13 - Breakthrough - Shot In The Dark

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This podcast contains sensitive and disturbing information, as well as
details relating to an alleged suicide. We urge anyone struggling
with their emotions to contact Lifeline on one three one
four or visit them at www dot lifeline dot org

(00:20):
dot au.

Speaker 2 (00:34):
Why can't we find out what happened?

Speaker 3 (00:36):
Why won't anyone help us?

Speaker 4 (00:40):
It was not suicide, There was someone else involved.

Speaker 1 (00:53):
Shot in the Dark, Episode thirteen.

Speaker 5 (00:58):
Brian Seymour.

Speaker 6 (00:59):
Here, I'm back in Brisbane. Maybe I should move here
at a cafe looking over the Brisbane District Court building
here on George Street. And Sue Cole is going to
be join me very shortly, and Allison will be here
very soon too. And of course we're here to listen
to Judge Nathan Jarrod deliver his decision on Sue's application

(01:23):
to set aside the findings of the twenty twenty one
inquest is the death of her sister Wen Grover in
nineteen eighty three. And I can see Sue Cole and
her husband Rod just walking towards me. Now we're going
say hello, hey, Sue, hello much.

Speaker 4 (01:40):
For being here again today.

Speaker 7 (01:42):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:43):
So if he does rule, and here's the thing I
mean I'm quite the confident but also filled with bird,
having done a number of these investigations over the years.
Even when you think the argument is overwhelming and common
sense will prevail, you get into the court and the
judge here is something like well, looking.

Speaker 8 (01:57):
At the evidence and referring to the statute and the
precedents are the similar cases where Karena's finding some decisions
have been called in the question, and I find that
whilst you have a good point, and you make this
point in that point, that it doesn't meet the standard
under this threshold and the statute of the law of
the Act.

Speaker 6 (02:15):
And therefore, unfortunately, I'm going to set aside the motion
and just miss it and wish you all the very best.
Thanks for coming, see you later. Now that happens a lot,
so I'm dreading that. I'm quietly confident it won't happen.
But if it does, what options are you? Is that
the end of the road.

Speaker 9 (02:32):
I believe we do have other options, but I haven't
explored them full and I've discussed them briefly with our
legal team, and their advice very much was, well, let's
cross that bridge when we come to it. Basically, we'll
see what happens today, So there are other options available
to it, but of course you know it's going to

(02:54):
be very difficult and they.

Speaker 4 (02:55):
Are very limited.

Speaker 9 (02:57):
But having said that, you know, stone and unturned, we
will definitely be looking at whatever options there are.

Speaker 6 (03:05):
There's also the possibility that someone listening to this, or
listening to Shot in the Dark for the first time,
will know someone or perhaps knows something and can actually
come forward still with a key piece of information. If
ken Sober was involved in Twent's death, perhaps he told
someone something, perhaps they noticed something. Maybe that key piece

(03:28):
of evidence that will force authorities to take whether action
could still emerge. That's a long shot, but that's one
of the reasons we do the podcast. Notwithstanding that you'd
be talking about really high level, expensive, long term appeal.
If no one wants to go down that road, I'm
assuming you don't.

Speaker 4 (03:46):
Know it really our options.

Speaker 9 (03:48):
Once again, like so many families before, and I keep
bringing up the other families because there are.

Speaker 4 (03:55):
So many of us.

Speaker 9 (03:56):
Friday, is this not just sleeee jumping up on a
soapbox going for me what happened to my sister?

Speaker 4 (04:02):
The whole world should stop and pay us attention.

Speaker 9 (04:05):
There are hundreds of thousands of us out there who
don't have the means, don't have the fortitude sometimes and
certainly do not have the money to follow.

Speaker 4 (04:16):
These things through to their entirety.

Speaker 9 (04:19):
And this is a huge failing in our system at
the moment, with the amount of women who are dying
every day in Australia through domestic violence.

Speaker 4 (04:29):
You know, something needs to be done about this, but
nothing's being done. Nothing's being done. You know, it's still
getting swept under the.

Speaker 9 (04:36):
Carpet the way it was forty years ago when Gwen died.
And I'm no feminist, but I can guarantee if that
was a man and a man of standing in community
who was found in the car that day as when was,
there would have very much been a different outcome. But
I feel sure that she.

Speaker 4 (04:56):
Was looked upon us book. This is just another single mother.

Speaker 9 (05:00):
She was probably drinking, she broke up with a boyfriend.
Oh well, that's it. Let's all go to the pub
and have a drink and forget about it. You know,
that's very much the way it was viewed through my eyes,
and cases today are still being viewed.

Speaker 4 (05:12):
That way, and you know, we have to take a stand.
It's not good enough it is, it just cannot continue
to go on.

Speaker 6 (05:19):
Yeah, Alison's going to join us very soon, right, so
whilst's not here, I'll ask you about it. And how
would you describe Allison's work in shining life on your coats?

Speaker 4 (05:31):
She's been amazing, as have you. You know, Alison has
been fantastic that Alison in Bot. So have you, Brian,
And I'm very grateful once again, you're flying up.

Speaker 9 (05:42):
From Sydney today on your own merits to do this.

Speaker 4 (05:46):
But Alison has been amazing.

Speaker 9 (05:47):
You know, She's a true supporter of not just the families,
but of women and any injustices that are taking place
in the system. And I believe through speaking with her,
this is something that has become, you know, a compassion
of hers, you know, is speaking up for women in
these situations, women like when who can no longer speak

(06:09):
for themselves, and doing the very best that she can
to support the families. And I think, you know, anyone
who listens to the podcast and the thousands of messages
of support that I've had.

Speaker 4 (06:23):
Since the podcast started, you know, sees that.

Speaker 9 (06:26):
And and you know it's only through people like Alison
who can reach out and spread the message worldwide that
change will come about because it really is beyond the families,
which we can do the very best that we can do,
but we can't get the sort of exposure to these
cases and to what's happening to these women that people

(06:47):
like yourself.

Speaker 10 (06:48):
And Alison can, and so for that reason and many others,
you know, I.

Speaker 9 (06:52):
Want term both for both of you, because if things
do go the right way today, this is not only
going to help when this is going to help so
many other women out there and so many other families
do are battling until a're thinking, well, do I just
give up?

Speaker 4 (07:08):
You know, is there nothing I can do?

Speaker 9 (07:10):
Do I just let my loved ones dead be just
another another statistic?

Speaker 11 (07:16):
So you know, I'm very hopeful that if we get
to ride out come today and with yours and Allison's
expert sort of advice going forward, you know, we may
be able to make a difference.

Speaker 6 (07:28):
It could go either way. And Sue's nerves are tingling,
especially due to the date of this long awaited ruling.
I should ask you. It's Friday the thirteenth.

Speaker 9 (07:37):
Yeahious, I know, No, I'm not, but I know when.

Speaker 4 (07:42):
I saw the date, I thought it's interesting. My mother
was very superstitious, and so is my grandmother.

Speaker 9 (07:50):
Yeah, well English, Scottish, whatever, so they were very superstitious.

Speaker 6 (07:56):
Let's buck the tree. Let's get some good news on
Friday at thirteen. All Right, Allison has managed to steal
away from the office despite being swamped with stories and
investigations for seven News, determined to be here on a
day that will make or break Sue's heart.

Speaker 4 (08:13):
I know, it's very no rackey.

Speaker 1 (08:14):
I mean, look, they really need to draw a line
in the sand on this, so I would be really
really disappointed if they didn't overturn that ruling, like it's
just nonsensical.

Speaker 4 (08:25):
But anyway, we'll see what happens to Yes.

Speaker 10 (08:28):
Yes, we've we've got to expect a judge to take
a stand against another judge, and it's hard to ask
someone to go out against someone of their own profession.
But I think if anybody will do it, I think
he probably will because he did seem to be very
much his own man when he was listening to the
evidence it was presented to him the other day.

Speaker 1 (08:49):
That's right, and this is this is bigger than just
one person.

Speaker 12 (08:53):
Yes, we were just discussing that with all about domestic violence,
it's all about hidden home sizes and like this could
really get the ball rolling.

Speaker 1 (09:03):
This could be monumental, I think. So I think if
someone like George Charrow, who is already from a minority,
so I would understand, I guess the flight of women women,
I would hope that that's yes.

Speaker 4 (09:23):
To me, it seems so obvious, but.

Speaker 2 (09:25):
We just it does.

Speaker 9 (09:28):
And exactly as I was saying to Brian today, like
since I started Searchlight, you know, which is about to
become national, Like the Constitution has just been finalized this week,
you know, the thousands of cases that I've become aware of,
and speaking to one of the country's foremost family advocates,
they said to me, it's it's more than thousands.

Speaker 4 (09:50):
So it's not like hundreds of thousands of cases that
are that are taking place out there.

Speaker 9 (09:55):
And while ever the domestic violence figures are the way
that they are, like someone has to take you stand
like it's today, you know as it was forty years ago.

Speaker 4 (10:04):
The same thing's happening at school. It's just a single mother.

Speaker 9 (10:07):
We're just you know, yeah fresh she went out to
like herself, that's just all go to the partment.

Speaker 4 (10:11):
Have me to forget about it. You know that has
to stop on me. Well, these women have to be recognized.

Speaker 1 (10:29):
On the seventh floor. We take our seats in the
courtroom as Judge Nathan Jarrow enters to deliver his decision.

Speaker 2 (10:38):
All rise, This court is now in session. Be seated.

Speaker 1 (10:46):
Judge Jarrow takes less than a minute to deliver his
verdict and he publishes his reasons, which we obtain later
and used to recreate his decision in the courtroom by.

Speaker 6 (10:57):
Way of brief background.

Speaker 5 (10:58):
The Northern Coroner, on nine of them twenty twenty one,
delivered findings in respect to an inquest into the death
of Miss Gwen Grover, who died at the age of
thirty two on fourteen October nineteen eighty three at Cannes.
Her honor found that Miss Grover's death was from cerebral
destruction caused by a self inflicted bullet wound to the head.
Her Honor ruled that the death was due to suicide.

(11:19):
The applicant, who is the sister of the deceased, has
applied under section fifty of the Coroner's Acts two thousand
and three to set aside the finding and order the
State Coroner to hold a new inquest into the matter.
The applicant asserts that the paucity of the evidence available
to the coroner did not enable her honour to be
able to find that the deceased committed suicide. It has
been contended that the lack of positive evidence of a

(11:41):
homicide does not lead to a conclusion that the death
must have been a suicide, such that the inquest was
erroneously conducted, and further evidence obtained subsequent to the inquest
supports that the findings should be set aside for the
reasons that follow. I am of the view that the
findings as to the death being self inflicted should be
set aside.

Speaker 6 (12:05):
Those words send a charge through the court. Sue Allison
and I look at each other in shock, unable to
even smile as we process what we're hearing. Coroner Wilson
got it wrong. Crucially, we need to know if Judge
Jarrow is ordering a new inquest. If one is held,

(12:26):
Much of what will be considered may feature in the
judge's reasons, which he details at length.

Speaker 5 (12:32):
Miss Grover, the day before her death, moved into a
unit located at Lake Street, Cannes. Shortly prior, she had
ceased a relationship with mister Kenneth Soper. Miss Grover's body
was identified on fourteen October nineteen eighty three by witness
mister Craig Locke in her green Valiant Glant sedan on
Lake Street Cans, approximately one hundred and twenty five meters

(12:53):
south of Rutherford Street, some two point one kilometers away
from her unit. Mister Locke said he feared on Miss
Grover sitting upright, leaned in to ask if she was
all right, and saw a rifle between her legs and
realized she was deceased. He then ran and called police
from his house and saw police arrive. No version was
taken from him at the time. Despite what mister Locke

(13:15):
recalled as to how Miss Grover was positioned, the limited
police photographs taken at the time show Miss Grover's body
slumped to the left. Fast forward thirty four years later,
in twenty eighteen, the applicant applied to the Coroner's court
for release of any documents held concerning the death of
her sister. The applicant was alarmed by the lack of
documented information, and the applicant did not believe that her

(13:37):
sister took her own life. In May twenty nineteen, the
Applicant requested the Attorney General to direct that a coronial
inquest be held into the death of Miss Grover. Their
request was approved in early twenty twenty. Police were directed
to investigate the matter further under the fresh investigation by
the Cold Case Review Team. Steps taken included producing a

(13:57):
scene recreation of the death which in the positioning of
the rifle, reconsideration of old evidence such as photographs, interviewing
and taking statements from several witnesses, and providing opinions as
to the likely make and model of the weapon. News
On nine November twenty twenty one, the Northern Coroner delivered
findings into the death of Miss Grover. In the written decision,

(14:18):
the Northern Coroner said that her honour could reasonably infer
the following matters. Miss Grover and mister Duncan Grover married
when Miss Grover was sixteen years old. They moved from
Country New South Wales to cans At around the end
of nineteen seventy four and had two sons together. Mister
Grover and Miss Grover separated sometime within the two year
period prior to March nineteen eighty three. During the period

(14:41):
of separation, Miss Grover returned to New South Wales with
her sons and lived with her sister, Sue Cole. That
sometime between March nineteen eighty three and twelve October nineteen
eighty three, after Miss Grover had returned to cans with
her sons, she either became aware for the first time
of a relationship between mister Grover and her friend, Miss
Pom Potter, or was confronted by the reality of their

(15:02):
relationship even if she had already known. When one evening,
perhaps under the influence of alcohol, miss Grover attended Miss
Potter's house, was invited in, and saw mister Grover in
Miss Potter's bed. Although the dates and the details differ,
the event is deposed to by missus Sharon Macady and
corroborated by Miss Potter and mister Grover. Miss Grover met

(15:24):
mister Soaper at a party around March nineteen eighty three,
and they formed a relationship immediately. Apparently they did not
spend one night apart after meeting. Miss Grover and her
sons eventually moved into mister Soaper's home in Westcourt, when
they lived for a short time before their separation. Mister
Grover and Miss Potter did not see as much of
Miss Grover. After that, Miss Grover moved from mister Soaper's

(15:46):
home to a unit at one seven seven Lake Street
on or about twelve October nineteen eighty three. Mister Soaper
did not know where Miss Grover had moved, was moving
too the accommodation Miss Grover secure uwood, presumably prior to leaving.
Mister Soaper's house, was described as unsuitable, almost uninhabitable, and

(16:06):
likely a reflection of her lack of financial means. Miss
Grover sought the assistance of Miss Potter to help her
move from mister Soapers. Miss Potter used mister Grover's trailer
and together they moved belongings to Lake Street all day
on thirteen October nineteen eighty three. The children were taken
to their fathers that night because the unit was a
mess and not ready for the boys. Missus Macadey and

(16:28):
her husband also assisted Miss Grover to move into her
unit on thirteen October nineteen eighty three. Her honor determined
that the immediate police investigation in nineteen eighty three was
perfunctory and considered that although the investigation reached a threshold
of adequate. The investigation was left vulnerable because not all
reasonable and relevant available evidence was obtained on behalf of

(16:51):
the applicant. It was highlighted that Miss Grover was right handed,
she was the mother of two young boys, and she
had experienced some recent emotional turmoil. He was submitted that
there was insufficient evidence before the coroner to be able
to conclude that Miss Grover died from a self inflicted wound,
due in part to the paucity of the evidence available
from the time. The argument was advanced that the inquest

(17:12):
proceeded on the basis that the outcome was predetermined, or alternatively,
that if there was insufficient evidence that it was homicide,
then the conclusion must be that it was suicide. In
support of this argument, the Form four prepared by Officer
Kinbaker made no mention of the existence of a firearm
or ammunition, and limited photographs were taken during the very

(17:33):
short investigation that followed the discovery of Miss Grover's body. Therefore,
in order for the findings that the coroner made to
be correct, it was submitted that the following must have
been the case.

Speaker 6 (17:44):
A Miss Grover.

Speaker 5 (17:45):
Commenced drinking at some time in the morning of her
death to account for the zero point one five zero
percent blood alcohol content, yet only one or two drink
bottles were found in the vehicle B. During her drinking,
she had the wherewithal to attend her exit boyfriend's house
and obtain a heavy rifle. With conflicting evidence about her
knowledge of and ability to operate guns. C, she would

(18:08):
have had to, whilst fairly drunk, load the heavy rifle,
hold it in her non dominant hands to her temple,
and pulled the trigger. D. This was near hockey fields
that were likely in use during the day E. Her
handbag presumably was found on top of the blood soaked seat.
No blood can be seen on the bag itself. It
therefore was either placed thereafter or potentially was on her

(18:30):
left shoulder when she held the heavy rifle up on
that side. F She left behind two young boys. It
was highlighted that no pathologist was called to give evidence
in the inquest, nor was the forensic pathologist called to
comment on the autopsy report findings. It was also highlighted
that important questions were not asked of mister Soaper regarding

(18:50):
his movements and whereabouts at the time. Miss Grover died
or the circumstances under which it is said Miss Grover
retrieved the rifle from his home. In addition, there was
some material inconsistencies in the versions he has given as
to when he last saw Miss Grover. It is to
be noted that mister Soaper is now himself deceased. It
was contended that the coroner's conclusions that it was suicide

(19:12):
appeared to have been based solely on the fact that
Miss Grover was found de ceased in the vehicle and
a rifle was located in the car with her. However,
those facts, it was said, are equally consistent with a homicide.
Whilst some weight was placed on miss Grover asking her
ex husband to look after the children if anything happened
to her, that fact was equally consistent with Miss Grover
being fearful of mister Soper as opposed to contemplating a suicide,

(19:37):
and therefore is equivocal evidence that does not resolve the
issue suicide or homicide either way. In this respect, it
was highlighted that there was no evidence before the coroner
that Miss Grover was contemplating suicide. There was no suicide note,
there was no evidence of suicidal ideation expressed by any
of the witnesses. There were no end of life arrangements. Further,

(19:59):
Miss Grover had no familiarity with firearms. The competing inference
was that she was moving forward with her life and
making plans for the future with her sons, because she
moved out of mister Soph's house into a new unit
and was in the process of cleaning it in preparation
for her sons to come and live with her. There
was evidence, it was said, of her love for her
sons and her being invested and caring for their future.

(20:21):
These matters therefore did not support the coroner's finding of suicide.
More particularly, the paucity of evidence available to the coroner
did not enable the coroner to be able to find
that Miss Grover committed suicide on the state of the
evidence before her honor. Regardless of Professor Deflow's opinion, it
is unclear to me whether the coroner could categorically conclude,
as her Honor did, that the death was due to

(20:43):
suicide and that at the time of her death, Miss
Grover was overwhelmed by the circumstances of her life and
was experiencing a significant situational crisis A, there was insufficient
evidence to conclude that Miss Grover was experiencing a significant
situational crisis, all being overwhelmed by the circumstances of her life.
I accept there was evidence from two witnesses, being missus

(21:05):
Mackady and Miss Potter, of their observations of Miss Grover
the night before her death, but there was competing evidence
from other witnesses such as mister Grover and the applicant,
such that in my opinion, the real state of the
evidence is not as unambiguous as to warrant ruling suicide B.
There are no witnesses who witnessed the death to safely

(21:25):
enable the finding. Assumptions were made and inferences have been
drawn given the way in which Miss Grover's body was found.
Yet mister Locke, who was the witness who saw Miss Grover,
gave evidence that he recalled her upright, as opposed to
the limited police photographs taken which depicted her slumped to
the side. Ce The coroner specifically identified the evidence of

(21:46):
mister Soaper that on the morning of Miss Grover's death,
he noticed that his gun had been moved from the wardrobe.
Yet her honor determined Miss Grover removed the gun and
ammunition from mister Soaper's house, to which she had access,
sometime on the morning of fourteen October nineteen eighty three,
likely after he departed for work. I am unable to
reconcile this finding in light of mister Sober's evidence that

(22:07):
the rifle was not there at the time he left
for work. The matters raised on behalf of the applicant
in the preceding paragraphs are persuasive and perhaps suggestive of
another theory other than suicide.

Speaker 1 (22:21):
Judge Jarrow also addresses the new evidence, mainly the report
written by Professor Johann duflou, a forensic pathologists engaged by
Sue's lawyers. He says that the scant evidence preserved from
the scene cannot prove suicide. Indeed, he thinks it's unlikely

(22:42):
that Gwen killed herself. Finally, Judge Jarrow mentions the woman
who contacted us after listening to this podcast to say
that when she was a teenager, she came across Gwen's
body sitting upright, confirming the claim made by Craig Locke.

(23:04):
At last, Judge Jarrow makes his final ruling.

Speaker 5 (23:10):
The application is allowed to the extent that the findings
of the coroner are set aside. The inquest is not
to be reopened or reordered.

Speaker 1 (23:24):
Soon meets with our lawyers to digest the ruling. Outside
the court. Seven years reporter Rosanna Kingson is waiting to
interview Sue.

Speaker 13 (23:33):
So, I guess to begin with, how did you feel
coming here to court today to hear the decision of
the judge.

Speaker 4 (23:38):
After the application?

Speaker 13 (23:39):
You must have felt quite nervous or you had a
lot of anticipation.

Speaker 9 (23:43):
I was very nervous and very apprehensive because, as we know,
given the events that have unfolded since nineteen eighty three,
things have not always gone the way that they should.

Speaker 4 (23:55):
Policies and proceedures have not always followed.

Speaker 9 (23:57):
So therefore I was very apprehensive today on the way here,
hoping and praying for the best possible outcome, but having
to face the reality that things may not go the
way that we wanted.

Speaker 13 (24:09):
But they haven't.

Speaker 4 (24:10):
They have.

Speaker 9 (24:11):
They have, like all our hopes and prayers have really
been answered. Judge Jarrow has set aside the findings of suicide.
He has agreed with us with our arguments that the
evidence before the Northern Coroner did not support the ruling
that Gwen died from suicide. So it's an amazing accomplishment

(24:31):
and an amazing achievement and just a gigantic step going forward.

Speaker 4 (24:35):
For us all.

Speaker 9 (24:36):
Further to that, he declined to direct the State Coroner
to reopen the end quest due to the passage of
time and the difficulty that we may have due to
that passage of time with new evidence emerging and coming forward.
This is very disappointing because I firmly believe that the

(24:58):
nineteen eighty three investigations was very lacking and there were
things that should have been done then that work.

Speaker 4 (25:05):
So we will proceed as best we can with that
going forward as well.

Speaker 9 (25:10):
I understand that what will happen now is that the
State Coroner we look at all the evidence.

Speaker 4 (25:16):
And we now look forward to someone else.

Speaker 9 (25:19):
Reconsidering all the new evidence that's come forward as well.
But it's an excellent step in the right direction, possibly
one of the best possible outcomes today in.

Speaker 4 (25:31):
Our height or justice in some form.

Speaker 9 (25:34):
For when the fact that Judge Jarrow has set aside
the findings of.

Speaker 4 (25:38):
Suicide, and we're very very grateful.

Speaker 13 (25:40):
For that, So has the door closed for a new
request or has Judge Jarrow left it a jar slightly.

Speaker 9 (25:46):
Well, I really do believe it is left a jar
slightly because you know, all the information, all the evidence
is being collected, is now being sent on to the
State Coroner. There will very much then be in the
State Coroner's hands as to whether or not he considers
it or whether he forwards it.

Speaker 4 (26:03):
To someone else. That's something that hopefully we will hear
in the new year.

Speaker 1 (26:08):
Brian and I are standing by with our own questions.
But basically he's saying that the coroner was wrong, right, soe.

Speaker 9 (26:15):
Well, he's overruled the finding of suicide. So there's really
no other way to look at it, Allison, other than
the fact that he has said that the Northern Coroner's
decision was wrong because the finding of suicide will no
longer be on record and will no longer be attached
to Gwen's name, So that in itself it is just
a major step forward and I'm extremely grateful for that.

Speaker 4 (26:37):
And why do you think this has come about, suit.

Speaker 9 (26:39):
Well, I believe that of course, you know, the podcast
had a large role to play in this. I believe
this is the first time that a podcast in Queensland.

Speaker 4 (26:49):
Has brought about the overruling.

Speaker 9 (26:52):
Other finding in a coronial inquest because obviously, you know,
all the work that you and Brian put into it,
the election of the new evidence that's come forward, has
really been instrumental in you know, what's taken place in
the courtroom today.

Speaker 4 (27:09):
And while we are discussing that, I'd like.

Speaker 9 (27:11):
To especially thank our legal team like Claire Coles from
Caxton Legal. Claire has been absolutely amazing, our two amazing
barristers like Sarah Farndon Casey and James Wallace as well,
who acted pro bono on our behalf. You know, without
their expertise and without yours and Brian's hard work going.

Speaker 4 (27:32):
Forward, you know, really we would still be floundering.

Speaker 9 (27:35):
So it's just been an incredible outcome and an incredible
victory today for all of us.

Speaker 1 (27:42):
Is it a bit disappointing though, that it takes a podcast,
it takes media recognition and investigation that you have to
get the support of for this to happen.

Speaker 9 (27:52):
It is disappointing, Allison, And you know, as I think
you know that you know, I am a very private
person and our family is a very private family.

Speaker 4 (28:01):
So it's been.

Speaker 9 (28:02):
Very, very difficult to see the circumstances of Gwen's death
put out there on display for the world to see,
for people to be making comments, people to be sitting
in judgment for her. But sadly that's the world we
live in today. That it really is the squeaky wheel
that gets the oil. And if we hadn't, you know,

(28:23):
exposed Gwen's case, nothing would have happened. And that truly
is one of the one of the great injustices of
the system, I guess.

Speaker 13 (28:32):
So what were the emotions that you were feeling inside
the courtroom as Judge Jarrow said that he was setting
aside the findings.

Speaker 9 (28:39):
It was just overwhelming And it's always that split second
thought of am I hearing this correctly?

Speaker 4 (28:46):
Am I misinterpreting this?

Speaker 9 (28:48):
Because of course there's a lot of legal language being used,
which to.

Speaker 4 (28:51):
The laborson is very confusing.

Speaker 9 (28:54):
So I was sitting there listening to his subsequent statements
after that, and I'm thinking, well, he said he set
aside the findings. I'm not sure what all the rest
of it means, but I'm just hanging onto that one sentence.
And then of course we got outside the doors and
had a meeting with Claire and she helped clarify things
for us, and we'll continue to help you set.

Speaker 4 (29:15):
The pathway going forward as well.

Speaker 6 (29:17):
So you set out to prove that his sister didn't
take her own life.

Speaker 2 (29:21):
And the current had got it wrong in that inquest.

Speaker 6 (29:23):
What does it mean to you to have a judge
now say, yeah, the corner did get it wrong. This
was not a definite case for a woman taking your
own life.

Speaker 9 (29:30):
It's very very validating, Brian, as you can imagine, it's
very validating, not just for me as Gwen's sister, but
I feel it's validating for Gwen herself as well. Now,
whether we like it or not, in society today, there's
still a stigma attached to suicide. I mean, Gwen, there's
been portrayed very unfairly at times by certain people who

(29:55):
sure remain anonymous today. So you know, I'm really hoping
that those people now might go away and have a
good look at themselves, because you know, the word suicide
is no longer attached to Gwen's name and Judge Jarrow
has made that clear.

Speaker 4 (30:12):
In the District Court in Brisbane today.

Speaker 6 (30:14):
How much does this go towards restoring your faith in
the justice system.

Speaker 4 (30:18):
Oh, hugely.

Speaker 9 (30:19):
When I walked out of that courtroom in Cans in
twenty twenty one, I honestly thought, like, what is this
all about?

Speaker 4 (30:26):
What is the point in this even having a justice system?
And you know, I can't.

Speaker 9 (30:31):
Help but say this, if we had more judges like that,
there would probably be a lot more families who would
have faith in the system.

Speaker 6 (30:38):
Do you call on the coroner to hold a new inquest?

Speaker 4 (30:41):
Yes? I would ask the coroner to consider all.

Speaker 9 (30:44):
The new evidence, which was it considered in Cans in
twenty twenty one. All of the new evidence that the
podcast is brought about, that our legal team is uncovered,
and that I uncovered.

Speaker 4 (30:55):
As well for my own research.

Speaker 9 (30:57):
And surely if any coroner considers all of that evidence,
I mean, we will have a very different scenario.

Speaker 4 (31:03):
Going forward to what we had in twenty twenty one.

Speaker 9 (31:06):
For any interest, Yes, yes, we do want a new
inquest given the evidence that we now have today.

Speaker 1 (31:14):
Is this a landmark decision for all victims people who
I guess are hidden homicides like Gwen? I mean, how
prevalent is this and how much hope do you have
that this will I guess get the ball rolling and
ensure that there is justice for other women like Gwen.

Speaker 9 (31:31):
Well, I don't think there's any other way that we
can look at it, Alison. It has to be seen
as a landmark decision because a judge today has overruled
the Northern Coroner's decision in twenty twenty one. That coroner
is adamant that Gwen died by suicide. So I believe
this has to be seen as a landmark decision and

(31:51):
a ray of hope if you like, going forward for
other families. From the research I've done, there's a woman
filled every four days in Australia result of domestic violence.
Now the vast majority of those never even make it
to court, let.

Speaker 4 (32:06):
Alone have a judgment ruled on them. And then there's another.

Speaker 9 (32:08):
Large majority of them that are ruled like Gwen's as
suicide when there's been absolutely no investigation done to the contrary.
So it's a sad fact of life that in forty
years really nothing has changed. But I think today we
really have drawn a line in the sand with what's
happened with Gwen's case in the court.

Speaker 6 (32:34):
One person I wanted to hear from is ed Kinbacker,
the former police officer who attended the scene where Gwen
died in nineteen eighty three. He was part of the
team that botched the investigation. I called him and told
him about the court's decision. Kinbacker at first didn't believe me,
then said the judge got it wrong, that he stands

(32:56):
by his investigation and he remains convinced when took her
own life. When I told him his investigation was one
of the worst I've seen in over thirty years of journalism,
he told me I was not a journalist, that I'm biased,
and he hung up on me.

Speaker 1 (33:19):
Sue's first call with the news is to a man
who has stood by her right from the start, former
police detective Jerry Thornton, who featured in the early episodes
of this podcast.

Speaker 3 (33:32):
Oh, it's just justified everything diversly we've been saying for
the last five or six years, in particularly what Sue's
been saying. And it was good that finally someone listened.

Speaker 6 (33:43):
Yeah, and in particular he found that the evidence did
not support a finding of suicide. Now you were at
the inquest. Was that your read when you were actually there?

Speaker 3 (33:52):
Yeah, Like the inquest was a joke and was in
and hour Riyan I realized that it was going to
be a wasted three days. It all seemed to be
framed in favor of suicide. That the second investigation was
as poor as the first.

Speaker 6 (34:06):
The cold case investigation. Yeah, yeah, I spoke to Weed
Kinbacker today and he told me that the judge got
it wrong. He stands by his initial investigation and that
Gwen definitely died of suicide.

Speaker 3 (34:18):
Are you surprised by that, Yes, because there's nothing that
I've seen can justify that. Because Ed originally said he
had no memory of it, but then he said that
in his mind, he can clearly remember seeing beer kens
on the floor in a pile of cigarette ash.

Speaker 2 (34:34):
Well, the photos didn't show that. They seem to.

Speaker 3 (34:37):
Accept ex evidence that it was there, but you couldn't
see it in the photos. But he's also said that
he didn't really have a recollection of the event itself,
but he could remember that. And I know Ed is
held in high regard up there as an investigator, and
I have no doubt he is. But he was junior
at the time. And put your hand up and say,
we might have got it wrong. But as they decided

(34:59):
to fight it all late.

Speaker 6 (35:00):
Well, that's right. A couple of things that the judge
found he found the current and gave a lot of
weight to the evidence of Sharon Macarty that two days
before she died, Gwen discovered her ex husband and her
best friend in bed together and she was overwhelmed with
despair and that was a big part of the reason
she supposedly took her own life. What did you make
of that evidence?

Speaker 3 (35:20):
There was no evidence to support what she was saying,
Like the two people involved was Duncan and Betty, and
they said that it happened two years before. And then
you've got Sue saying that she moved down to Bogglebro
wherever it was, and so lived with her for those
two years and then she returned. But Sharon Macketty also
says in her evidence think three times she hasn't got
a very good memory, but they seem to accept her memory.

(35:42):
And they also seemed to accept that Gwen committed suicide
because she was upset because two days before she'd found
Dunking in bed with Betty. But then they also seemed
to accept that it was over the breakup with Sober
a day before, So it was almost as iful.

Speaker 2 (35:55):
If it's not one, it's the other. But there was
no evidence.

Speaker 3 (35:58):
Except for Macartty that she was depressed and like not
even Betty or Duncan said she was depressed and she
was happy.

Speaker 2 (36:05):
Moving on with a life.

Speaker 3 (36:06):
And then Soaper's excuse for the breakup, I thought it
was quite remarkable, and that he said that Glenn's two
sons pushed through the door before us, So he chastise
the sons for pushing through before her, and she, yeah,
he took exception of that.

Speaker 2 (36:19):
She left. It didn't seem like a very big reason
to leave.

Speaker 6 (36:23):
You mentioned Ken Soper, you know ed Kinbacker and the
other police initially took sixteen seventeen days to interview Ken,
whereas I would have thought that the partner would have
been suspect number one.

Speaker 2 (36:34):
What were your thoughts, Well, I would have thought so.

Speaker 3 (36:37):
I would have thought that would have been the first
person you would have Yeah, you have to treat him
as suspicious until otherwise. That's a perfect example where it
wasn't It just seemed to be too cut and dried.
So they were happy with that. But it's always amazed
me that at the time, so he gives a statement
saying it was his point three to two five rifle
that was used, and he says it was his and

(36:58):
they showered to him at the PlayStation or whatever. And
he says he has ad in to twenty guns. He
can't remember the calibers of all except about three, but
he says the three two, five of us is but
any statement. Thirty seven years later he said, no, it
was a twenty twos that he borrowed off Glen Graham
or whatever his name was.

Speaker 2 (37:16):
And Glen Graham wasn't called.

Speaker 3 (37:18):
And I would have thought he'd have been a fairly
important person to have a gym quest, considering he was
supposed to own the gun. But why did it take
Sober thirty seven years to remember that it wasn't the
three to two follow because it wasn't invented until the
early two seisands, So someone's obviously told him that, and
then he's decided to go with the twenty two.

Speaker 6 (37:37):
Judge Jarrow was also confused about how Gwen obtained the gun,
the conflicting evidence of Sober that it was taken from
his cupboard perhaps or from his shed. He told Duncan
that he left the gun in the boot of the
car and that Gwen had grabbed it from there, and
then ultimately then woke up and found the gun missing
from his cupboard, or it was taken from the cupboard

(37:58):
after he left for work, and it was unclear to
me house Gwen supposedly got hold of this gun. Was
it clear to you?

Speaker 3 (38:05):
But old boy his original statement now, whether he's telling
him the truth or not.

Speaker 2 (38:08):
That was taken three weeks later, not thirty seven years later.

Speaker 3 (38:12):
And he says that he wakes up and he sees
the cupboard in the spare bedroom open the morning that
the gun was supposed to go on missing, and later
on he says it was in his own bedroom. But regardless,
he says that's where he keeps all his guns. He
doesn't mention anywhere else to police where he keeps his guns.
He also says he's big on security, so he keeps

(38:32):
all the ammunition in the glove box of his car,
which was packed onnath the house or downstairs or something.
But you've got a lady who was allegedly under the influence,
and she goes round to his place during the night,
into whatever cupboard it was, whether it was in his
room or a spare room, selects one rifle out of twenty.

Speaker 2 (38:49):
And then goes downstairs and goes.

Speaker 3 (38:51):
Through the club box and I'd imagine there's a fair
variety of ammunition there and selects the right project dolls
for that gun, which is pretty incredible when all the
evidence seems to suggest she didn't know anything about guns.

Speaker 6 (39:03):
It is incredible.

Speaker 2 (39:04):
So it didn't seem to consider that.

Speaker 3 (39:07):
Considered that the original inquest, But there's lots of other
things they didn't consider either.

Speaker 2 (39:11):
Well.

Speaker 6 (39:11):
You mentioned, I know that when I first spoke to
you a couple of years ago, you mentioned that you
couldn't work out from the police photos, the handful of
photos taken at the scene of Gwen in the car,
how she ended up in the position. She didn't how
the gun ended up in that position.

Speaker 2 (39:25):
The thing that struck me was with the gun.

Speaker 3 (39:27):
She's allegedly sued herself in the left temple, even though
she's right hand, so she has to use her left hand,
which to me is really odd that you wouldn't use
your dominant hen But it's only a small car than
it was the Galen, and yet somehow she's fallen to
the left, to the passenger seat where the gun was
allegedly positioned, and yet the gun has fallen across the

(39:49):
dash passed the steering wheels onto her right side, and
the right hand is still tightly gripped around the end
of the barrel. So I just don't know how that
he would have remained on there, and particularly when it
had to get past, like she's falling and the gun's
going the opposite direction. I just don't know why he
would have been so And it was white knuttle type,

(40:09):
like the head was really tightly wrapped around the barrel,
and her feet weren't in the right position, like a
feet in a really odd position is if more, I
don't know, in a struggle or an effort to get away,
rather than bracing yourself to be shot.

Speaker 6 (40:25):
Yeah, and Jerry, what do you think happened to Gwen Oh?

Speaker 3 (40:28):
I think she was murdered. I think that's the most
obvious suspect is Sober. I don't understand why Sober turned
up the court virtually a day and a half before
he was due to give evidence, and he was the
only witness that did turn up at that time. I
think he was supposed to give evidence at two o'clock
on the Wednesday, but he was there first thing Tuesday morning,
and there was police going in and out of the court.

Speaker 2 (40:50):
It just seemed odd that he was going to be
there and.

Speaker 3 (40:53):
Then his evidence, even though it changed considerably to thirty
seven years prior, it just seemed to be accepted without question.

Speaker 2 (41:01):
And like as I said.

Speaker 3 (41:02):
About the police, maybe should have just put their hand
up and said, well, we might have got it wrong.
Will engage you by a mechanic, will engage a pathologist,
will engage an armorer, a specialist armorer, not the one
that the police supplied, and you might have been able
to find the truth of it out. But to not
call those sort of witnesses. Plus Glenn Graham, Oh, I
think it was unforgivable. It just made it a complete

(41:22):
circus and a waste to tell.

Speaker 6 (41:23):
Yeah, because Glenn Graham was the friend that Ken soberclaims
owned the gun that came out of nowhere.

Speaker 3 (41:29):
Yeah, thirty seven years later he remembers, but he even
says that his memories a bit scratchy, but improved after
thirty seven years.

Speaker 6 (41:36):
Ultimately, Sue has won a We think it's the first
time a podcast has led to a judge overturning a
current as finding in Queensland, possibly in Australia. It's a
real testament to Sue's perseverance. What do you make of
Sue's efforts in championing his sister.

Speaker 3 (41:52):
They're incredible, Brian, I think Trobbly ninety nine percent of
people would give up once you knew you had to
go to a district court. She was, she got a
good legal team. But it's a long, hard road and
it shouldn't be that hard. It really shouldn't be that
hard that you've got to go to a district court,
and like it must be an impulse on those courts
then to do it.

Speaker 2 (42:11):
I just won.

Speaker 3 (42:12):
If the investigation was done properly, or that the second
investigation had been done properly, there would have been no
need for that. And had all the events been presented,
like the evidence of Saber's previous wife, Pamela, that was
really important. Carl Ca spoked, but said they couldn't compel
someone to give evidence. Well, you can try, you can
subpoen to them if you think it's going to benefit,

(42:33):
because coronials are about finding out the truth, not hiding stuff.

Speaker 6 (42:37):
Well, that was surprising because Pamela certainly spoke to us
and as you recall, told us that Ken was physically abusive.
It stalled her and that he threatened her by putting
a rifle in her mouth. I mean all extremely relevant
to that inquest, and that the current didn't hear any
of it well.

Speaker 3 (42:53):
Particularly particularly with the way Gwen allegedly died, you would
have thought it was very very relevant and he was
according to Pamo domestic glance men had aside from the
gun in the mouse, I can't see why she wasn't
sub painted to give evidence or perhaps get a better
investigator to talk to it.

Speaker 6 (43:13):
And of course we discovered and I'm not sure if
the police at the time learned this when they ran
his name that at the time of Gwen's death, Ken
Soper was on parole for child sex offenses of which
he was convicted.

Speaker 3 (43:24):
You would think that that should have been checked out
at the time. You would think when I was in
the job versual any when you dealt with yours done
checks on you would have thought it was something like that.
You'd definitely done a check. It seems to me that
I've got there and said lady in the car dead, gun, yeah, suicide.

Speaker 6 (43:39):
Well, there are still women Todayman Allison's doing the podcast
about Amy Wensley. You're familiar with that case, another woman
supposedly shot herself with her kids waiting outside in a
running car. I'm not sure much has changed at all.
What's your impression.

Speaker 3 (43:53):
No, I don't think it has. I just don't know
why the police, and that's Australia white to, not just
queens Land, don't say there's an issue here. We'll put
up our hands and we'll turn around and we'll try
and fix it.

Speaker 2 (44:02):
Like over there.

Speaker 3 (44:03):
I think that the two police were disciplined, whatever that means,
but they were disciplined over it. But I don't think
there'd be a lot of work getting done to solve
that because it could just be filed. Like I've spoken
to a few solicteners or in Queensland that have acted
for people who have got concerns about the way the
loved ones die it. But if you can't get access
to any material, we'll use you got And basically, if

(44:27):
the police are kind enough to tell you anything, believe
what they tell you. Like the Amy Wensley one is
a perfect one. Like I think that the trigger hend
was actually under a right buttock, which would make it
pretty hard to shoot yourself, so that was a really
obvious thing. And then the family's got to fight for
the next ten years to try and get some sort
of result.

Speaker 6 (44:44):
Thank you so much, Jian, and I'm sure we'll be
in touch soon. But enjoy the rest of your day.
Thanks Brian, Thanks mate, Sue.

Speaker 1 (44:52):
Brian and I moved to a busy cafe nearby to
digest what all this means. So, Sue, what happened.

Speaker 4 (45:00):
With the finding? Does there have to be a finding?

Speaker 1 (45:02):
If they're going to set the suicide ruling aside, do
they then have to make another determination even if it's
open You would.

Speaker 9 (45:09):
Think there has to be a definitive outcome if you like,
like to set the findings aside, and then it basically
to be sitting in limbo like you know, cannot happen
going forward.

Speaker 4 (45:21):
If they said the Northern Parenter is wrong.

Speaker 9 (45:24):
And this is what's happened today, there's absolutely no if,
butts or ads about this. Judge Jarrow said the Northern
Parenter was wrong in ruling it as a suicide.

Speaker 4 (45:34):
That finding has been set aside. We now have to
look upon that and say, well, it's not suicide. What
is it? Is it an open finding? Is it homicide?

Speaker 9 (45:44):
And that's where I believe the next person that gets
hold of the case has to take it.

Speaker 4 (45:50):
Yes, well that's an issue now, isn't it.

Speaker 1 (45:52):
Because my understanding is they can do a different finding.
I know the judge couldn't because Judge Sharrow did cover it.
He couldn't make it's righting. But if they consider all
the evidence, they can then make a different determination without
necessarily going back to an inquest. So we'll find out
whether that's the case. But i'd imagine that's what you'd
be wanting to know from.

Speaker 2 (46:12):
Them as well.

Speaker 9 (46:13):
Yes, exactly now, And once again, we don't know who
that person will be, Like it gets sent to the
state coroner to begin with, like does he make the
decision or does he then send it on to someone else.

Speaker 1 (46:24):
That's what I understanding, will be sended on to someone
else who review it and make a recommendation, right, and
then I guess they go from there whether or not
that is enough for an inquest to be reopened, or
whether they can make a different determination based on the
new evidence that we've uncovered.

Speaker 4 (46:43):
Yeah, So have you spoken to Jerry since this?

Speaker 9 (46:46):
I called Jerry as soon as we've walked out of
the courthouse. I called Jerry and let him know what
has happened today because Jerry has been so involved in this.

Speaker 4 (46:57):
Right from the first timeline I called him and.

Speaker 9 (47:01):
When I was first sort of trying to get things underway,
he's been such a great source of support and guidance.
And I must say there's been times when his dry
sense of humor has.

Speaker 4 (47:11):
Really helped carry me through some of the terrible things
that were happening.

Speaker 9 (47:16):
And he's very happy, and I'm sure that deep down
it feels very validated as well, because right from day
one he was picking out the very.

Speaker 4 (47:25):
Obvious flaws in the whole situation.

Speaker 9 (47:28):
He attended the coronial inquest in Cans, flew from his
property in the outback to Cans for the inquest, saw
the fiasco that insured there so quite to him, even
though he's retired now, from a professional standpoint, this has
to be very validating for him as well.

Speaker 4 (47:46):
He was very happy. He was very happy.

Speaker 9 (47:48):
Yes, yeah, I think he was like me, It was
a little bit. It takes a little bit to process
because you know, this has gone on for so long, Allison,
and even since twenty twenty one, as you know, we've
been fighting and up field battle with this thing.

Speaker 4 (48:02):
And so today for this to happen.

Speaker 9 (48:03):
It's almost like, did that really happen or did I
just imagine it?

Speaker 4 (48:07):
It was just wish for thinking on my part.

Speaker 9 (48:09):
So I think, you know, I told him and there
was sort of like a couple of secums where he was.

Speaker 4 (48:14):
I think he was processing it too, but he's very happy,
very very happy.

Speaker 1 (48:19):
Are you thinking about any of the other key people
like ed Kinbacker and all this.

Speaker 4 (48:23):
I'm thinking about all of them, Alison. I'm thinking about
all of them. It was something, really, wasn't it.

Speaker 1 (48:29):
Like it's almost as you say, they kind of they
take it personally. Do you feel vindicated?

Speaker 4 (48:36):
I do? I do?

Speaker 9 (48:38):
I mean, and I think anyone in my position would
have to, because you know, a district court judge has
said they got it wrong.

Speaker 4 (48:46):
And that's the bottom line. You can wrap this up
in whatever legal is you want.

Speaker 9 (48:49):
At the end of the day, the Northern Coroner got
it wrong, and that's really the bottom line here today
from my perspective.

Speaker 6 (48:57):
If I can ask your suit for forty years, the
stain on Gwen's reputation as a mother who abandoned her
young children, abandoned her family and just cut and run,
but taking our own life, that stain now has been
lifted and there's a stain now on the Queensland Police
and the Coroner's office. What should happen next?

Speaker 9 (49:20):
Well, I think they have to own up like anybody
that you know. I mean, we're all grown up people now.
When we make mistakes, we have to own up and apologize.
I think Gwen deserves an apology. Gwen deserves an apology,
not just for Gwen, not just for me, but for
all the women who've been treated this way, had their

(49:42):
deaths dismissed a suicide, had their character destroyed, had their
good name dragged through the mud, had denigrating comments made
about them, made rumor and innuendo.

Speaker 4 (49:53):
Spread about them.

Speaker 9 (49:54):
Alice, and you discovered those emails that circulated in the
QBS about where they were just disgusting.

Speaker 4 (50:00):
They were disgusting on any level. I don't care whether.

Speaker 9 (50:03):
You're a police officer, whether you're someone sitting in a
bus shoulder, whether you're a family member.

Speaker 4 (50:07):
What you are anyone who read those emails. The Attorney General's.

Speaker 9 (50:12):
Top advisor said there is no way to excuse those emails.

Speaker 4 (50:16):
They are a disgrace.

Speaker 9 (50:18):
And to me, that demonstrated this is what's happening this
is what's happening behind the scenes. When a family goes
to them and says, you know, this has happened to
a loved one, can you please look into it.

Speaker 4 (50:29):
We become a laughing stuff.

Speaker 9 (50:31):
We become the butt of the jokes in the staff
room and to me that is one of the big,
big problems in the system, which I mean, I don't
know how to fix it. I don't think we're ever
going to fix it because you can't fix people's attitude.

Speaker 1 (50:53):
As of now, there is no apology from the Queensland Police,
but there is more hope. We wrote to the Office
of the Queensland Coroner, Terry Ryan, asking, now that the
finding of suicide is set aside, is a new finding required.
If so, what are the options for making a finding?

(51:13):
If not, does it automatically become an open finding or abandoned?
And how long will it take for the matter to
be assessed and a decision made. This is the response
we received from a spokesman.

Speaker 14 (51:30):
The State Coroner will consider the judgment of Judge Jarrow,
noting that the court declined to order that the inquest
be reopened to re examine the finding, or that a
new inquest beheld.

Speaker 1 (51:42):
We then received our own legal advice and we're told
no new finding was required. It would be odd to
leave it as it stands with no finding as to
how Gwen died homicide, suicide or misadventure. While not a deal,
it does not compel the coroner to reopen, but they

(52:05):
still may do so, although there's no time limit on
when a decision has to be made.

Speaker 6 (52:14):
Regardless of what the state coroner designs. The significance of
this ruling is not lost on those on the front line.
Allison caught up with domestic violence in New South Wales
CEO Deelia Donovan.

Speaker 1 (52:26):
You know, given that we have so many demands today
and so many women still dying today, how important is
it to still shine a light on these depths.

Speaker 15 (52:35):
It is so significantly important because what these issues are
showing us is hidden crimes and possibly repeat offenders we
didn't know that existed. This will highlight accountability, justice, the
shame and everything that victims survivors go through to have
what has happened to them acknowledged, their families, the pain.

(52:55):
It is fundamental that we go back and acknowledge what
hasn't been acknowledged and recognized. Domestic and family violence and
the fact that it has caused huge amount of domestic
homicides that possibly have we been reported, weren't taken seriously
and weren't respected.

Speaker 1 (53:11):
But some will argue it's resources, right, we need resources
to deal with the current situation, So that's kind of
what you're up against.

Speaker 15 (53:19):
Yeah, And I think what I would say to that
is there's two points there. I'd want to make is
victim survivors deserve justice, as do their family, so from
a justice perspective and truthtelling, it's fundamental. And secondly, we
don't capture data very well when it comes to domestic
and family violence, so we don't often know what need
looks like because there's so much of it, but we

(53:39):
don't record it well enough. So if we're not recording
actual statistics of what's happening, we then can't look at
the evidence space of what the needs and the resources
need to be. So I would argue that we do
need to have that information so we can make informed
decisions about funding and resourcing. And because we haven't known
those statistics in the past, we then haven't resourced adequately.

Speaker 1 (54:00):
And I guess just about setting a precedent who certainly
in this court decision. How significant is it.

Speaker 15 (54:06):
It's deeply significant. As I've said, you know, it's about justice,
it's about accountability, it's about recognition, it's about taking shame
away from victims survivors who have been wrongly accused and
absolutely right. You know, people will respond in different ways
when they're impacted by domestic and family violence, and it's deeply,
deeply complex, but it is important that the justice system

(54:27):
is recognizing what's happening and that those legal protections can
then be recognized going forward.

Speaker 16 (54:32):
At any time, at any stage of an investigation, it
is really critical that we do have an accurate assessment
of a woman's experience or domestic violence and all the
different types of harms that can take because we do
know that some days reported as suicide are part of
the hidden domestic violence homicide pole, and as has been

(54:54):
highlighted in your podcast, these deaths are essentially murdered by
proxy for women who either our own lives due to
the relentless experience of internet partner violence, or when the
death is incorrectly categorized as suicide when it is in
fact a domestic violence homicide.

Speaker 6 (55:11):
This is doctor Kelly Dingley from DV Connect in Queensland.

Speaker 16 (55:15):
It certainly is something that is not unknown to the
domestic family violence sector as well as the digital system
and also as.

Speaker 4 (55:23):
Reported in academia.

Speaker 16 (55:25):
So you know, for example, a lot of the work
that's been done with Cape Fitzgibbitt and Silkie Myers as
well with the recent missions looking at missing murdering of nations,
women's and children, and so this is not an unknown
situation and there are many reasons why it does need
to have a SPOTLT on it because these deaths are
kind of visible and data sets and they do contribute

(55:47):
to them the ongoing silencing of a woman's domestic violence.

Speaker 4 (55:51):
And we also know that children.

Speaker 16 (55:53):
And family members of women murdered are also part of
that hidden toll of suicides related to DV death.

Speaker 6 (56:01):
Calls for help from domestic violent survivors continue to climb
up thirty percent from the previous year, according to MICA Projects,
a not for profit organization in Brisbane. CEO Karen Walsh
says during this time they provided assistance to more than
eleven thousand women.

Speaker 4 (56:18):
Yeah, I think that, you.

Speaker 17 (56:20):
Know, definitely, over the last decade, it's not considered just
private business but it is more now considered that we
should be providing women with the support and resources they
need to be protected. They might not be able to
do that all on their own, which might have been
the case ten years ago or longer. I think that

(56:41):
we still blame the women for not leaving or not
leaving earlier when death or other things do occur. But
the reality is women are most at risk when they leave,
and what's the reaction Apart from those debts where the
cohersive control was completely unrecognizable and they've attempted murder of

(57:07):
the family members and sometimes successful murder of all family members,
and then in a suicide attempt on their own. Sometimes
they have been successful, sometimes they haven't. Those ones seemed
to be very much, not known to police, not known
to services, living a fairly sort of comfortable life, but

(57:30):
no one quite knows what happened, you know, like and
then when people investigate it more people will see the
signs of control, often a lot of financial stress, image
issues where partner's being lost his job and he was
in a well paid job or like. There seems to
be different circumstances around some of those debts to others

(57:54):
who were engaged with the service system in multiple ways,
And I suppose that's to do with their personal resources.
Like the poorer you are, the more you're going to
be reliant on the safety net and service system that
people can access, Whereas sometimes when women have more resources,

(58:14):
they still get pushed into poverty by DV. But they
might be able to plan how they go about leaving
in a different way, or not know at all that
he's intention or be so scared they won't leave because
they fear that he will kill them more he has
said he would if they left, so they never talk

(58:35):
about it. There's not one recipe for it, I suppose.
So it means listening intently to women and what they
want and how they want to go about getting their safety,
but as well recognizing that there are systems the police
can put in place, they can get protection orders, people

(58:56):
can respond rapidly in in a coordinated way so that
they are safer and not reliant just on their own resources.

Speaker 6 (59:05):
So you've had a chance to speak to your legal team,
what's your sense of what might happen now going forward.

Speaker 7 (59:11):
I spoke to them directly straight after, like Judge Sharrow
handed down his decision, and then I've also had communications
with them yesterday and on both counts they assured me
that they are happy and willing to continue to assist
me in making the representations to the State Coroner about
the findings that were made regarding Gwen.

Speaker 6 (59:34):
Steth Okay and the finding of suicide was set aside.
So what does that mean. Does the coroner by law
have to come up with a new finding?

Speaker 2 (59:45):
I believe so.

Speaker 7 (59:47):
Like my understanding is that as we know Justicehero, he
set aside.

Speaker 4 (59:52):
Coroner Wilson's findings as.

Speaker 7 (59:55):
To the fact that she ruled that it was suicide,
like he's overruled that. But I believe that now it
goes to either the state Coroner and he can either
make the decision from here or pass it on to
another coroner to make the decision. And going forward, I
think they've got the opportunity to either just agree with

(01:00:16):
Justice Sharrow, leave it at that, send it back to
in quest, or any other further options that are really
open to the state Coroner.

Speaker 4 (01:00:25):
I guess yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:00:26):
Actually I'm looking now. I think under sections forty five
to b and E of the Coroners Act in Queensland,
the coroner does have to make a new finding it's
just whether or not the state coroner or another coroner
makes those findings by reviewing the evidence rather than holding
a new inquest. Which do you think they will do,
and which do you think they should do?

Speaker 2 (01:00:47):
What they will do?

Speaker 7 (01:00:49):
You know, I have no idea, Brian, because as you know,
like we've had a real battle on our hands to date,
and things in the past that we hoped would in
court and should have happened have not transpired. I think
we need another inquest, We need another inquest and we
need an independent investigation. Now how we will get an

(01:01:09):
independent investigation from the qpis given the treatment we've had
in the past and given the way Gwen's case was
viewed in the past, I don't know. We do have
new evidence now that we didn't have when the inquest
took place in cans So all of that new evidence
should be viewed critically and independently and objectively. It should

(01:01:32):
be viewed by someone who does not have contacts, friendships
or friendships that are going to sway their judgment. And
you know, I think, as I've mentioned previously, Brian, there
has been cases in Queensland alone, like probably the most
famous one to Vicky Armland, Julian Lake.

Speaker 4 (01:01:51):
It took three coronial inquests to get the right decision.

Speaker 7 (01:01:55):
But the thing that we have to focus on here, Brian,
is that the family did. We get the right decision
in the end, and this is all we're asking for,
Like any other family of those hundreds of thousands of
victims out there, we just want justice and we want
the right decision. So if, for example, another coroner looks

(01:02:16):
at it and says, no, judge here, I got it wrong.
I'm going to give a different opinion to this, then
we'll do exactly what we've done from day one. We'll
just pick up the pieces and we'll forge on ahead
from there.

Speaker 6 (01:02:28):
Yeah, and I guess there's also the possibility the state
coroner or another coroner will make a finding, an open finding,
or a finding that Gwen died due to the actions
of another person. Yes, play and homicide involved. It is
possible that both of those might could emerge.

Speaker 7 (01:02:45):
Yes, and you know, both of those in my view
would be correct.

Speaker 4 (01:02:50):
Well, I absolutely, one hundred percent.

Speaker 7 (01:02:52):
Believe it would be correct to say that Gwen died
by foul play and at the hands of another person, Brian,
because I believe when have the evidence that Ken Sober
was responsible for Gwen's dad all.

Speaker 6 (01:03:04):
Right, so well, any idea on the time frame as
to when the said coroner will make a decision.

Speaker 7 (01:03:10):
Absolutely none, I'm sorry, Brian, absolutely none. No, it's really
in his hands like once once it hits his desk
once again. As I've said in the past, this is
one of the things that families.

Speaker 4 (01:03:22):
Are up against with the sister.

Speaker 7 (01:03:23):
But what happens from here we really just have to
wait now and see.

Speaker 6 (01:03:27):
As always, Sue, we will be standing by you right
through to the end, along with all our listeners. Good luck.

Speaker 7 (01:03:33):
Thanks Brian, thanks so much, and thanks again to you
and Allison everything that you've done. You know, you've been
absolutely amazing and without you we could never have got
it this far.

Speaker 1 (01:03:53):
It's been four decades of anguish, perseverance and great courage
in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds, and Sue Cole
now feels that justice is in reach for her sister Gwen.

(01:04:20):
Someone somewhere may know more about this case. Perhaps one
of our listeners may help find the information that reveals
the truth behind the death of Gwen Grover. If you
know something or have a suggestion, please email us at
Shot in the Dark at seven dot com dot Au,

(01:04:41):
or leave us an anonymous tip at Shot Inthdark dot
com dot au. If this podcast has raised issues for you,
please call Lifeline on thirteen eleven fourteen or visit them
at www dot Lifeline dot org au. This podcast is

(01:05:03):
brought to you by me presenter and journalist Alison Sandy.
If you like what you're hearing, please rate and review
our podcast. It helps other listeners find us special thanks
to my writer, producer Brian Seymour, Gwen's sister and tireless

(01:05:23):
campaigner for Justice Sue Cole, sound designer Mark Wright, graphics
Jason Blamford. Before our theme music is by Bob Kronk
the First and there is a link to his music
on Spotify in the show notes.

Speaker 6 (01:05:42):
When Away such Swirm, the Pains.

Speaker 1 (01:05:51):
And Shot in the Dark is a seven News production.

Speaker 9 (01:06:00):
Also WoT also mat In

All Episodes

13 - Breakthrough

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

Therapy Gecko

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}13 - Breakthrough