, he
refused to. As a result, under Section sixteen of the CIA,
reasonable forces used to conduct the search. The KO sustained
cuts and abrasions to his arm during the incident. That's
the facts, your honor. Thank you, there is a record,
I believe.

Speaker 2 (40:30):
Yes, I've got a copy of that. Thanks hang on, yes,
I do, Thank you, mister Moler.

Speaker 14 (40:34):
Does your honor need to hear the facts in relation
to the disorderly Yes, I do, sorry, and I imagine
the breach.

Speaker 3 (40:40):
Of bail and a breach of bail can be added
to the prosecution notice. Yes, Missus Simmons.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
I just want to let you know that we actually
pressed mute on the video link at the moment because
we've got a lot of background noise. So if for
some reason you needed to say something, just wave your
hand and we will come back to you.

Speaker 3 (40:55):
Okay, thanks Sergeant.

Speaker 10 (40:56):
At five point thirty one on the eighth of March
twenty twenty four, the accused was at twenty three in Armadale.
Police located the address in relation to an incident that
had happened between the accused and other occupants of the house.
The accused is deemed to be heavily intoxicated. Upon police arrival,
and whilst police was speaking to the other people at

(41:16):
the scene, the accused started to shout and be abusive
towards those people, despite police asking him to lower his
voice and behave himself multiple times. During the incident, multiple
people from the neighborhood were out on the street and
the incident was captured on police body worn camera. That's
the facts, your honor.

Speaker 3 (41:35):
Thank you all right, Thank you, mister Moler, thank you.

Speaker 1 (41:38):
Your honor.

Speaker 14 (41:39):
And just to clarify, the disorderly behavior preceded the.

Speaker 3 (41:42):
Obstruct defense, right, I figured that, Thank you.

Speaker 1 (41:45):
Your honor.

Speaker 14 (41:45):
Having regard to the seriousness of the offending and the
matters of mitigation, I will soon address. The Defense says
that a financial penalty or community based order is appropriate
in all the circumstances. In determining the appropriate penalty, Defense
would urge the court to have regard to the following. Firstly,
mister simmons pleas for the disorderly and the breach of
bail were entered at an early stage of proceedings last year.

(42:09):
Given the history of the obstruct charge, Defense accepts that
less utility attaches to the guilty plea, but we do
point out that a plea was entered after mister Simmons
engaged council earlier this year and following negotiations with the prosecution. Nevertheless,
defense says, mister Simmons, please remain indicative of an acceptance
of responsibility and a willingness to facilitate the course of justice. Secondly,

(42:33):
mister Simmons has spent at least a month in custody
in relation to these matters. Throughout my involvement in these matters,
mister Simmons has served two separate periods of time in
Hakia due to his failure to comply with bail conditions
and his surety being unwilling to resign. Mister simmons time
in custody has served as another stark reality check that
he has had time to reflect on his actions and

(42:55):
the type of person he wants and needs to be. Thirdly,
mister simmons record does him no favours. However, this appears
to be mister simons first conviction of obstructing police officers.
Prior to the commission of these offenses, mister Simmons had
not committed a substantive offense since about April twenty twenty two.
And Fourthly, mister Simmons has spoken candidly about his regret

(43:17):
and disappointment. Mister Simmons has also demonstrated insight into his
culpability and some victim empathy. Mister Simmons appreciates that the
safety of police officers carrying out their duties is a
matter of prime importance, and thus weight must be placed
on the sentencing consideration of general deterrence. The facts are
accepted by mister Simmons and he accepts his behavior and

(43:40):
resistance was unnecessary and simply inexcusable. He instructs he was
heavily intoxicated at the time. The offending is aggravated by
mister simmons prolonged unwillingness to comply with police directions, and
of course his actions also interfered with the health and
safety of officers. Having regard to all theircumstances, Defense says

(44:01):
that mister symonds conduct does not fall toward the highest
end of the scale of seriousness. Turning to mister simons
background and personal circumstances, I will simply underscore the following.
Mister Simonds continues to enjoy the support of his mother
and father, who reside in the Midwest region of the state.
Mister Simmons reported a good upbringing. Mister Simmons ordinarily resides

(44:23):
in Perth's eastern suburbs and is currently in receipt of
payments from Centilink. Mister Simmons instructs he suffers from PTSD
and depression. Mister Simmons has won the biological daughter and
has limited access to her. Mister Simmons typically lives a
quiet life and tends to avoid a lot of interaction
with other people. Mister Simmons left school at the age

(44:43):
of fifteen and worked with his father as a machine
operator on the mines for South thirty two for a
period of time. He later undertook work as a shearer.
Mister Simons, I'm told was also a talented sportsman at school.
And finally, mister Simmonds had a motorbike accident in his
early twenties which resulted in some head trauma and mister
Simmons losing his spleen. Unless your honor requires further clarification,

(45:07):
I have no further submissions.

Speaker 3 (45:09):
Thanks, mister Molar.

Speaker 10 (45:10):
Sergeant I don't wish to be heard, Your honor.

Speaker 3 (45:13):
Mister Moler.

Speaker 2 (45:13):
The only other question I did have in relation to
obviously the level of intoxication, and I appreciate that that
was a factor to be considered in terms of his behavior.

Speaker 3 (45:22):
Is there anything that mister Simmons is doing or has
done to address that.

Speaker 14 (45:26):
I understand there has been some counseling previously, Your Honor,
perhaps by way of some background, mister Simmons long term
partner was found dead at their home in twenty fourteen
with a fatal head wound from a shotgun round. After
three separate police investigations, mister Simmons was cleared of any
involvement in his partner's death, and he also gave evidence
in what was a fairly harrowing coronial inquiry in twenty

(45:48):
twenty one, and in my ultimate submission, he has never
been the same since. I'm told by his father that
his family has facilitated some counseling for him, but perhaps
those circumstances shed low on his background and in terms
of the timing of the current offending, it was at
the same time when mister simmons partner's death was being
reinvestigated in the Channel seven news podcast The Truth About Amy,

(46:11):
and as part of that investigation, he had been tracked
down by an investigative journalist and that is what I'm
told was the catalyst for the escalation in his alcohol
consumption and agitation at the time of offending. So put simply,
I think he has struggled to cope with the emotion
and trauma, the public attention and the false claims that
were being spread. So in the circumstances, I think I

(46:33):
would be urging your honor to perhaps go down a
fine pathway. I'm a little bit wary that a community
based order in the circumstances, Whilst it may benefit mister Simmons,
I'm also mindful of setting him up to fail as well, all.

Speaker 2 (46:46):
Right, which is precisely why I asked the question. So
thanks mister Mola for picking that up. All right, mister Simmons,
in relation to these matters, the reason I just asked
about what you've done to address both the alcoholism and
the underlying PTSD diagnosis was to see whether it would
be appropriate for my court to deal with the matter
by way of a community based order today so that

(47:08):
you could get those adequate supports. It seems to me, though,
that you've got family in the background that are willing
to assist you to ensure that you follow through with
that support, and hopefully, mister Simmons, you do so, because
the background that mister Mola has just outlined to me
is nothing short of tragic, and I have no doubt
that that's had a huge impact on your life. The

(47:28):
reality for you, mister Simmonds, is while that might seem
unfair and horrible to have gone through. If you don't
choose to address it, you're going to continue to come
back through to the courts because alcohol is very clearly
a default position for you when these traumas keep coming back,
and they will keep coming back until you look into them,
mister Simmonds and.

Speaker 3 (47:48):
Get the rehabilitation that you effectively need. So, as I say,
whilst it does feel quite.

Speaker 2 (47:55):
Unfair, if you don't do it, then it prevents you
from moving forward and we will see you back in
the courts. It's very important mister Simmons that you follow
that up. But given the support of your family, I
will allow that to happen. In relation to the obstruct
police officer charge, that's the most serious that I need
to sentence today. It's concerning, mister Simmons that you didn't

(48:15):
cooperate with police. Had you done so, obviously you wouldn't
be in the position that you are, but uneducated by
the level of intoxication. Not that that's any excuse for you,
mister Simmons, but the reality is it puts it into context,
certainly in the circumstances where there was essentially relived trauma
going on in the background at the time for you.

(48:36):
It is a serious offense, and generally deterrence is the
most predominant sentencing factor in relation to the charge. But
I don't find it to be something that is at
the high end, and I am satisfied it is appropriate
mister Simmons, to deal with the matter by way of fine,
taking into account your plea of guilty, the fact you've
spent some time in custody and there is that acceptance

(48:58):
and remorse in relation to it. It's evident, mister Simmons,
on your face today that there is remorse there so
to the breach of bail with undertaking Section forty six.
Given the time in custody, there's two nights in police
custody that I will take into account in relation to
that breach of bail, in relation to the obstruct police
officer and the disorderly behavior, it's appropriate in my view

(49:20):
to deal with it by way of a fine. It
will be a fine of one thousand dollars that has
been reduced taking into account the fact that mister Simmons
has been in custody for one month.

Speaker 3 (49:31):
All right, mister Simmons, you.

Speaker 2 (49:33):
Take care and go and get the help that you
need because it's obvious to me that that still remains unaddressed.

Speaker 3 (49:39):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (49:39):
You will be released once you sign your fine slips.
Mister Simmons, Thank you, your honor, thank you, Thank you,
mister Moler.

Speaker 5 (49:46):
Now I don't know about you, Liam, but the thing
that jumped out at me is that David Simmons is
yet again able to say exactly what he wants and
remain unchallenged.

Speaker 1 (49:57):
Well, I don't know where I start on this. I'm
just I'm absolutely fascinated by this, but I can tell
you what, Allison, here's my immediate reaction. And it doesn't
take a Rhodes scholar to figure this out. Somebody needs
to get in contact with Magistrate Medcalf. Look, perhaps even
we could do that. I'm not suggesting that she knows
about this or was aware about this for one moment,

(50:20):
but if she does know about it, I'd love to
know what she thinks about it, because, as you know
and all our listeners would know, in a court room,
it's all about honesty, right, You have to be honest
under the law. It's the first tenant. So that the
stuff that goes on and he's given to a magistrate,
the information, the evidence, that's given to a magistrate in
this case in mitigation from his lawyer, from David simmons

(50:44):
lawyer has to be an honest representation of what's happened. Now,
let me point out exactly what's gone on here, Rhys Moler,
and I'm just going to go back to I'm going
to go back to the transcript of what happened when
he got up to tell magistrate that David Simmons should
not be punished very severely for this at all. Right,

(51:06):
before I get to the key stroke here, he also says,
as our listeners have heard, he makes this comment. He says,
mister Simmons, please remain indicative of an acceptance of responsibility,
an acceptance of responsibility. So let's be completely transparent about this.
A plea deal has been done, and I'm very surprised

(51:27):
that the police prosecutor agreed to this. A plea deal
has been done. So there's two charges. Initially, there's a
charge of assaulting a public officer and there's a charge
of obstructing a public officer. And David Simmons has agreed
to plead guilty to obstructing a public officer, a plea

(51:49):
that incidentally he pleaded not guilty too when he first appeared.
So he's changed his plea in return for the more
serious charge of assaulting a public officer being dropped. And
this is a bloke. Just remind us again, this is
a bloke who has already been imprisoned previously for the
same charge assaulting a public officer. That charge has been

(52:12):
dropped in order for him to plead guilty on the
other one. Now in mitigation, he goes on, mister Moler
on behalf of his client. He goes on to tell
Magistrate Medcalf about how David Simmons is in a whole
world of hurt because he's emotionally in turmoil. Allison, it's incredible,
and he says this, and I'm quoting from the transcript,

(52:33):
mister Mohler says, and in terms of the timing of
the current offending, the current offending, so that's obstructing the
public officer. Mister Moler tells the magistrate quote. It was
at a time when mister simmons partner's death, that's Amy
was being reinvestigated in the Channel seven news podcast The

(52:56):
Truth About Amy, And as part of that investigation, he
had been tracked down by an investigative journalist. He means me,
and that is what I'm told was the catalyst for
the escalation in his alcohol consumption and agitation at the
time of this offending. Let me repeat that, at the
time of this offending. So put, simply says mister Molar

(53:20):
to the magistrate. I think he struggled to cope with
the emotion and trauma, the public attention and the false
claims that were being spread. That's our claims. So this
is pretty serious stuff. So all that emotional turmoil and
all the pressure we put on him all led him
to obstructing a public officer and being, as they said,

(53:42):
very deeply intoxicated. Ok. One problem, mister Molar with this argument.

Speaker 5 (53:49):
Yes, big problem.

Speaker 1 (53:50):
We began work on this investigation on the ground in
Western Australia and the podcast on the sixth of May
twenty twenty four, almost exactly three months after David Simmons
was drunk as are skunk and running around obstructing police
officers in the course of their duty. We first met

(54:11):
David Simmons a week after that, on the thirteenth of May.
That's when David Simmons first found out that we were
investigating how are over three months after the offense. And
that was at the surprise surprise the Perth Central Law Courts,
in which David Simmons was very happy to have a
conversation and it went something like this, f off. That

(54:36):
was the end of the conversation. So can I just
come back to the point here, I would say to
the court, you've got a real problem because you have
been entirely misled. Now this wasn't challenged by the magistrate
because the magistrate understandably would have thought Magistrate metcalf would
have thought, okay, well, you know I'm being told by
Rhese Mohler. He's an associate at t Han Legal Group,

(54:59):
the t Han Legal Group. Prior to that, he was
a senior Federal prosecutor at the Commonwealth DPP Office.

Speaker 5 (55:05):
Of course, it certainly looks like a play deal, but
I thought I'd better check with Waypole And this time
they did respond kind of. They said charge negotiations are
a common practice in criminal proceedings in this state, as
recognized in the DPP's Statement of Prosecution Policy and Guidelines.

(55:25):
So neither confirming nor denying.

Speaker 1 (55:28):
So I'm just completely flabbagasted by all this that's.

Speaker 5 (55:30):
The thing, right, Moler should have done checks. I would
so I sent him an email to find out if
he would seek to correct the record, and he replied,
Dear Allison, Unfortunately, I have not acted for mister Simmonds
since the conclusion of those proceedings. Any submissions were made
in accordance with the instructions given to me. In these circumstances,

(55:53):
I won't be providing any official comment on the matter.
Any queries should be directed to mister Simmons. Well, that's
easier said than done. Anyway, Moving on, apologies for being
unable to assist with your inquiries. I hope you have
a great long weekend. Kind regards real.

Speaker 1 (56:11):
Smaller I mean Simmons, time and time and time again,
when are people going to wake up? He gets treated
as an endangered species and it's about time it stopped.
And if he's going to be in court, it needs
to be honest.

Speaker 5 (56:25):
Now then you have Sergeant Keys right, the police prosecutor.
It would have been really easy for him to come
back and say, actually hang on, you know, like if
he'd had any inclination or anything.

Speaker 1 (56:41):
Is a great point. There is no challenge to this whatsoever,
No challenge to this whatsoever. And that's from the police
prosecutor now coming back to you know, the commissioner representing
his troops and giving them albeit I think, false confidence.
Where is the role of the prosecutor in this spot
on al It's a great point to bring up. Why

(57:01):
aren't they jumping up? I mean, if you really want
to defend your troops at ground level, obstructing it an
assaulting in the course of your duty is bread and
butter stuff, isn't it. Why isn't he jumping up and
caught and challenging things. You see, the prosecutor's already made
an agreement. This is part of the plea deal. I
can't believe that. And nowhere, nowhere does the prosecutor remind
the magistrate that, in actual fact, you're honor, this is

(57:24):
his second conviction along these lines. He was previously convicted
of assaulting a police officer. This whole hearing, it's just ridiculous.

Speaker 5 (57:32):
But the other thing is I mean, as the magistrate
said in her response, all of a sudden full sympathy
for David Simmons because none of this was challenge no one.
I mean, I suppose as a magistrate you'd expect somebody
would challenge this if there was inaccuracies, but it wasn't.
Just like police opposed a bench warrant to arrest him

(57:56):
when he didn't turn up for Amy's in quest. You know,
it's just like what is going on here with WA Police.
I mean, not to mention all the stuff we're going
to cover off in this second season, you know, beggars
belief and obviously it's really really concerning watch his space.
But in the meantime we have purposely laid low for

(58:18):
a bit, so WA Police has time to continue its
reignited investigation into Amy's death in preparation of an update
de brief for the state's Director of Public Prosecution, Rob Owen.

Speaker 4 (58:32):
Once this investigation is complete, WA Police will present all
findings of the task force to the Office of the
Director of Public Prosecutions for his consideration.

Speaker 5 (58:44):
That's what WA Police told us in a statement late
last year. We then contacted the Office of the Director
of Public Prosecutions and we're told this.

Speaker 8 (58:54):
The ODPP also provides a formal charge advice function at
the request of an investigative agency, predominantly WA Police. The
ODPP and investigative agencies have an independent function within the
criminal justice system, and it is a matter for the
investigative agency as to whether they accept that advice and
decide whether to lay charges or not.

Speaker 1 (59:15):
So al they seem to be saying that it's still
up to wa police as to whether charges are laid,
if any. Now if they are, the Director then decides
whether the case is strong enough to prosecute.

Speaker 8 (59:31):
It is the odpp's policy to provide reasons to a
court for the discontinuance of a prosecution unless the discontinuance
is for administrative purposes only, or to do so would
prejudice the administration of justice or cause harm to a victim, witness,
or accused. It is proper to publicly explain the odpp's
approach to the question of whether a prosecution is to

(59:53):
continue or be terminated by reference to the factors in
the DPP Statement of Prosecution Policy and guard lines, for example,
by reference to the lack of a prima facie case,
lack of reasonable prospects of conviction, or that there is
no public interest in proceeding so.

Speaker 1 (01:00:09):
In other words, whether they think there's enough evidence to
secure a conviction. Should Amy's case proceed to trial, And
that's what we'll be discussing in season two L We've
already established that Amy could not have shot herself, but
are the circumstances of Amy having been killed by another
person by a third party enough for her case to
go to trial.

Speaker 5 (01:00:31):
Over the course of this season, we will be revealing
yet more evidence proving Amy couldn't have killed herself. I mean,
if there wasn't enough, but also the way the evidence
has been weighted so far, and there are clear issues
with that, which we will talk to some high caliber
people of integrity who will provide their opinions on it.

(01:00:54):
And we'll also speak to those who thought that right
from the beginning Amy's supposed suicide didn't make sense, but
were sidelined by others who were committed to the suicide
theory being pushed through no matter what. We will also
evaluate the case for the prosecution and what it means
should the DPP and WA police decide not to pursue

(01:01:18):
a conviction.

Speaker 1 (01:01:19):
Yes, bucking the system. What happened to the detective who
stuck her neck out and refused to agree that Amy's
death was a suicide.

Speaker 9 (01:01:28):
I then started to put the coronial file together and
I identified what outstanding lines of inquiry should be followed,
for instance, a forensic So I started looking at that
and then I asked Major Crime for a memo giving
their critical decisions on what actually how they deemed it
non suspicious.

Speaker 1 (01:01:46):
Also new evidence putting the integrity and the reputation of
WA police under further threat.

Speaker 5 (01:01:52):
He was so angry and stood so close to her
that she remembered feeling his spit on her face.

Speaker 1 (01:01:59):
That's coming up. Great to be back.

Speaker 5 (01:02:01):
Oh absolutely, Liam. We've got a big job ahead of us,
and trust me, there's a long way to go here.
And I tell you we are not giving up on this.
Amy did not kill herself. The evidence is overwhelming. Then
we also have a person of interest who had means,
motive and opportunity. So hang on to your hats. We

(01:02:22):
have a lot coming up. You won't want to miss it.

Speaker 14 (01:02:34):
So listen see.

Speaker 5 (01:02:39):
Sodation We both know.

Speaker 6 (01:02:45):
Thenay untill me.

Speaker 5 (01:02:53):
Hunt.

Speaker 1 (01:03:00):
If you knew Amy and have information, any information about
her death, we'd love to hear from you. Just email
us at the Truth about Amy at seven dot com
dot au. That's s e v E N The Truth
about Amy at seven dot com dot Au, or visit

(01:03:26):
our website sevenews dot com dot AU, forward slash The
Truth about Amy. You can also send us an anonymous
tip at www dot the Truth about Amy dot com.
If you're on Facebook or Instagram, you can follow us
to see photos and updates relevant to the case, but

(01:03:49):
for legal reasons, unfortunately, you won't be able to make
any comments. And remember, if you like what you're hearing,
don't for get to subscribe. Please rate and review our
series because it really helps new listeners to find us.

(01:04:11):
Presenter and executive producer Alison Sandy, Presenter and investigative journalist
Liam Bartlett, Sound design Mark Wright, Assistant producer Cassie Woodward,
Graphics Jason Blanford, and special thanks to Brian Seymour. This

(01:04:46):
is a seven News production.