November 8, 2025 • 60 mins
David Heilpern was a cannabis smoking, yoga loving lawyer who wanted to change the world. As a country magistrate, he’s held a vomit bag for a prisoner, watched one young man go to prison just to spend time with family and saw others he convicted die behind bars. David joins Gary Jubelin to share what it’s really like behind the bench, and how he became known as the “f**k” magistrate.
Want to hear more from I Catch Killers? Visit news.com.au.
Watch episodes of I Catch Killers on our YouTube channel here.
Like the show? Get more at icatchkillers.com.au
Advertising enquiries: newspodcastssold@news.com.au
Questions for Gary: icatchkillers@news.com.au
Get in touch with the show by joining our Facebook group, and visiting us on Instagram or Tiktok.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
The public has had a long held fascination with detectives.
Detective sy aside of life, the average person is never
exposed to. I spent thirty four years as a cop.
For twenty five of those years I was catching killers.
That's what I did for a living. I was a
homicide detective. I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead,
I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated.
(00:23):
The guests I talk to each week have amazing stories
from all sides of the law. The interviews are raw
and honest, just like the people I talk to. Some
of the content and language might be confronting. That's because
no one who comes in the contact with crime is
left unchanged. Join me now as I take you into
this world. Magistrates, by the nature of their work, are
(00:49):
often criticized by the public for going soft on crime.
And then you have, on the other hand, people they
convict and sentence think they've been hard done by. It's
a tough job burn a local court magistrate, but they
play a crucial role in society today. We're fortunate to
have retired magistrate David Helpern come on the podcast and
(01:09):
have a fascinating discussion about the life of magistrate, including
everything from the time he held a sick bag for
a prisoner, face death threats, and he's dealings with sovereign
citizens and why he became known as the fuck Magistrate.
That's going to be interesting. If you have a preconceived
idea about the person who sits in judgment of others,
(01:29):
have a listen to what David has to say about
the role. I think you'll be surprised and perhaps shocked
about the person he is and his views on crime
and punishment. It was a refreshing chat and one that
opened my eyes up to the complexity of the role.
David Hilpern, welcome to I Catch Killers.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Thanks so much.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Well, look, old habits die hard. So if I start
referring to you as your honor, you know that I've
got flashbacks to times in the witness box where I've
been dissected by very clever legal people. So if I
fall into that trap, forgive me.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Well. When you and I started in court, I think
it was your worship.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah that changed two thousand and four, I think around
that time, was it.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Yeah, that's right. It stopped worshiping me and started honoring me.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
So then either way, I was trying to give you respect,
your honor, your worship. Sir, you were twenty one years
as a magistrate. Did you come accustomed to people addressing
you in that manner, your honor, your worship, that type
of thing.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Never. It always felt completely bizarre. Really, I kept looking
around wondering who they were talking to. It's such an
artificial environment, really, the court, where you refer to people
not by their name but solely by their title and
of course your worship and your honor. They're meant to
(02:55):
instantly give authority. But I sort of always felt that
authority should be earned and respect should be earned, rather
than just given by a title.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Yeah, that's an interesting way of looking at in my
research that I didn't in preparation for it. I saw
it was either in an article or an interview you did.
You had some funny situations with the way that you've
been addressed, and with someone in court trying obviously trying
to do their best, but referred to you as your majesty.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Your majesty, your most worshipfulness. Yeah, you really got the
full gamut. Your majesty was delivered by a by a
fellow who'd only just immigrated from India and he was
bending over backwards to show respect, so I just let
it go.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
It would have been a little bit embarrassing if you
pull him upon that.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
Absolutely. I also got called your holiness once as well,
when I thought being elevated to the pope was really
something else.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Well, I'm glad you didn't buy into your own own
fame and the adulation that you had from people in
your courts. But it's interesting the way you see people
come in the courts, because it is a strange environment
for people, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
It really is. And you know I always I mean
you and I discussed this in preparation that by the
time you've been a police officer for five or ten years,
going to court just becomes natural and you're pretty relaxed
about it. Yeah, Whereas for people who've never been there before,
particularly young people, Aboriginal people, people from different backgrounds, it's
(04:32):
quite a scary environment for them. And I think one
of the real functions of good lawyers, good prosecutors, and
good judicial officers is to make people feel relaxed and
not too uptight.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Yeah. Well, I think creating that relaxed atmosphere lends to
a better outcome as well, because I've seen people that
have literally choked in the witness box. I know the
story or the information they wanted to provide, and that
doesn't come out properly, and quite often it's because they're
intimidated in a foreign type environment.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Absolutely. I used to in training other magistrates. I used
to say, you know, courts should be like hospitals. Horrible
things do happen there, but everyone's doing their best in
this case to get to the truth and to get
to a just outcome.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
Yeah. No, it's important to create that. You talk about training.
On occasions where I've been fortunate enough to speak to
law students that are going to embark on a career
in law, what I try to leave my talk with,
or what I try to finish off with in giving
words of wisdom in that environment is that don't lose
(05:40):
touch with your humanity when you're practicing law. Like I'm
speaking to people, I'm talking to them from a police
point of view and things that I've seen and done.
But the importance of maintaining your humanity. Would you agree
in that concept?
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Yeah, for sure. And you know, I mean, I think
it's part of really maintaining your sanity in these jobs,
because if you lose your humanity, then where's your touchstone
when things start going wrong? You know? I mean, I
think most people join the police, most people join the
legal profession because they care and they want to help
other people. But if you lose your humanity, I think
(06:15):
you can be making mistakes and errors of judgment that
really impact on other people. I always tried to remind
myself that I was just a human being trying to
do my best in a difficult and very hot house environment.
And if you start from that perspective, with a bit
of humility as well as humanity, then I think justice
(06:39):
is better served. And I mean, I'm sure we've all
seen that in really good police officers too. They maintain
their humanity, they realize that they're human and we're all
just doing our best in a pretty difficult system.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
Yeah, I look, and I agree wholeheartedly what you've said there,
But I've also seen people that lose their way because
it's an adversarial system, and I see defense and prosecutors
going at it like it's a game of sport, and
I'm sitting in the court with the victim whose life's
been turned upside down or even the person appearing before
the court. And I think sometimes that can be disarming
(07:16):
to people involved in it, that they look and go,
what's going on here? We're talking about my life because
it is high stakes in the court.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
System, absolutely, and there's a difference between an adversarial system
which we have and a competitive system which we shouldn't have.
It's not actually about winning or losing. It's certainly about
ensuring that your case is presented the best it can
be from a prosecution or a defense point of view
and from the judicial office point of view, that everything
(07:46):
is explained and that people understand what's going on. I
mean the number of times I'd sentence people and go
into language that's a bit two technical or jargon and
they wouldn't have a clue what had actually happened. That's
got to be avoided. And also that over competitiveness. I
mean I had lawyers and prosecutors almost come to blows
(08:09):
yeah at the bar table, and you know, you feel
like saying, children, you know, we're not actually getting to
any point of having an evidence rightly if you're presented
so that I can make a decision when you're going
at it like that.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
The lost sight of what it's about. I'll do a
segue because you mentioned language, and I think i'll bring
this up. I was aware of the work that you
were doing at various times in your career when you're
a magistrate, and I was a police officer in homicide,
so doing a lot of work around the state in
different areas. But you did have a name. I'll let
(08:45):
you explain it the fuck magistrate, do you want to explain?
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Explain that it's true and it's a bad chize still
to this day, where with some pride, look, I think
we'd all been aware of the trifector, but I honestly
hadn't seen it that much in my career as a
defense lawyer and occasionally doing prosecution matters. But when I
went out to western New South Wales as a very
young magistrate, I was sitting in towns like Burke In Brewarrina, Cobabo.
(09:15):
Every second or third case was what they call a
trifacta case where someone's arrested for offensive language and then
they put up a bit of a stink and they're
charged with hindu police or resist arrest and assault police,
all because of language. And almost without exception, it was
the word fuck, And I'd been brought up on Triple
(09:37):
J and I'd watched movies and television and the word
that Alvin Purple, and you know, it had started to
be used really regularly. Yeah, people were getting arrested for it.
And it's not as though they were being arrested for
saying it in church. They were being arrested for saying
it in the street. And I had a case where,
or two cases really, one where a a bike that
(10:00):
was suspected of being stolen was being taken by a
police officer and the young Aboriginal man who took who
it was being taken from, saying you're not fucking having it,
and they said you're under arrest, and that was it.
It was on and the trifector in the second case
where a woman down at the South Coast was swearing
(10:21):
in a domestic violence situation where she was the victim
and the police had attended the premises and she had
lost lost control really and certainly was swearing at everybody.
But in both those cases, it seemed to me to
be ridiculous to arrest people that is deprived of their
liberty for an offense that carries a maximum penalty of
a fine. And so I just heard argument from a
(10:46):
barrister by the name of Mark Dennis, who is now
an sc and he said, well, I'll put it to you.
The words not offensive anymore. It's lost its punch, and
really this is just an unfortunate use of police powers
to deal with another problem, which is disrespect, or another
(11:06):
problem which is not being able to control yourself in
times of stress. And I accepted that argument, and I
found that the word was no longer offensive and dismissed
charges against people and there was no appeal, but there
was complaint. Some police didn't like it, and sixty Minutes
(11:27):
did a big number on it, and the police commissioner
came on sixty Minutes and said, well, you know, I
think he's probably right. I've used that word myself. Yeah,
that was the end of it.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Really, like the law is set in precedents, and yeah,
it goes back a long way, but it's got to
be able to serve the community that it's operating for.
And I think, congratulations on you taking that stance on that,
because I thought it was a shortcut for policing. It
sort of it fitted in early days in my policing.
(11:58):
I think we could rest people for being intoxicated or vagrant,
and that was just the excuse. Okay, I've got no
real charge. I take this person off the street. And
that's what you were talking about. And there was times
when it was abused, and you say the big three
like offensive behavior, right, you've said the word fuck. Now
we're going to arrest you. When you resist, that's going
(12:18):
to be resist police. And when you push this, that's
assault police. And these people are fitting there. And I
didn't like the culture of police and probably police that
I didn't respect talking about Oh we'll give them the trifecta. Yeah,
it was a horrible way, So congratulations on that. But
I'm sure you the shock jock type situation. People were
to push back and go, who is this soft magistrate?
(12:39):
He's going soft on crime. The sky is going to
fall if we allow people to do to swear.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
So, yeah, it's a funny thing because you know, you
bring your own, your own culture, you bring your own
humanity to the bench, which is something I think people
don't realize. So that I think I was much tougher
on domestic violence, much tougher on drink driving than many magistrates,
but certainly much lighter when I thought that things have
(13:05):
changed and the law doesn't just stay stable, it doesn't
stay in one spot. And while words like that were
certainly offensive twenty thirty forty years before I made that decision,
things actually move on. And I think these days, you know,
I'd hesitate to say it now, but the N word,
when you refer to people who are colored, Yeah, I
(13:27):
think that word is far more offensive than the word
fuck is today.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Well, you'd get the more reaction from someone if you
said that. If you're throwing out the F word, No
one's going to batten nyhii it if you said the
other word, people would. I agree. And when you're looking
at it, the definition of the actual crime is that
you've offended people. I took offense to the fact. And
I say this jokingly. I thought it was quite funny
(13:52):
that there was an article written about it in your
Stance and they reference was it chuk Fouler, the infamous
corrupt detective in the Royal Commission?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
Every second word that came out.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
Yeah, where we all sat at home watching his tapes
in his car or whatever, and he was using the
word as a punctuation mark and yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Totally, totally, Well, I thought it was funny that someone
said to me that his shorts were more offensive than
his language.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Bringing back there those images. We should move on from that. Yeah,
I do recall where they had the camera. It wasn't
a good good position. Tell us a little bit about
your your background, where did you grow up and how
did you find your way into law.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Look, my dad was a lawyer, and my uncle, Howe
was a lawyer and then a Supreme Court judge hol Spurling,
and there was a lot of law talk around our
kitchen table. My dad was very involved in civil liberties
and in prisoner Action group, and he was chief of
staff to Frank Walker, the then Attorney General when I
(14:56):
was a child, so I got brought up in a
hot house environment of law. I of course rejected that
completely and wanted to be a vet because we grew
up on a farm in Bathist and I thought that's it.
But I missed out on the marks to be a
vet just by a couple of marks. And in those days,
whatever mark you got, that was it, and vet science
(15:18):
was much higher. So law was my second choice, but
I never regretted it. Really. As soon as I started
at law school, I had some absolutely inspirational fellow students
and inspirational teachers, and I loved it. I love it
to this day. I find it's interesting and exciting and
(15:38):
intellectually challenging and morally challenging the kinds of dilemmas that
the law brings up. So my background was being brought
up in that environment. But I went to Bathist High School,
so I wasn't from a private school. And I did
my law degree. I moved to Sydney to do law
and I hated living in the city, so I moved
(15:59):
back to Batson, did it externally and when I finished,
by then I had a couple of kids, so it
wasn't a question of to finish off. As most people
would be aware, You've got to do another course, which
is called the College of Law or the legal workshop,
and to do that I got off at a scholarship
to do that in Canberra with A and U and
(16:20):
the Australian Attorney General's Department. So I joined them, and
then didn't like living in Canberra either, realized I was
definitely a country boy, and got a job with a
law firm Inkyogle, which and opened a branch office in
Nimben because I loved Nimben. I thought it was the
center of the universe.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Okay, I've spent a bit of time at Nimban myself.
Were you the radical, going to change the world type
UNI student and taking on the world? Was that your thing?
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Yes, I think you could say that. I was involved
in protests. I don't know if you remember a case,
but there was a case called Island Roberts where she'd
killed her husband, Bruce, and she'd got life imprisonment, and
I think my first set of demonstrations were to do
with releasing her from custody when really she was just
(17:13):
trying to defend herself against domestic vinds. It led to
the change in law for provocation as a defense, and
you know, at that time the Tazzy Dams marches were happening,
and so yeah, I thought it was a great chance
to enjoy myself, meet interesting people, particularly the opposite sex,
and get involved in politics.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
Okay, so I'm getting a picture of the type of
person you were, and recreational drugs in that environment. I
think statute of limitations a pass that and I haven't
cautioned you, so I think we can speak openly about that.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Indeed, and I've been open about that that. I mean,
I should say that in those days, it was very
unusual for people to use any drugs other things, just cannabis. Yeah,
and I certainly inhaled and exhaled, fortunately.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Not to President Clinton.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
And I really enjoyed it. I thought cannabis was a
terrific drug for me. I didn't like drinking. I didn't
like being around people who were drinking that much either.
It was pretty agro, whereas smoking was very mellow, and
it helped me weirdly focus on my studies enormously. I mean,
(18:33):
I did well with my studies. And I know that
it's unpopular to say, but for some people it really
helped slow me down.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
I think it's interesting with the drug situation, like when
we're talking cannabis and that I know people that, yeah,
that drug suits them at whatever it does. It balances
out other people that if they touch alcohol, they're going
to turn into a night there, you know, or other
people can deal with alcohol. It's an individual thing. The
(19:03):
effect that has on you living that type of lifestyle.
Do you think that served you well when you did
eventually start practicing.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
Law, Yes, I think it did. I mean I joined
a small firm that was, and I was doing criminal
defense work, doing legal aid, doing aboriginal legal service work,
and of course moving to the Far North Coast and
having a branch office in Nimben. A significant proportion of
my work was drug work, and no one was really
specializing in that much. But I enjoyed that kind of work.
(19:34):
I enjoyed the clients. I enjoyed the repartee with some
of the elements of the drug squad. You know, we
loved to hate each other and teased each other on
the winds and losses that we had. Probably far too competitive,
but I enjoyed the work environment, and I enjoyed that
doing drug work, and as you can imagine, there was
(19:56):
plenty of it. There was a lot of people being
arrested for cannabis plants. It was at the days of
the helicopter raids where crops were routinely being seized and
burnt and people arrested. There was a lot of people
charged just with simple possessions. And yeah, it's sort of
motivated me to speak up and speak out about why
(20:17):
the law needed to be changed. And I guess I
felt completely hypocritical as well, because I was a person
who not daily, yeah, in fact, not even weekly, but
if I went out, I really liked and enjoyed to
have a smoke.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Yeah, yeah, I can understand the conflict there, but that
was the environment. Like Nimben. I spent some time up there,
not working, but also time up there when I was working,
And it was quite funny driving up there, even an
unmarked police car. You'd pull up to a commune and
the whole commune and disappear into the bushes, calling out
government car, government car, just disappearing. And I just a
(20:56):
side note, I had a conversation with a family up there,
and they were most distraught that they raise their children
in very much the nimb and lifestyle, and their children
had rebelled, and they were disappointed that they're trying to
get careers and they're getting jobs and different things like that.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
And it's an absolute tragedy when that happens.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
Yeah, they raise them with all the right veys.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
When you call someone poss rainbow and they still become
an accountant, you've definitely failed.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
Defense. Did you ever consider prosecution? Did you ever go
down that path?
Speaker 2 (21:31):
I did do some prosecuting. I did one of our clients,
or several of our clients were local councils and I
did some prosecution work there, and there is no doubt
that the best training to be a defense lawyer is
to do some prosecution and vice versa. A maide of
mine who's now the Minister for Local Government, Ron Honig,
was a public defender for many years and then he
(21:53):
did a stint in the Crown prosecutions and he said
to me, I learned more in that six months about
being a good defense lawyer, in fact, just being a
good lawyer. Yeah. By swapping the side of the fence,
and I think doing the prosecution work for local councils
for people who had built dangerous structures or had committed
other environmental type offenses. That was really powerful training ground
(22:18):
and also showed me that things weren't quite as black
and white as as I thought they were. It also
showed me that a good prosecutor and a good defense
lawyer together can really get to the truth of a situation,
normally get an a greed set of facts, normally getting
agreed plea, and there's no need for all the difficulties.
I did find really quickly that I did not like
(22:41):
defending sexual assault cases. I found them grueling, and I
never felt comfortable in the role of cross examining victims
of sexual assault.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Yeah, I would imagine that I know a lot of
people in the legal sector, and that's pretty much across
the board. That's harder the fences, and sometimes it crosses
that line. That must be hard doing that, jumping between
the two sides. And you know, as you said, coming
to a situation where both parties are amenable, having agreed
(23:14):
set of the facts and resolving the situation fairly. That's
the ultimate goal, isn't it that you want to achieve
in that environment?
Speaker 2 (23:23):
Absolutely, because it means that everyone knows where they're at.
And it also means, particularly in violent crimes, that people
don't have to give evidence. And I think we would
all agree that the process as a victim of crime
of giving evidence can often be well, it's often described
as being worse than worse than the experience itself, you know,
(23:43):
and I think having to relive it and all the
difficulties associated with that. And the other thing is there's
a good rule in law which is if you plead guilty,
you get a discount. Yeah, and that it's not as
big a discount as people realize, but it's a real
currot as opposed to to a stick. From a defense
perspective and from a prosecutorial perspective.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
Yeah, I see the benefits of that. Then I never
got bogged down. I know people have really strong views
on sentencing and all that, and I personally don't like
in the whole range of offenses where they talk about
mandatory sentencing on offenses. One thing I've learned watching people
go through the courts is that each case is unique
(24:26):
in its own own way, and to put a blanket
a mandatory sentence for if you're convicted of this offense
doesn't always fit the crime.
Speaker 2 (24:35):
I totally agree. I think there's a problem with our
sentencing system, and that is that the prosecution don't appeal enough.
It's very hard to get the DPP to appeal a sentence,
particularly from the local court, and what that means is
that the whole appeal system is skewed, so only defense
lawyers appeal and then magistrates are sitting there getting their
sentences lessened more often than not. And in the whole
(25:00):
time I was a magistrate, I never had one sentence increased.
In fact, I never had a New South Wales DPP
appeal against a sentence. Now that's just wrong because I'm
sure I was too lenient on occasions. I mean, you
try not to be and you try and err on
the side of right, but the system is skewed and
(25:20):
it shouldn't be and we wouldn't need mandatory sentencing if
we had a decent and proper appeal system.
Speaker 1 (25:26):
Yeah, it's interesting the appeal system. Out of all the
aspects of court, I found the appeal system. I could
sit in court being involved in appeals and it just
seems so complex, the appeal system. Quite often I'd sit
there and I think I've got reasonable intelligence in trying
to understand the process of courts. But I've got to
say sometimes I've sat in court, especially appeals at the
(25:49):
High Court, and I'm sitting there, going, what are we
talking about here? It's very complex totally.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
And then one of the great things about being magistrates
is you never had to deal with anybody else's appeals
because you were right at the bottom of the barrel.
You were at a court of first instance, and yeah,
you know, it was just it was just you were
the first one to have a go and if people
had a different view, well that That was fine by me.
I never got upset by appeals, and you're right, I
often didn't understand them either.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
Yeah, just on this nuanced point of law that would
just go over my head sometimes. How long were you
practicing law before you became a magistrate? How long were
you doing that for?
Speaker 2 (26:28):
I was practicing for about ten years before I became
a magistrate. But during that time also I got invited
along with another local lawyer, to help establish Southern Cross
University Law School, and so I was a part time
lawyer for the last four or five years as we
set up that law school and I became an academic
(26:48):
at it. It quickly was really apparent to local practitioners
in those days. If you wanted to practice in New
South Wales, you had to do your degree in New
South Wales and you had to get admitted in New
South Wales. So all the lawyers on the far North
coast would have to Anyone who wanted to be a
lawyer from a rural or regional area in New South
Wales had to go to Sydney, and that was just
(27:09):
so it was really difficult for many people. It was
a barrier. So we thought, well, let's start the first
non metropolitan law school in Australia which.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
We did that you've spent four years. There was it
ninety eight that you was at research that you did
in prisons and wrote a book about Can we talk
about that before we talk about your role as the magistrate.
That was before you became a magistrate.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
It was I was representing a young man from the
Gold Coast who'd come down to Tunneble Falls community and
conducted a raid. Now that sounds like a police action,
but in fact hippies were pretty vulnerable to people coming
in garments and stealing their crops and he had been
involved in that. He was nineteen and going on fifteen.
(27:59):
And when his bail was refused, I said too. It
was in the district court. I said, you know, this
young man is likely to get sexually assaulted in prison
and that's why you should give him bail. And the
judge said to me, well, where's the proof of that,
where's the proof that anyone that that happens? And Corrective
Services minister had said, well, rape is inevitable in prison
(28:20):
and I quoted that. The judge wasn't too impressed with that,
and I thought, give me a chance. I'll go and
get some I'll find out there must be research on it.
And I found out that with in Australia there was none,
absolutely no research. So that case that young man was
bail refused and after he was sexually assaulted in prison
and he killed himself, that really motivated me to start
(28:43):
researching this issue, and so I got some funding. And
I suppose also I was motivated by the fact that
I was an academic who didn't have a higher degree,
and that was a bit of a no no. So
I decided to do a high degree in research, interviewing
three hundred prisoners aged eighteen to twenty five as to
whether they'd been assaulted or sexually assaulted while they're in prison,
(29:04):
and unsurprisingly, about one in three had been sexually assaulted
while they're in prison. Sometimes that took the form of
what we would call rape, but often it was a
protective pairing. In other words, they would pair with someone
who was bigger, tougher than and would protect them in
exchange for sexual favors. So that research was published and
(29:27):
caused quite a stir. It caused a few things, the
segregation of eighteen to twenty five year old prisoners with
each other, rather than older prisoners, which was I think
a start the introduction of condoms into prisons which exists
to this day, and because the HIV AIDS was huge
at that time, and also a recognition that technology has
(29:50):
huge and obviously an ongoing role to play in keeping
prisoners safe. So I then published that research as a
book and some fun touring with that in the United
States in particular where it became Unfortunately, I donated the
royalties very early on. I wish I hadn't.
Speaker 1 (30:09):
Just didn't think clearly enough on it.
Speaker 2 (30:12):
I just thought it wouldn't sell many.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
But the book Fear or Favor Sexual Assault of Young Persons.
I'm reading through the parts of it, and yeah, the
statistics that came out were quite frightening. And when you
talk one in three and even as a police officer,
and very much as a police officer, you had empathy
(30:34):
on what you were doing, but you didn't really consider
what happens when you send people to prison. But there
have been many times when I locked people up and
I know what happens in prison and the type of
people in prison, and you think what's going to happen
to them doesn't really fit the crime. They've committed and
it was almost you look. I looked with pity and
thinking this is terrible. I know what's going to happen
(30:57):
to this person. They will not be able to look
after themselves in prison, so they'll either have to pair
up with someone for protection or they will be attacked
in the full on sexual assault. And the impact that
has on people, As you said by your client, that
a result in him taking his own life.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
And let's face people who go into prison and are
victimized are not likely to have great self restraint learn
the kind of skills we would hope they learned not
to re offend in that kind of environment. Of course,
it means they wouldn't want to go back, but as
we all know, criminogenic behavior is partly willpower and partly circumstance.
(31:40):
So I hope things have improved. I suspect they have.
I think that there's many more avenues for complaint, a
lot more protection, and the technology means that most areas
of prisons are now covered by CCT.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Well the technology, and I spent some time in prison
of recent times doing a podcast series, and I was
fascinated by the technology that's available now that it might
be the offense or an assault happened now, but they
can look back at all the movements week prior to
that and from all different angles, and yeah, it has
(32:14):
to make it more difficult. But I've seen not so
much when I was in the police because it wasn't
the type of conversations that I would be having. But
since I've been out of the police and people I've
met doing this podcast the effect that that has on people.
And there was a person sitting here in the studio,
Russell Manster, who's sadly passed away, but talked about being
(32:36):
sent to a prison as a seventeen year old and
putting a cell with to sex offenders and just brutalized
for days on end, and he came out angry and
subsequently spent the next twenty years in and out of jail,
and his whole life was dictated by this is never
going to happen to me again, yep.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
And I think that undertaking research like that was important
but also showed me that there's more ways to change
things protest, and that the role of academia in society
is actually really important when it picks up on it
(33:17):
and is able to highlight you know, not things that
are obscure, but things that are fundamental. I mean, any
of us could go to jail. That's the reality. Me
for my price sins, you for your price sins. We
could all end up in jail, and if we do,
we should be safe.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Yeah, that's not part of the punishment. And you're quite
right with the academic study, the research and all the
information that can back it up that when this next
young lawyer like you were at the time saying, well,
I'm concerned about what will happen to my client, and here,
in fact, there is a study that shows yeah, it
does carry weight. I think I'd like to think and
(33:56):
a shout out to correct New Services and just a
bit of a bit of a stay. But I went
to and you practiced in Wellington, or you've presided in
Wellington the mcquarie Correctional Center, where they're approaching prisons a
completely different way, and a lot of that is that
the prisoners feel safe. And I'm not just talking about
(34:17):
sexual assaults, but in that environment, prisoners are treaty with respect.
I hadn't seen a jail like it where they're calling
the corrective services officers by names and there's mutual respect
both sides shout out not only to the prisoners but
corrective services officers. They work for six hours in whatever
(34:37):
industry they could find within the prison, and they study
for six hours and then they all stay in the dorm.
The interesting part of all the prisoners residing in the dorm,
I thought there'd be a bloodbath. I thought, yeah, maximum
security prisoners twenty five in one dorm where they're pretty
well free to roam and do what they want. It
actually taught them social skills. And I joked with them
(35:00):
in there, and subsequently that if there was someone within
that pod, the twenty five that they didn't get on,
they'd almost like one of those reality TV shows, vote
them off the island. We don't like this person, could
we move out? And I've got to say I was
so impressed. And it hasn't been running long enough to
(35:20):
see the after effect the studies that once they've been
released from prison, But the majority of prisoners I spoke
to in there said what it sets us up for
is that it teaches us how to integrate back into society.
And yeah, these weren't all the do good at prisoners.
These were some hard cases, you know, the people that
we all would have heard their names in the media
(35:42):
for the crimes that they've committed, and some of the
younger blakes, and there was a lot of people in
there for lengthy The food there was very good because
there's a lot of chefs, because chefs got involved in
drug dealing or who would have guessed, But there were
people serving lengthy custoviial sentences. And they said, when we're
in other prisons, the more traditional prisons, every time we
(36:03):
walked out of our cell, we had to bridge up
and get ready to take on whoever was going to
come at us. And there'd always be someone here. They
felt safe, they could relax, they could let their guard down.
And I've got to say I was so impressed, and
I honestly hober gets that type of prison gets integrated
across the board.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
Look, there's some great things happening in that area. And
also some of the specialist Aboriginal units are really doing
some great work with Aboriginal young people and Aboriginal adults
in terms of connection to culture, and the studies show
that that leaves will lead to less likely to reoffend.
The enemy of a good prison system is the tabloid media,
(36:44):
often having a go at it being too soft. You
know what the real outcome that you want from a
prison is people not to return, and we've been failing
at that. About seventy percent of prisoners will go back
within five years. Now, prisons like you've just maybe you're
not going to get to eighty percent not returning, but
(37:04):
you might well get to fifty or sixty or seventy
percent not returning. And it looks, you know, the Henry
Lawson wrote in I think nineteen seventeen when he was
in prison, he said, the press are printing their smug
smug lies and paying their shameful debt. They talk of
the benefits prisoners have and the things that prisoners get,
(37:26):
and you know, we need to look at prisons and
go I don't actually care if there's great education or
great physical surroundings or good food or whatever, as long
as people are less likely to defend, because particularly violent offenders,
that has such a long lasting impact. And we know
that most violent offenders are domestic violence offenders, and we
(37:47):
know the impact that has on their children and their
children's children and their families and their partners. And we're
just anything to put a stop to that. I don't
care what it costs or how soft it looks.
Speaker 1 (37:59):
Yeah, well, David, when I spent time in there, and
there was a couple of weeks and I thought, am
I going soft here? Am I taking that prisoner aside?
Because you had that go soft on crime? What am
I talking about? The next cop go soft on crime?
I spoke to Ken Marslu His son was murdered in
an arm robbery. Just a young fella working at the
(38:21):
pizza hut, paying his way through university and an arm
robbery and he was shot and kill. That was a
horrendous crime. And Ken was very angry and campaigned and
led enough is enough and different different campaigns, mandatory sentence
in getting tough on crime. And I've become quite close
with Ken since I've left the cops. We knew each
(38:43):
other before, and I rang him on, Okay, this is
what I'm seeing in prison. What's your take on this? Ken?
And he said, that's about getting smart on crime, not
getting tough on crime. If we can reduce crime, there's
less victims. Everyone wins. And yeah, that strengthened my resolve. That. Okay,
that's if anyone's got the right to really question what
(39:05):
goes on in prisons at someone that's lost their child
in circumstances like Ken did, and yeah, I think everyone's
a winner. And as we're talking the other day the
cost of keeping prisoners in custody, that what if we
channel that money somewhere else to rehabilitate diversionary programs that
(39:27):
keep people out of prison. Has to be a benefit to.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
It, absolutely, And the other whole aspect of that is, well,
who's in prison and who needs to be in prison
if we make sure that you got the right people,
the people who really need to be detained. And you
and I both started in an era where fine defaulters
were thrown into prison, where possession of a small amount
(39:50):
of drug led to a prison term. Whereas you know,
we've rationalized that to an extent. We need to always
be focused on that if the right people are in prison,
the community is protected, and not just immediately but in
the medium to long term. If they're treated like humans
and given responsibility and learned decision making processes.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
Well, if they're treated like animals, they come out like animals.
And I've heard prisoners say that, but even the prisoners
in these maximum security prisons acknowledge that society is not
for everyone. Like there's people in here and they'll point
to them, go that person should never be released, and yeah,
there's one of the people that society need to be
protected by. Okay. Magistrates, Yes, when describe the role of
(40:38):
a magistrate, because people look at the magistrates and I'm surprised,
I'm constantly surprised how many people never actually experience court.
And it's yeah, there's only a small percentage of either
the ones that commit offenses or the ones that have
been caught up in witnessing a crime. There's a lot
of people that never see and inside of the court.
(40:59):
So what is the all of the magistrate? How would
you describe it?
Speaker 2 (41:03):
You know, the magistrate is the call fates of the
criminal justice system. Every single case starts, every single criminal
case starts in the magistrate's court. But at such a
very job. Magistrates are also coroners, so we also deal
with cronial matters. Magistrates also have a civil jurisdiction, so
disputes between people up to one hundred thousand dollars are
(41:24):
dealt within the local court. But crime, all crimes start
in the magistrate's court. And what that means is even
a murderer will start in the magistrate's court and then
go up to high courts, But about ninety three percent
of all cases start and finish in the magistrate's court.
And they used to just deal with summary offenses, traffic matters,
(41:46):
very minor offenses. But over the years, the efficiency dividend
of having just a magistrate, not a judge and jury
determining matters means that the jurisdiction has expanded, So magistrates
deal basically with people who've been charged with the vast
majority of offenses and determine their guilt and if they're guilty,
(42:08):
determine their sentence. So the average day of a magistrate
would be dealing with a defendant hearing, for example, where
someone's pleading not guilty to a domestic violence offense or
a cultivation of prohibited plan defense or a white collar crime,
or more likely than not, a traffic offense, and determining
if they're guilty. The maximum penalty magistrates can impose this
(42:30):
five years imprisonment, so nothing like the district court which
has unlimited and supreme court, but still the nuts and
bolts of the criminal justice system revolve around the local
court and the magistrate sits like a judge, but without
the superannuation.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
And without the wink and come on, David, let that go.
Let that go.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
I've let it go, or associates for that matter. But
so there's magistrates in every country town either ones that
come in each you know, up to certain size. So
even small towns in this area, places like Kyogle and
mullam Bimbi and MacLean will each have a magistrate visiting them,
you know, once a week or once a month, or
(43:12):
a few days a week, or in Lismore and the
bigger places every day. So magistrates are at the coal
face of the criminal justice system and they are the
judicial officer that most people will come in contact with.
Just in New South Wales now they're called judges of
the local court starting next year. Yeah, I heard that
and it's been the case in the Act in the
(43:32):
Northern Territory for a while and I think it reflects
better the role. I mean, who knows, You're right, people
don't know what a magistrate does, but they'd be more
likely to know what a judge does. And really they're
just judges of the local court.
Speaker 1 (43:44):
Yeah, I would imagine it's a lonely job. Sitting there,
and I say that from my observations, like the prosecution
they've got their team, the defense have got their team.
People in the gallery, the media are hanging out doing
what the media do. A magistrate all on their own
and making some very big decisions knowing that they're potentially
(44:07):
going to be scrutinized by some very informed legal people
sitting above them for different matters.
Speaker 2 (44:12):
Well, and not just scrutinized by them. When I was
first appointed, my first appointment was Dubbo and the local
member was Jerry Peacock. And never had you met a
more law an order a person than Jerry Peacock, who
also owned the local newspaper. So you can imagine it
was a real tra effector so. But yes, it is
(44:33):
lonely because lawyers tend to mix with lawyers in a
country town. And you know, I was a country practitioner.
Most of or a lot of my friends were lawyers.
And then you go to the bench and of course
you can't mix with the lawyers because they're before you.
So it is lonely and country magistrates by their very nature,
(44:53):
sit on their own. It's not like the Downing Center
or one of the big city courts where you might
have twenty magistrates and you can all get together at
more morning tea and have a chat. This was and
shortly after I. I mean, you know, believe it or not.
When I started, we used to have morning teas with
all the lawyers and all the prosecutors. The police sergeant's
wife would traditionally put it on and we would all
(45:15):
gaggle and sort out the cases. Well, that was soon
thrown out quite rightly, but it did mean that it
was our pretty lonely existence. And you know, I was
living in Dubbo and you know, you're buying a newspaper
and the newsagents say why aren't you locking people up more?
And you go to the checkout and the young woman
working there saying, hey, you're not going to lock my
boyfriend up, are you? And you know, so you couldn't
(45:37):
avoid the area.
Speaker 1 (45:39):
That's like I hear the dramas have been the local
cop that you're never really off duty. But yeah, it's
pressure times ten when you're the magistrate of young Susie's
coming before you next week. She's a good girl as
you're buying your cup of coffee or something like that.
Speaker 2 (45:56):
So it's I think It is really true of local
sergeants too, And I think policemen's kids like magistrates kids,
you know, they get a hard time at times.
Speaker 1 (46:06):
Yes, well, when did you make the decision? So you
practiced law for a period of time and then you
set up the university, the law faculty there, when did
you decide that I want to be a magistrate?
Speaker 2 (46:20):
Jeff Shaw was the Attorney General and he and I
had had some arguments about a whole set of things.
We got on very well, but he was sick of
me pestering and about law changes I wanted to see,
and he said, I'm going to stop having to deal
with you soon, and I said, well, good luck with that.
And then I got the phone call that you least expect,
which was from the Attorney's the Governor's private secretary, which
(46:44):
was to offer me offer me a job as a magistrate.
And I thought, well, you know, I'd come across some
really good magistrates in my time, there was one phil
Molean who since passed away. But I'd also come across
some terrible magistrates who I had very little respect for.
And I thought, well, I can do this job. Well,
I can change the world. There's things that I really
(47:06):
want to make a difference on aboriginal over representation, drug laws,
you know, things like that. And so I went into
it with the usual gusto of a good lefty protester
and thought I could really change things from the inside.
And that's that's why I did it. Also, you know,
to be mercenary about it. It meant it was more
(47:26):
than a doubling of my salary. It looked like a
terrific secure job until you're at at that time, till
you're seventy years of old, and I thought, well, this
is this is pretty good.
Speaker 1 (47:37):
Now. Dubbo is where you first posted. That's a tough
area to be the local court magistrate. I've spent a
lot of time in Dubbo, not work there, attached there,
but through murder investigations and the reputation of the town,
you would have a lot of people coming through through
the court.
Speaker 2 (47:55):
There, absolutely, and you know, the magistrates out there aired
the circuit work as well, which was really hard towns,
towns that were racked with really deep social problems and
the criminal justice system. The police and the magistrate and
the defense and the prosecutors were meant to solve these
problems and of course we couldn't. We were dealing with
(48:18):
the we're putting a band aid over a gaping wound
of a whole range of different things. And you know,
I would sit in many towns where the only people
I would ever lock up were Aboriginal people and that's depressing.
Speaker 1 (48:32):
And look, I'm very much aware of the problems and
the high representation of the Indigenous population in our prisons
and in our court system, and it's it's quite alarming.
I have an association with a lot of Indigenous people
and through them a work mainly through a workers as
a police officer, and I know that I always felt
(48:55):
they were disadvantage in the justice system. They weren't comfortable
in the court, see situation. There was a whole range
of things that made me feel that there's a reason
there's a high representation there and the problem is not
going to be fixed the way that we approached that.
What's your take on it, because you would have seen
a lot of that I would imagine in the areas
like Dubbo and out from there.
Speaker 2 (49:17):
Yeah, it's a disheartening. It's one of those wicked problems
that and I think the first thing to recognize is
the criminal justice system can do very little. By the
time people get to court, by the time they're committing offenses,
by the time their families are dissolving, it's too late
to do that much. And certainly, you know, imprisoning and
(49:37):
the like, and the extent of the problem was and
is overwhelming. I was really blessed by having great prosecutors
who saw the problem and bent over backwards to do
what we could within the limitations of the system to
deal with people appropriately, and of course talented, young, idealistic
Aboriginal legal service lawyers who any of whom are now
(50:00):
the judges and politicians that we are from all sides
of politics that speak sense to this issue. So we
muddled through, but it was overwhelmingly depressing. I remember a
young man who in Wellington Local Court who said to me,
I sucked his lawyer and said, I'm guilty. He'd robbed
(50:22):
a bank with a syringe. He said, I'm guilty. I
just want you to lock me up, but I want
to go to the big House, meaning Bathist jail. And
I said, well, why do you want to go there?
And he said, well, my dad there and my grandfather's there,
and I'd really like to spend some time with them,
and I just you know, that sinking feeling and the
pitious stomach saying that's what you aspire to. So it
(50:46):
was really quite overwhelming, and we could tinker at the edges.
But the problems of Aboriginal over representation in the criminal
justice system are largely not about the criminal justice system.
They're about the education system, and they're about health. They're
about lack of welfare and support. And we know that
programs since then, you know, are like justice reinvestment, like
(51:08):
circle sentencing. None of that existed then. Many of the
sentencing options that are available community service work didn't exist then,
so you know, we were very limited. It was very difficult.
We all had the goal and I mean the police
as well, had the goal of keeping people out of
jail as much as we could and keeping and keeping
(51:30):
the community safe. But it was an uphill battle and
inherently depressing. I don't mean that from a clinical point
of view, but it's just like the drudgery of it.
Speaker 1 (51:39):
Really. Yeah. No, I'm hearing what you're saying, and I
pick up on the fact that we can't fix it,
that the justice system and prevention is better than cure
and if we can prevent them going down that path,
like the indigenous communities, and when you talk about a
grandfather in prison and the father in prison and the
(51:59):
young film, I wants to go in there to to
seeze relatives. That sort of breaks your heart, doesn't it.
That's what hope has that young fellow got. I've heard
people talk about when kids are going off track and
like restorative justice and diversionary programs. With one person that
might have been Jaron Badge, an Aboriginal lady that grew
(52:21):
up in the block and joined the police, very very
impressive person. She's out of the police now, but she
talked about a person that was a young fellow that
was sentenced for minor crimes that might have been a
bible stealing a bible of something, and instead of a sentence,
he was told to hang out with one of the
elders and go fishing with the elder for a couple
(52:43):
of weeks. And I think, what a great idea something
like that is that could potentially make a difference, break
that cycle.
Speaker 2 (52:50):
I saw that a lot with circle sentencing. When I
was in Lismore for ten years, we ran a circle
sentencing and so that meant that offenders who pleaded guilty,
instead of being sends by me, went before a circle.
And the circle included the victim of the crime, the
police officer involved, and a circle of elders as well
as the defense team and all the rest of it.
(53:11):
So it was a big circle. But you know, there
was more often than not there was no dry eye
in the place. You know, it was emotional and it
was genuine, and it was it was doing that. It
was seeking to utilize the wisdom and respect for elders
to affect a proper sentence that would be less likely
(53:33):
for people to re offend. And of course it's proven
to be so, which is why circle sentencing is universally
seen as not the solution, but as part of a solution.
Speaker 1 (53:43):
And if we put our efforts in and our money
at that point in time, maybe we don't have to
spend the money we do down the track with people
when they're incarcerated and all the impact that.
Speaker 2 (53:54):
Has absolutely And you know, I finished up ten years
on the circuit at Lismore, done and I said to
some one of the eldest the very last circle that
I did, you know, I really miss you guys. I've
learned so much. I'm so glad for your involvement. And
I just wondered how much you paid for this and
they said, oh, we're not paid. And I said, this
(54:17):
is every week ten years we've been meeting as a circle.
And they go, yep, yep, that's my own time. Not
paid a cent, you know, And I thought, there's the
defense lawyer and the magistrate and the police officer were
all being paid, and the eldest themselves. This is their
input into the next generation that they care so much about.
(54:39):
And you know, it was really showed the commitment of
those people.
Speaker 1 (54:43):
David, you touched on something that I learned very much.
After I left the police. I thought I was a big,
tough crime fighter and making a difference on crime. And
when I've stepped away from policing, I've looked at some
people that are doing stuff exactly as you've just described
and not not getting paid or doing it just because
it's the right thing to do, and they're making more
(55:04):
difference on reducing crime than I ever could with a
pair of handcuffs and a gun.
Speaker 2 (55:09):
Or sitting on the bench with a gavel.
Speaker 1 (55:12):
Yeah for sure. Yeah, And I would imagine that would
be part of it. There's a magistrate feeling that frustration.
I can see it, I can feel it, but there's
nothing I can do about it. It's a system and
the systems set up, and I don't I can tell
that you care about the job that you do, but
I don't see you as someone that's just naive to
(55:32):
the fact. You know, Coulby, let everyone walk free and
there'll be no problems people the society. Society do need
to be protected. But I heard an interview that you
did where you're talking about a young fella that couldn't
be given bail or he couldn't be released because of
the nature of the offense, and you ended up catching
(55:52):
a plane with him. Do you want to just tell
that story? Because when you talk about dry eyes, I
was walking along listening to you on that talking about
I thought that's really really sad, and you could just
picture it.
Speaker 2 (56:06):
So we used to fly into circuit courts and Brewarrener
was one of those courts, and when I got there
one day, the registrar, who's the clerk of the court,
the administrative person there said, look, we've got no police transport.
You can't refuse anyone bail any young people bail because
there's no police officers to take them. And I said, well,
I'll do my best anyway. In the middle of the day,
(56:26):
lo and behold, the young person was arrested and there
was no way he was getting bail, that's for sure,
and nobody wanted him to get bail and anyway, so
I refused him bail. And then I got on the
plane to fly back, and it was like an eight
seven seedar and I was on one side, and sitting
right next to me was him, handcuffed to the handhold
(56:49):
there and looking pretty terrified. Anyway, we acknowledged each other.
I should say as a prelude, Brewarrener has the oldest
man made structure in the world, which is the fish traps,
thirty thousand years old, and you can really only fathom
them from the air, this intricate pattern of stonework that
traps the river when it floods, and then people would
(57:11):
have fish for years, sometimes decades between floods by trapping
the fishing these dams. So that's about ten times older
than the Pyramids. In any event, So the plane goes
to take off and I could see he was shaking,
and I said to him have you ever been on
a plane before? He said, I've never been out of
(57:32):
Brewarna before. And anyway, so we then taxied around and
started to take off, and as we started to take off,
he started gagging. The police officer sitting behind him couldn't
do much, so I grabbed my sick bag, and I
was holding the sick bag and not really liking bodily
fluids too much. I just looked out the window and
he's vomiting in the bag, and I'm looking out at
(57:54):
the fish traps as we're taking off, and I just
think that freeze frame of me. It just sums up
everything that's wrong with the criminal justice system and the
culture that we're ignoring of these of these ancient people
with ancient wisdom and connection to land, and there we
are taking him away from his community and there he
(58:14):
is vomiting and scared and the police and me. I mean,
just the whole picture is just one of sadness.
Speaker 1 (58:19):
Really. Yeah. When I heard that, I could just imagine
that and really in a world that he could not
understand too in a plane, first time in the plane,
and it is just terrified, and.
Speaker 2 (58:33):
I mean, now we have language for this. This was
you know, almost thirty years ago. Now we have language
for this, which is things like fas D. I mean,
this was a young man who did not understand the
consequences of his actions. I mean, I think all of
us with children know that many children still don't know
the consequences of their actions. But this is a really
(58:54):
fundamental problem. And you know, now one would hope we
would be treating this younger rather than just locking them up.
Speaker 1 (59:01):
Yeah, I think those type of improvements and it's not easy.
We're seeing here going it's not waving a wand and
the world will be fixed. We might take a break
at this point. When we come back, I'll talk more
about your role as a magistrate because twenty one years,
I'm sure you've seen a lot talk about the impact
of drugs and in particular ice, when you've seen ice
(59:25):
come in. I saw that in the latter part of
my police career, the type of impact, but that sort
of changed the dynamics for what you were dealing with
in the courts. I think you've had dealings with sovereign
citizens there. That's always an interesting chat. On my catch
killers have upset a couple of sovereign citizens on things
(59:45):
that we've said from people that were impacted by sovereign citizens.
I'd also like to take a dive into your thoughts
on artificial intelligence AI and how that's going to impact
on law down down the track, because I think that's
an interesting area to go to. And I do want
to speak to you about the reason as a magistrate,
(01:00:07):
and we talk about a lonely job and a risky job.
There was a period in time for one particular person
where you were had to move out of your home
and put in a secure location because of the threats
made against you. So whole range of things to talk about.
Speaker 2 (01:00:22):
Have we only got another How are we going to
possibly do that?
Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
We could extend it. I'm sure we we'll manage our best.
I'm sure we'll come and go Okay, great, Thanks, cheers,
The public has had a long held fascination with detectives.
Detective sy aside of life, the average person is never
exposed to. I spent thirty four years as a cop.
For twenty five of those years I was catching killers.
That's what I did for a living. I was a
homicide detective. I'm no longer just interviewing bad guys. Instead,
I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated.
(00:23):
The guests I talk to each week have amazing stories
from all sides of the law. The interviews are raw
and honest, just like the people I talk to. Some
of the content and language might be confronting. That's because
no one who comes in the contact with crime is
left unchanged. Join me now as I take you into
this world. Magistrates, by the nature of their work, are
(00:49):
often criticized by the public for going soft on crime.
And then you have, on the other hand, people they
convict and sentence think they've been hard done by. It's
a tough job burn a local court magistrate, but they
play a crucial role in society today. We're fortunate to
have retired magistrate David Helpern come on the podcast and
(01:09):
have a fascinating discussion about the life of magistrate, including
everything from the time he held a sick bag for
a prisoner, face death threats, and he's dealings with sovereign
citizens and why he became known as the fuck Magistrate.
That's going to be interesting. If you have a preconceived
idea about the person who sits in judgment of others,
(01:29):
have a listen to what David has to say about
the role. I think you'll be surprised and perhaps shocked
about the person he is and his views on crime
and punishment. It was a refreshing chat and one that
opened my eyes up to the complexity of the role.
David Hilpern, welcome to I Catch Killers.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Thanks so much.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Well, look, old habits die hard. So if I start
referring to you as your honor, you know that I've
got flashbacks to times in the witness box where I've
been dissected by very clever legal people. So if I
fall into that trap, forgive me.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Well. When you and I started in court, I think
it was your worship.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah that changed two thousand and four, I think around
that time, was it.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Yeah, that's right. It stopped worshiping me and started honoring me.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
So then either way, I was trying to give you respect,
your honor, your worship. Sir, you were twenty one years
as a magistrate. Did you come accustomed to people addressing
you in that manner, your honor, your worship, that type
of thing.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Never. It always felt completely bizarre. Really, I kept looking
around wondering who they were talking to. It's such an
artificial environment, really, the court, where you refer to people
not by their name but solely by their title and
of course your worship and your honor. They're meant to
(02:55):
instantly give authority. But I sort of always felt that
authority should be earned and respect should be earned, rather
than just given by a title.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Yeah, that's an interesting way of looking at in my
research that I didn't in preparation for it. I saw
it was either in an article or an interview you did.
You had some funny situations with the way that you've
been addressed, and with someone in court trying obviously trying
to do their best, but referred to you as your majesty.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Your majesty, your most worshipfulness. Yeah, you really got the
full gamut. Your majesty was delivered by a by a
fellow who'd only just immigrated from India and he was
bending over backwards to show respect, so I just let
it go.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
It would have been a little bit embarrassing if you
pull him upon that.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
Absolutely. I also got called your holiness once as well,
when I thought being elevated to the pope was really
something else.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Well, I'm glad you didn't buy into your own own
fame and the adulation that you had from people in
your courts. But it's interesting the way you see people
come in the courts, because it is a strange environment
for people, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
It really is. And you know I always I mean
you and I discussed this in preparation that by the
time you've been a police officer for five or ten years,
going to court just becomes natural and you're pretty relaxed
about it. Yeah, Whereas for people who've never been there before,
particularly young people, Aboriginal people, people from different backgrounds, it's
(04:32):
quite a scary environment for them. And I think one
of the real functions of good lawyers, good prosecutors, and
good judicial officers is to make people feel relaxed and
not too uptight.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Yeah. Well, I think creating that relaxed atmosphere lends to
a better outcome as well, because I've seen people that
have literally choked in the witness box. I know the
story or the information they wanted to provide, and that
doesn't come out properly, and quite often it's because they're
intimidated in a foreign type environment.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Absolutely. I used to in training other magistrates. I used
to say, you know, courts should be like hospitals. Horrible
things do happen there, but everyone's doing their best in
this case to get to the truth and to get
to a just outcome.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
Yeah. No, it's important to create that. You talk about training.
On occasions where I've been fortunate enough to speak to
law students that are going to embark on a career
in law, what I try to leave my talk with,
or what I try to finish off with in giving
words of wisdom in that environment is that don't lose
(05:40):
touch with your humanity when you're practicing law. Like I'm
speaking to people, I'm talking to them from a police
point of view and things that I've seen and done.
But the importance of maintaining your humanity. Would you agree
in that concept?
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Yeah, for sure. And you know, I mean, I think
it's part of really maintaining your sanity in these jobs,
because if you lose your humanity, then where's your touchstone
when things start going wrong? You know? I mean, I
think most people join the police, most people join the
legal profession because they care and they want to help
other people. But if you lose your humanity, I think
(06:15):
you can be making mistakes and errors of judgment that
really impact on other people. I always tried to remind
myself that I was just a human being trying to
do my best in a difficult and very hot house environment.
And if you start from that perspective, with a bit
of humility as well as humanity, then I think justice
(06:39):
is better served. And I mean, I'm sure we've all
seen that in really good police officers too. They maintain
their humanity, they realize that they're human and we're all
just doing our best in a pretty difficult system.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
Yeah, I look, and I agree wholeheartedly what you've said there,
But I've also seen people that lose their way because
it's an adversarial system, and I see defense and prosecutors
going at it like it's a game of sport, and
I'm sitting in the court with the victim whose life's
been turned upside down or even the person appearing before
the court. And I think sometimes that can be disarming
(07:16):
to people involved in it, that they look and go,
what's going on here? We're talking about my life because
it is high stakes in the court.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
System, absolutely, and there's a difference between an adversarial system
which we have and a competitive system which we shouldn't have.
It's not actually about winning or losing. It's certainly about
ensuring that your case is presented the best it can
be from a prosecution or a defense point of view
and from the judicial office point of view, that everything
(07:46):
is explained and that people understand what's going on. I
mean the number of times I'd sentence people and go
into language that's a bit two technical or jargon and
they wouldn't have a clue what had actually happened. That's
got to be avoided. And also that over competitiveness. I
mean I had lawyers and prosecutors almost come to blows
(08:09):
yeah at the bar table, and you know, you feel
like saying, children, you know, we're not actually getting to
any point of having an evidence rightly if you're presented
so that I can make a decision when you're going
at it like that.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
The lost sight of what it's about. I'll do a
segue because you mentioned language, and I think i'll bring
this up. I was aware of the work that you
were doing at various times in your career when you're
a magistrate, and I was a police officer in homicide,
so doing a lot of work around the state in
different areas. But you did have a name. I'll let
(08:45):
you explain it the fuck magistrate, do you want to explain?
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Explain that it's true and it's a bad chize still
to this day, where with some pride, look, I think
we'd all been aware of the trifector, but I honestly
hadn't seen it that much in my career as a
defense lawyer and occasionally doing prosecution matters. But when I
went out to western New South Wales as a very
young magistrate, I was sitting in towns like Burke In Brewarrina, Cobabo.
(09:15):
Every second or third case was what they call a
trifacta case where someone's arrested for offensive language and then
they put up a bit of a stink and they're
charged with hindu police or resist arrest and assault police,
all because of language. And almost without exception, it was
the word fuck, And I'd been brought up on Triple
(09:37):
J and I'd watched movies and television and the word
that Alvin Purple, and you know, it had started to
be used really regularly. Yeah, people were getting arrested for it.
And it's not as though they were being arrested for
saying it in church. They were being arrested for saying
it in the street. And I had a case where,
or two cases really, one where a a bike that
(10:00):
was suspected of being stolen was being taken by a
police officer and the young Aboriginal man who took who
it was being taken from, saying you're not fucking having it,
and they said you're under arrest, and that was it.
It was on and the trifector in the second case
where a woman down at the South Coast was swearing
(10:21):
in a domestic violence situation where she was the victim
and the police had attended the premises and she had
lost lost control really and certainly was swearing at everybody.
But in both those cases, it seemed to me to
be ridiculous to arrest people that is deprived of their
liberty for an offense that carries a maximum penalty of
a fine. And so I just heard argument from a
(10:46):
barrister by the name of Mark Dennis, who is now
an sc and he said, well, I'll put it to you.
The words not offensive anymore. It's lost its punch, and
really this is just an unfortunate use of police powers
to deal with another problem, which is disrespect, or another
(11:06):
problem which is not being able to control yourself in
times of stress. And I accepted that argument, and I
found that the word was no longer offensive and dismissed
charges against people and there was no appeal, but there
was complaint. Some police didn't like it, and sixty Minutes
(11:27):
did a big number on it, and the police commissioner
came on sixty Minutes and said, well, you know, I
think he's probably right. I've used that word myself. Yeah,
that was the end of it.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Really, like the law is set in precedents, and yeah,
it goes back a long way, but it's got to
be able to serve the community that it's operating for.
And I think, congratulations on you taking that stance on that,
because I thought it was a shortcut for policing. It
sort of it fitted in early days in my policing.
(11:58):
I think we could rest people for being intoxicated or vagrant,
and that was just the excuse. Okay, I've got no
real charge. I take this person off the street. And
that's what you were talking about. And there was times
when it was abused, and you say the big three
like offensive behavior, right, you've said the word fuck. Now
we're going to arrest you. When you resist, that's going
(12:18):
to be resist police. And when you push this, that's
assault police. And these people are fitting there. And I
didn't like the culture of police and probably police that
I didn't respect talking about Oh we'll give them the trifecta. Yeah,
it was a horrible way, So congratulations on that. But
I'm sure you the shock jock type situation. People were
to push back and go, who is this soft magistrate?
(12:39):
He's going soft on crime. The sky is going to
fall if we allow people to do to swear.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
So, yeah, it's a funny thing because you know, you
bring your own, your own culture, you bring your own
humanity to the bench, which is something I think people
don't realize. So that I think I was much tougher
on domestic violence, much tougher on drink driving than many magistrates,
but certainly much lighter when I thought that things have
(13:05):
changed and the law doesn't just stay stable, it doesn't
stay in one spot. And while words like that were
certainly offensive twenty thirty forty years before I made that decision,
things actually move on. And I think these days, you know,
I'd hesitate to say it now, but the N word,
when you refer to people who are colored, Yeah, I
(13:27):
think that word is far more offensive than the word
fuck is today.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Well, you'd get the more reaction from someone if you
said that. If you're throwing out the F word, No
one's going to batten nyhii it if you said the
other word, people would. I agree. And when you're looking
at it, the definition of the actual crime is that
you've offended people. I took offense to the fact. And
I say this jokingly. I thought it was quite funny
(13:52):
that there was an article written about it in your
Stance and they reference was it chuk Fouler, the infamous
corrupt detective in the Royal Commission?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
Every second word that came out.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
Yeah, where we all sat at home watching his tapes
in his car or whatever, and he was using the
word as a punctuation mark and yeah.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Totally, totally, Well, I thought it was funny that someone
said to me that his shorts were more offensive than
his language.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Bringing back there those images. We should move on from that. Yeah,
I do recall where they had the camera. It wasn't
a good good position. Tell us a little bit about
your your background, where did you grow up and how
did you find your way into law.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Look, my dad was a lawyer, and my uncle, Howe
was a lawyer and then a Supreme Court judge hol Spurling,
and there was a lot of law talk around our
kitchen table. My dad was very involved in civil liberties
and in prisoner Action group, and he was chief of
staff to Frank Walker, the then Attorney General when I
(14:56):
was a child, so I got brought up in a
hot house environment of law. I of course rejected that
completely and wanted to be a vet because we grew
up on a farm in Bathist and I thought that's it.
But I missed out on the marks to be a
vet just by a couple of marks. And in those days,
whatever mark you got, that was it, and vet science
(15:18):
was much higher. So law was my second choice, but
I never regretted it. Really. As soon as I started
at law school, I had some absolutely inspirational fellow students
and inspirational teachers, and I loved it. I love it
to this day. I find it's interesting and exciting and
(15:38):
intellectually challenging and morally challenging the kinds of dilemmas that
the law brings up. So my background was being brought
up in that environment. But I went to Bathist High School,
so I wasn't from a private school. And I did
my law degree. I moved to Sydney to do law
and I hated living in the city, so I moved
(15:59):
back to Batson, did it externally and when I finished,
by then I had a couple of kids, so it
wasn't a question of to finish off. As most people
would be aware, You've got to do another course, which
is called the College of Law or the legal workshop,
and to do that I got off at a scholarship
to do that in Canberra with A and U and
(16:20):
the Australian Attorney General's Department. So I joined them, and
then didn't like living in Canberra either, realized I was
definitely a country boy, and got a job with a
law firm Inkyogle, which and opened a branch office in
Nimben because I loved Nimben. I thought it was the
center of the universe.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Okay, I've spent a bit of time at Nimban myself.
Were you the radical, going to change the world type
UNI student and taking on the world? Was that your thing?
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Yes, I think you could say that. I was involved
in protests. I don't know if you remember a case,
but there was a case called Island Roberts where she'd
killed her husband, Bruce, and she'd got life imprisonment, and
I think my first set of demonstrations were to do
with releasing her from custody when really she was just
(17:13):
trying to defend herself against domestic vinds. It led to
the change in law for provocation as a defense, and
you know, at that time the Tazzy Dams marches were happening,
and so yeah, I thought it was a great chance
to enjoy myself, meet interesting people, particularly the opposite sex,
and get involved in politics.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
Okay, so I'm getting a picture of the type of
person you were, and recreational drugs in that environment. I
think statute of limitations a pass that and I haven't
cautioned you, so I think we can speak openly about that.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Indeed, and I've been open about that that. I mean,
I should say that in those days, it was very
unusual for people to use any drugs other things, just cannabis. Yeah,
and I certainly inhaled and exhaled, fortunately.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Not to President Clinton.
Speaker 2 (18:12):
And I really enjoyed it. I thought cannabis was a
terrific drug for me. I didn't like drinking. I didn't
like being around people who were drinking that much either.
It was pretty agro, whereas smoking was very mellow, and
it helped me weirdly focus on my studies enormously. I mean,
(18:33):
I did well with my studies. And I know that
it's unpopular to say, but for some people it really
helped slow me down.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
I think it's interesting with the drug situation, like when
we're talking cannabis and that I know people that, yeah,
that drug suits them at whatever it does. It balances
out other people that if they touch alcohol, they're going
to turn into a night there, you know, or other
people can deal with alcohol. It's an individual thing. The
(19:03):
effect that has on you living that type of lifestyle.
Do you think that served you well when you did
eventually start practicing.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
Law, Yes, I think it did. I mean I joined
a small firm that was, and I was doing criminal
defense work, doing legal aid, doing aboriginal legal service work,
and of course moving to the Far North Coast and
having a branch office in Nimben. A significant proportion of
my work was drug work, and no one was really
specializing in that much. But I enjoyed that kind of work.
(19:34):
I enjoyed the clients. I enjoyed the repartee with some
of the elements of the drug squad. You know, we
loved to hate each other and teased each other on
the winds and losses that we had. Probably far too competitive,
but I enjoyed the work environment, and I enjoyed that
doing drug work, and as you can imagine, there was
(19:56):
plenty of it. There was a lot of people being
arrested for cannabis plants. It was at the days of
the helicopter raids where crops were routinely being seized and
burnt and people arrested. There was a lot of people
charged just with simple possessions. And yeah, it's sort of
motivated me to speak up and speak out about why
(20:17):
the law needed to be changed. And I guess I
felt completely hypocritical as well, because I was a person
who not daily, yeah, in fact, not even weekly, but
if I went out, I really liked and enjoyed to
have a smoke.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Yeah, yeah, I can understand the conflict there, but that
was the environment. Like Nimben. I spent some time up there,
not working, but also time up there when I was working,
And it was quite funny driving up there, even an
unmarked police car. You'd pull up to a commune and
the whole commune and disappear into the bushes, calling out
government car, government car, just disappearing. And I just a
(20:56):
side note, I had a conversation with a family up there,
and they were most distraught that they raise their children
in very much the nimb and lifestyle, and their children
had rebelled, and they were disappointed that they're trying to
get careers and they're getting jobs and different things like that.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
And it's an absolute tragedy when that happens.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
Yeah, they raise them with all the right veys.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
When you call someone poss rainbow and they still become
an accountant, you've definitely failed.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
Defense. Did you ever consider prosecution? Did you ever go
down that path?
Speaker 2 (21:31):
I did do some prosecuting. I did one of our clients,
or several of our clients were local councils and I
did some prosecution work there, and there is no doubt
that the best training to be a defense lawyer is
to do some prosecution and vice versa. A maide of
mine who's now the Minister for Local Government, Ron Honig,
was a public defender for many years and then he
(21:53):
did a stint in the Crown prosecutions and he said
to me, I learned more in that six months about
being a good defense lawyer, in fact, just being a
good lawyer. Yeah. By swapping the side of the fence,
and I think doing the prosecution work for local councils
for people who had built dangerous structures or had committed
other environmental type offenses. That was really powerful training ground
(22:18):
and also showed me that things weren't quite as black
and white as as I thought they were. It also
showed me that a good prosecutor and a good defense
lawyer together can really get to the truth of a situation,
normally get an a greed set of facts, normally getting
agreed plea, and there's no need for all the difficulties.
I did find really quickly that I did not like
(22:41):
defending sexual assault cases. I found them grueling, and I
never felt comfortable in the role of cross examining victims
of sexual assault.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Yeah, I would imagine that I know a lot of
people in the legal sector, and that's pretty much across
the board. That's harder the fences, and sometimes it crosses
that line. That must be hard doing that, jumping between
the two sides. And you know, as you said, coming
to a situation where both parties are amenable, having agreed
(23:14):
set of the facts and resolving the situation fairly. That's
the ultimate goal, isn't it that you want to achieve
in that environment?
Speaker 2 (23:23):
Absolutely, because it means that everyone knows where they're at.
And it also means, particularly in violent crimes, that people
don't have to give evidence. And I think we would
all agree that the process as a victim of crime
of giving evidence can often be well, it's often described
as being worse than worse than the experience itself, you know,
(23:43):
and I think having to relive it and all the
difficulties associated with that. And the other thing is there's
a good rule in law which is if you plead guilty,
you get a discount. Yeah, and that it's not as
big a discount as people realize, but it's a real
currot as opposed to to a stick. From a defense
perspective and from a prosecutorial perspective.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
Yeah, I see the benefits of that. Then I never
got bogged down. I know people have really strong views
on sentencing and all that, and I personally don't like
in the whole range of offenses where they talk about
mandatory sentencing on offenses. One thing I've learned watching people
go through the courts is that each case is unique
(24:26):
in its own own way, and to put a blanket
a mandatory sentence for if you're convicted of this offense
doesn't always fit the crime.
Speaker 2 (24:35):
I totally agree. I think there's a problem with our
sentencing system, and that is that the prosecution don't appeal enough.
It's very hard to get the DPP to appeal a sentence,
particularly from the local court, and what that means is
that the whole appeal system is skewed, so only defense
lawyers appeal and then magistrates are sitting there getting their
sentences lessened more often than not. And in the whole
(25:00):
time I was a magistrate, I never had one sentence increased.
In fact, I never had a New South Wales DPP
appeal against a sentence. Now that's just wrong because I'm
sure I was too lenient on occasions. I mean, you
try not to be and you try and err on
the side of right, but the system is skewed and
(25:20):
it shouldn't be and we wouldn't need mandatory sentencing if
we had a decent and proper appeal system.
Speaker 1 (25:26):
Yeah, it's interesting the appeal system. Out of all the
aspects of court, I found the appeal system. I could
sit in court being involved in appeals and it just
seems so complex, the appeal system. Quite often I'd sit
there and I think I've got reasonable intelligence in trying
to understand the process of courts. But I've got to
say sometimes I've sat in court, especially appeals at the
(25:49):
High Court, and I'm sitting there, going, what are we
talking about here? It's very complex totally.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
And then one of the great things about being magistrates
is you never had to deal with anybody else's appeals
because you were right at the bottom of the barrel.
You were at a court of first instance, and yeah,
you know, it was just it was just you were
the first one to have a go and if people
had a different view, well that That was fine by me.
I never got upset by appeals, and you're right, I
often didn't understand them either.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
Yeah, just on this nuanced point of law that would
just go over my head sometimes. How long were you
practicing law before you became a magistrate? How long were
you doing that for?
Speaker 2 (26:28):
I was practicing for about ten years before I became
a magistrate. But during that time also I got invited
along with another local lawyer, to help establish Southern Cross
University Law School, and so I was a part time
lawyer for the last four or five years as we
set up that law school and I became an academic
(26:48):
at it. It quickly was really apparent to local practitioners
in those days. If you wanted to practice in New
South Wales, you had to do your degree in New
South Wales and you had to get admitted in New
South Wales. So all the lawyers on the far North
coast would have to Anyone who wanted to be a
lawyer from a rural or regional area in New South
Wales had to go to Sydney, and that was just
(27:09):
so it was really difficult for many people. It was
a barrier. So we thought, well, let's start the first
non metropolitan law school in Australia which.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
We did that you've spent four years. There was it
ninety eight that you was at research that you did
in prisons and wrote a book about Can we talk
about that before we talk about your role as the magistrate.
That was before you became a magistrate.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
It was I was representing a young man from the
Gold Coast who'd come down to Tunneble Falls community and
conducted a raid. Now that sounds like a police action,
but in fact hippies were pretty vulnerable to people coming
in garments and stealing their crops and he had been
involved in that. He was nineteen and going on fifteen.
(27:59):
And when his bail was refused, I said too. It
was in the district court. I said, you know, this
young man is likely to get sexually assaulted in prison
and that's why you should give him bail. And the
judge said to me, well, where's the proof of that,
where's the proof that anyone that that happens? And Corrective
Services minister had said, well, rape is inevitable in prison
(28:20):
and I quoted that. The judge wasn't too impressed with that,
and I thought, give me a chance. I'll go and
get some I'll find out there must be research on it.
And I found out that with in Australia there was none,
absolutely no research. So that case that young man was
bail refused and after he was sexually assaulted in prison
and he killed himself, that really motivated me to start
(28:43):
researching this issue, and so I got some funding. And
I suppose also I was motivated by the fact that
I was an academic who didn't have a higher degree,
and that was a bit of a no no. So
I decided to do a high degree in research, interviewing
three hundred prisoners aged eighteen to twenty five as to
whether they'd been assaulted or sexually assaulted while they're in prison,
(29:04):
and unsurprisingly, about one in three had been sexually assaulted
while they're in prison. Sometimes that took the form of
what we would call rape, but often it was a
protective pairing. In other words, they would pair with someone
who was bigger, tougher than and would protect them in
exchange for sexual favors. So that research was published and
(29:27):
caused quite a stir. It caused a few things, the
segregation of eighteen to twenty five year old prisoners with
each other, rather than older prisoners, which was I think
a start the introduction of condoms into prisons which exists
to this day, and because the HIV AIDS was huge
at that time, and also a recognition that technology has
(29:50):
huge and obviously an ongoing role to play in keeping
prisoners safe. So I then published that research as a
book and some fun touring with that in the United
States in particular where it became Unfortunately, I donated the
royalties very early on. I wish I hadn't.
Speaker 1 (30:09):
Just didn't think clearly enough on it.
Speaker 2 (30:12):
I just thought it wouldn't sell many.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
But the book Fear or Favor Sexual Assault of Young Persons.
I'm reading through the parts of it, and yeah, the
statistics that came out were quite frightening. And when you
talk one in three and even as a police officer,
and very much as a police officer, you had empathy
(30:34):
on what you were doing, but you didn't really consider
what happens when you send people to prison. But there
have been many times when I locked people up and
I know what happens in prison and the type of
people in prison, and you think what's going to happen
to them doesn't really fit the crime. They've committed and
it was almost you look. I looked with pity and
thinking this is terrible. I know what's going to happen
(30:57):
to this person. They will not be able to look
after themselves in prison, so they'll either have to pair
up with someone for protection or they will be attacked
in the full on sexual assault. And the impact that
has on people, As you said by your client, that
a result in him taking his own life.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
And let's face people who go into prison and are
victimized are not likely to have great self restraint learn
the kind of skills we would hope they learned not
to re offend in that kind of environment. Of course,
it means they wouldn't want to go back, but as
we all know, criminogenic behavior is partly willpower and partly circumstance.
(31:40):
So I hope things have improved. I suspect they have.
I think that there's many more avenues for complaint, a
lot more protection, and the technology means that most areas
of prisons are now covered by CCT.
Speaker 1 (31:54):
Well the technology, and I spent some time in prison
of recent times doing a podcast series, and I was
fascinated by the technology that's available now that it might
be the offense or an assault happened now, but they
can look back at all the movements week prior to
that and from all different angles, and yeah, it has
(32:14):
to make it more difficult. But I've seen not so
much when I was in the police because it wasn't
the type of conversations that I would be having. But
since I've been out of the police and people I've
met doing this podcast the effect that that has on people.
And there was a person sitting here in the studio,
Russell Manster, who's sadly passed away, but talked about being
(32:36):
sent to a prison as a seventeen year old and
putting a cell with to sex offenders and just brutalized
for days on end, and he came out angry and
subsequently spent the next twenty years in and out of jail,
and his whole life was dictated by this is never
going to happen to me again, yep.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
And I think that undertaking research like that was important
but also showed me that there's more ways to change
things protest, and that the role of academia in society
is actually really important when it picks up on it
(33:17):
and is able to highlight you know, not things that
are obscure, but things that are fundamental. I mean, any
of us could go to jail. That's the reality. Me
for my price sins, you for your price sins. We
could all end up in jail, and if we do,
we should be safe.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Yeah, that's not part of the punishment. And you're quite
right with the academic study, the research and all the
information that can back it up that when this next
young lawyer like you were at the time saying, well,
I'm concerned about what will happen to my client, and here,
in fact, there is a study that shows yeah, it
does carry weight. I think I'd like to think and
(33:56):
a shout out to correct New Services and just a
bit of a bit of a stay. But I went
to and you practiced in Wellington, or you've presided in
Wellington the mcquarie Correctional Center, where they're approaching prisons a
completely different way, and a lot of that is that
the prisoners feel safe. And I'm not just talking about
(34:17):
sexual assaults, but in that environment, prisoners are treaty with respect.
I hadn't seen a jail like it where they're calling
the corrective services officers by names and there's mutual respect
both sides shout out not only to the prisoners but
corrective services officers. They work for six hours in whatever
(34:37):
industry they could find within the prison, and they study
for six hours and then they all stay in the dorm.
The interesting part of all the prisoners residing in the dorm,
I thought there'd be a bloodbath. I thought, yeah, maximum
security prisoners twenty five in one dorm where they're pretty
well free to roam and do what they want. It
actually taught them social skills. And I joked with them
(35:00):
in there, and subsequently that if there was someone within
that pod, the twenty five that they didn't get on,
they'd almost like one of those reality TV shows, vote
them off the island. We don't like this person, could
we move out? And I've got to say I was
so impressed. And it hasn't been running long enough to
(35:20):
see the after effect the studies that once they've been
released from prison, But the majority of prisoners I spoke
to in there said what it sets us up for
is that it teaches us how to integrate back into society.
And yeah, these weren't all the do good at prisoners.
These were some hard cases, you know, the people that
we all would have heard their names in the media
(35:42):
for the crimes that they've committed, and some of the
younger blakes, and there was a lot of people in
there for lengthy The food there was very good because
there's a lot of chefs, because chefs got involved in
drug dealing or who would have guessed, But there were
people serving lengthy custoviial sentences. And they said, when we're
in other prisons, the more traditional prisons, every time we
(36:03):
walked out of our cell, we had to bridge up
and get ready to take on whoever was going to
come at us. And there'd always be someone here. They
felt safe, they could relax, they could let their guard down.
And I've got to say I was so impressed, and
I honestly hober gets that type of prison gets integrated
across the board.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
Look, there's some great things happening in that area. And
also some of the specialist Aboriginal units are really doing
some great work with Aboriginal young people and Aboriginal adults
in terms of connection to culture, and the studies show
that that leaves will lead to less likely to reoffend.
The enemy of a good prison system is the tabloid media,
(36:44):
often having a go at it being too soft. You
know what the real outcome that you want from a
prison is people not to return, and we've been failing
at that. About seventy percent of prisoners will go back
within five years. Now, prisons like you've just maybe you're
not going to get to eighty percent not returning, but
(37:04):
you might well get to fifty or sixty or seventy
percent not returning. And it looks, you know, the Henry
Lawson wrote in I think nineteen seventeen when he was
in prison, he said, the press are printing their smug
smug lies and paying their shameful debt. They talk of
the benefits prisoners have and the things that prisoners get,
(37:26):
and you know, we need to look at prisons and
go I don't actually care if there's great education or
great physical surroundings or good food or whatever, as long
as people are less likely to defend, because particularly violent offenders,
that has such a long lasting impact. And we know
that most violent offenders are domestic violence offenders, and we
(37:47):
know the impact that has on their children and their
children's children and their families and their partners. And we're
just anything to put a stop to that. I don't
care what it costs or how soft it looks.
Speaker 1 (37:59):
Yeah, well, David, when I spent time in there, and
there was a couple of weeks and I thought, am
I going soft here? Am I taking that prisoner aside?
Because you had that go soft on crime? What am
I talking about? The next cop go soft on crime?
I spoke to Ken Marslu His son was murdered in
an arm robbery. Just a young fella working at the
(38:21):
pizza hut, paying his way through university and an arm
robbery and he was shot and kill. That was a
horrendous crime. And Ken was very angry and campaigned and
led enough is enough and different different campaigns, mandatory sentence
in getting tough on crime. And I've become quite close
with Ken since I've left the cops. We knew each
(38:43):
other before, and I rang him on, Okay, this is
what I'm seeing in prison. What's your take on this? Ken?
And he said, that's about getting smart on crime, not
getting tough on crime. If we can reduce crime, there's
less victims. Everyone wins. And yeah, that strengthened my resolve. That. Okay,
that's if anyone's got the right to really question what
(39:05):
goes on in prisons at someone that's lost their child
in circumstances like Ken did, and yeah, I think everyone's
a winner. And as we're talking the other day the
cost of keeping prisoners in custody, that what if we
channel that money somewhere else to rehabilitate diversionary programs that
(39:27):
keep people out of prison. Has to be a benefit to.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
It, absolutely, And the other whole aspect of that is, well,
who's in prison and who needs to be in prison
if we make sure that you got the right people,
the people who really need to be detained. And you
and I both started in an era where fine defaulters
were thrown into prison, where possession of a small amount
(39:50):
of drug led to a prison term. Whereas you know,
we've rationalized that to an extent. We need to always
be focused on that if the right people are in prison,
the community is protected, and not just immediately but in
the medium to long term. If they're treated like humans
and given responsibility and learned decision making processes.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
Well, if they're treated like animals, they come out like animals.
And I've heard prisoners say that, but even the prisoners
in these maximum security prisons acknowledge that society is not
for everyone. Like there's people in here and they'll point
to them, go that person should never be released, and yeah,
there's one of the people that society need to be
protected by. Okay. Magistrates, Yes, when describe the role of
(40:38):
a magistrate, because people look at the magistrates and I'm surprised,
I'm constantly surprised how many people never actually experience court.
And it's yeah, there's only a small percentage of either
the ones that commit offenses or the ones that have
been caught up in witnessing a crime. There's a lot
of people that never see and inside of the court.
(40:59):
So what is the all of the magistrate? How would
you describe it?
Speaker 2 (41:03):
You know, the magistrate is the call fates of the
criminal justice system. Every single case starts, every single criminal
case starts in the magistrate's court. But at such a
very job. Magistrates are also coroners, so we also deal
with cronial matters. Magistrates also have a civil jurisdiction, so
disputes between people up to one hundred thousand dollars are
(41:24):
dealt within the local court. But crime, all crimes start
in the magistrate's court. And what that means is even
a murderer will start in the magistrate's court and then
go up to high courts, But about ninety three percent
of all cases start and finish in the magistrate's court.
And they used to just deal with summary offenses, traffic matters,
(41:46):
very minor offenses. But over the years, the efficiency dividend
of having just a magistrate, not a judge and jury
determining matters means that the jurisdiction has expanded, So magistrates
deal basically with people who've been charged with the vast
majority of offenses and determine their guilt and if they're guilty,
(42:08):
determine their sentence. So the average day of a magistrate
would be dealing with a defendant hearing, for example, where
someone's pleading not guilty to a domestic violence offense or
a cultivation of prohibited plan defense or a white collar crime,
or more likely than not, a traffic offense, and determining
if they're guilty. The maximum penalty magistrates can impose this
(42:30):
five years imprisonment, so nothing like the district court which
has unlimited and supreme court, but still the nuts and
bolts of the criminal justice system revolve around the local
court and the magistrate sits like a judge, but without
the superannuation.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
And without the wink and come on, David, let that go.
Let that go.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
I've let it go, or associates for that matter. But
so there's magistrates in every country town either ones that
come in each you know, up to certain size. So
even small towns in this area, places like Kyogle and
mullam Bimbi and MacLean will each have a magistrate visiting them,
you know, once a week or once a month, or
(43:12):
a few days a week, or in Lismore and the
bigger places every day. So magistrates are at the coal
face of the criminal justice system and they are the
judicial officer that most people will come in contact with.
Just in New South Wales now they're called judges of
the local court starting next year. Yeah, I heard that
and it's been the case in the Act in the
(43:32):
Northern Territory for a while and I think it reflects
better the role. I mean, who knows, You're right, people
don't know what a magistrate does, but they'd be more
likely to know what a judge does. And really they're
just judges of the local court.
Speaker 1 (43:44):
Yeah, I would imagine it's a lonely job. Sitting there,
and I say that from my observations, like the prosecution
they've got their team, the defense have got their team.
People in the gallery, the media are hanging out doing
what the media do. A magistrate all on their own
and making some very big decisions knowing that they're potentially
(44:07):
going to be scrutinized by some very informed legal people
sitting above them for different matters.
Speaker 2 (44:12):
Well, and not just scrutinized by them. When I was
first appointed, my first appointment was Dubbo and the local
member was Jerry Peacock. And never had you met a
more law an order a person than Jerry Peacock, who
also owned the local newspaper. So you can imagine it
was a real tra effector so. But yes, it is
(44:33):
lonely because lawyers tend to mix with lawyers in a
country town. And you know, I was a country practitioner.
Most of or a lot of my friends were lawyers.
And then you go to the bench and of course
you can't mix with the lawyers because they're before you.
So it is lonely and country magistrates by their very nature,
(44:53):
sit on their own. It's not like the Downing Center
or one of the big city courts where you might
have twenty magistrates and you can all get together at
more morning tea and have a chat. This was and
shortly after I. I mean, you know, believe it or not.
When I started, we used to have morning teas with
all the lawyers and all the prosecutors. The police sergeant's
wife would traditionally put it on and we would all
(45:15):
gaggle and sort out the cases. Well, that was soon
thrown out quite rightly, but it did mean that it
was our pretty lonely existence. And you know, I was
living in Dubbo and you know, you're buying a newspaper
and the newsagents say why aren't you locking people up more?
And you go to the checkout and the young woman
working there saying, hey, you're not going to lock my
boyfriend up, are you? And you know, so you couldn't
(45:37):
avoid the area.
Speaker 1 (45:39):
That's like I hear the dramas have been the local
cop that you're never really off duty. But yeah, it's
pressure times ten when you're the magistrate of young Susie's
coming before you next week. She's a good girl as
you're buying your cup of coffee or something like that.
Speaker 2 (45:56):
So it's I think It is really true of local
sergeants too, And I think policemen's kids like magistrates kids,
you know, they get a hard time at times.
Speaker 1 (46:06):
Yes, well, when did you make the decision? So you
practiced law for a period of time and then you
set up the university, the law faculty there, when did
you decide that I want to be a magistrate?
Speaker 2 (46:20):
Jeff Shaw was the Attorney General and he and I
had had some arguments about a whole set of things.
We got on very well, but he was sick of
me pestering and about law changes I wanted to see,
and he said, I'm going to stop having to deal
with you soon, and I said, well, good luck with that.
And then I got the phone call that you least expect,
which was from the Attorney's the Governor's private secretary, which
(46:44):
was to offer me offer me a job as a magistrate.
And I thought, well, you know, I'd come across some
really good magistrates in my time, there was one phil
Molean who since passed away. But I'd also come across
some terrible magistrates who I had very little respect for.
And I thought, well, I can do this job. Well,
I can change the world. There's things that I really
(47:06):
want to make a difference on aboriginal over representation, drug laws,
you know, things like that. And so I went into
it with the usual gusto of a good lefty protester
and thought I could really change things from the inside.
And that's that's why I did it. Also, you know,
to be mercenary about it. It meant it was more
(47:26):
than a doubling of my salary. It looked like a
terrific secure job until you're at at that time, till
you're seventy years of old, and I thought, well, this
is this is pretty good.
Speaker 1 (47:37):
Now. Dubbo is where you first posted. That's a tough
area to be the local court magistrate. I've spent a
lot of time in Dubbo, not work there, attached there,
but through murder investigations and the reputation of the town,
you would have a lot of people coming through through
the court.
Speaker 2 (47:55):
There, absolutely, and you know, the magistrates out there aired
the circuit work as well, which was really hard towns,
towns that were racked with really deep social problems and
the criminal justice system. The police and the magistrate and
the defense and the prosecutors were meant to solve these
problems and of course we couldn't. We were dealing with
(48:18):
the we're putting a band aid over a gaping wound
of a whole range of different things. And you know,
I would sit in many towns where the only people
I would ever lock up were Aboriginal people and that's depressing.
Speaker 1 (48:32):
And look, I'm very much aware of the problems and
the high representation of the Indigenous population in our prisons
and in our court system, and it's it's quite alarming.
I have an association with a lot of Indigenous people
and through them a work mainly through a workers as
a police officer, and I know that I always felt
(48:55):
they were disadvantage in the justice system. They weren't comfortable
in the court, see situation. There was a whole range
of things that made me feel that there's a reason
there's a high representation there and the problem is not
going to be fixed the way that we approached that.
What's your take on it, because you would have seen
a lot of that I would imagine in the areas
like Dubbo and out from there.
Speaker 2 (49:17):
Yeah, it's a disheartening. It's one of those wicked problems
that and I think the first thing to recognize is
the criminal justice system can do very little. By the
time people get to court, by the time they're committing offenses,
by the time their families are dissolving, it's too late
to do that much. And certainly, you know, imprisoning and
(49:37):
the like, and the extent of the problem was and
is overwhelming. I was really blessed by having great prosecutors
who saw the problem and bent over backwards to do
what we could within the limitations of the system to
deal with people appropriately, and of course talented, young, idealistic
Aboriginal legal service lawyers who any of whom are now
(50:00):
the judges and politicians that we are from all sides
of politics that speak sense to this issue. So we
muddled through, but it was overwhelmingly depressing. I remember a
young man who in Wellington Local Court who said to me,
I sucked his lawyer and said, I'm guilty. He'd robbed
(50:22):
a bank with a syringe. He said, I'm guilty. I
just want you to lock me up, but I want
to go to the big House, meaning Bathist jail. And
I said, well, why do you want to go there?
And he said, well, my dad there and my grandfather's there,
and I'd really like to spend some time with them,
and I just you know, that sinking feeling and the
pitious stomach saying that's what you aspire to. So it
(50:46):
was really quite overwhelming, and we could tinker at the edges.
But the problems of Aboriginal over representation in the criminal
justice system are largely not about the criminal justice system.
They're about the education system, and they're about health. They're
about lack of welfare and support. And we know that
programs since then, you know, are like justice reinvestment, like
(51:08):
circle sentencing. None of that existed then. Many of the
sentencing options that are available community service work didn't exist then,
so you know, we were very limited. It was very difficult.
We all had the goal and I mean the police
as well, had the goal of keeping people out of
jail as much as we could and keeping and keeping
(51:30):
the community safe. But it was an uphill battle and
inherently depressing. I don't mean that from a clinical point
of view, but it's just like the drudgery of it.
Speaker 1 (51:39):
Really. Yeah. No, I'm hearing what you're saying, and I
pick up on the fact that we can't fix it,
that the justice system and prevention is better than cure
and if we can prevent them going down that path,
like the indigenous communities, and when you talk about a
grandfather in prison and the father in prison and the
(51:59):
young film, I wants to go in there to to
seeze relatives. That sort of breaks your heart, doesn't it.
That's what hope has that young fellow got. I've heard
people talk about when kids are going off track and
like restorative justice and diversionary programs. With one person that
might have been Jaron Badge, an Aboriginal lady that grew
(52:21):
up in the block and joined the police, very very
impressive person. She's out of the police now, but she
talked about a person that was a young fellow that
was sentenced for minor crimes that might have been a
bible stealing a bible of something, and instead of a sentence,
he was told to hang out with one of the
elders and go fishing with the elder for a couple
(52:43):
of weeks. And I think, what a great idea something
like that is that could potentially make a difference, break
that cycle.
Speaker 2 (52:50):
I saw that a lot with circle sentencing. When I
was in Lismore for ten years, we ran a circle
sentencing and so that meant that offenders who pleaded guilty,
instead of being sends by me, went before a circle.
And the circle included the victim of the crime, the
police officer involved, and a circle of elders as well
as the defense team and all the rest of it.
(53:11):
So it was a big circle. But you know, there
was more often than not there was no dry eye
in the place. You know, it was emotional and it
was genuine, and it was it was doing that. It
was seeking to utilize the wisdom and respect for elders
to affect a proper sentence that would be less likely
(53:33):
for people to re offend. And of course it's proven
to be so, which is why circle sentencing is universally
seen as not the solution, but as part of a solution.
Speaker 1 (53:43):
And if we put our efforts in and our money
at that point in time, maybe we don't have to
spend the money we do down the track with people
when they're incarcerated and all the impact that.
Speaker 2 (53:54):
Has absolutely And you know, I finished up ten years
on the circuit at Lismore, done and I said to
some one of the eldest the very last circle that
I did, you know, I really miss you guys. I've
learned so much. I'm so glad for your involvement. And
I just wondered how much you paid for this and
they said, oh, we're not paid. And I said, this
(54:17):
is every week ten years we've been meeting as a circle.
And they go, yep, yep, that's my own time. Not
paid a cent, you know, And I thought, there's the
defense lawyer and the magistrate and the police officer were
all being paid, and the eldest themselves. This is their
input into the next generation that they care so much about.
(54:39):
And you know, it was really showed the commitment of
those people.
Speaker 1 (54:43):
David, you touched on something that I learned very much.
After I left the police. I thought I was a big,
tough crime fighter and making a difference on crime. And
when I've stepped away from policing, I've looked at some
people that are doing stuff exactly as you've just described
and not not getting paid or doing it just because
it's the right thing to do, and they're making more
(55:04):
difference on reducing crime than I ever could with a
pair of handcuffs and a gun.
Speaker 2 (55:09):
Or sitting on the bench with a gavel.
Speaker 1 (55:12):
Yeah for sure. Yeah, And I would imagine that would
be part of it. There's a magistrate feeling that frustration.
I can see it, I can feel it, but there's
nothing I can do about it. It's a system and
the systems set up, and I don't I can tell
that you care about the job that you do, but
I don't see you as someone that's just naive to
(55:32):
the fact. You know, Coulby, let everyone walk free and
there'll be no problems people the society. Society do need
to be protected. But I heard an interview that you
did where you're talking about a young fella that couldn't
be given bail or he couldn't be released because of
the nature of the offense, and you ended up catching
(55:52):
a plane with him. Do you want to just tell
that story? Because when you talk about dry eyes, I
was walking along listening to you on that talking about
I thought that's really really sad, and you could just
picture it.
Speaker 2 (56:06):
So we used to fly into circuit courts and Brewarrener
was one of those courts, and when I got there
one day, the registrar, who's the clerk of the court,
the administrative person there said, look, we've got no police transport.
You can't refuse anyone bail any young people bail because
there's no police officers to take them. And I said, well,
I'll do my best anyway. In the middle of the day,
(56:26):
lo and behold, the young person was arrested and there
was no way he was getting bail, that's for sure,
and nobody wanted him to get bail and anyway, so
I refused him bail. And then I got on the
plane to fly back, and it was like an eight
seven seedar and I was on one side, and sitting
right next to me was him, handcuffed to the handhold
(56:49):
there and looking pretty terrified. Anyway, we acknowledged each other.
I should say as a prelude, Brewarrener has the oldest
man made structure in the world, which is the fish traps,
thirty thousand years old, and you can really only fathom
them from the air, this intricate pattern of stonework that
traps the river when it floods, and then people would
(57:11):
have fish for years, sometimes decades between floods by trapping
the fishing these dams. So that's about ten times older
than the Pyramids. In any event, So the plane goes
to take off and I could see he was shaking,
and I said to him have you ever been on
a plane before? He said, I've never been out of
(57:32):
Brewarna before. And anyway, so we then taxied around and
started to take off, and as we started to take off,
he started gagging. The police officer sitting behind him couldn't
do much, so I grabbed my sick bag, and I
was holding the sick bag and not really liking bodily
fluids too much. I just looked out the window and
he's vomiting in the bag, and I'm looking out at
(57:54):
the fish traps as we're taking off, and I just
think that freeze frame of me. It just sums up
everything that's wrong with the criminal justice system and the
culture that we're ignoring of these of these ancient people
with ancient wisdom and connection to land, and there we
are taking him away from his community and there he
(58:14):
is vomiting and scared and the police and me. I mean,
just the whole picture is just one of sadness.
Speaker 1 (58:19):
Really. Yeah. When I heard that, I could just imagine
that and really in a world that he could not
understand too in a plane, first time in the plane,
and it is just terrified, and.
Speaker 2 (58:33):
I mean, now we have language for this. This was
you know, almost thirty years ago. Now we have language
for this, which is things like fas D. I mean,
this was a young man who did not understand the
consequences of his actions. I mean, I think all of
us with children know that many children still don't know
the consequences of their actions. But this is a really
(58:54):
fundamental problem. And you know, now one would hope we
would be treating this younger rather than just locking them up.
Speaker 1 (59:01):
Yeah, I think those type of improvements and it's not easy.
We're seeing here going it's not waving a wand and
the world will be fixed. We might take a break
at this point. When we come back, I'll talk more
about your role as a magistrate because twenty one years,
I'm sure you've seen a lot talk about the impact
of drugs and in particular ice, when you've seen ice
(59:25):
come in. I saw that in the latter part of
my police career, the type of impact, but that sort
of changed the dynamics for what you were dealing with
in the courts. I think you've had dealings with sovereign
citizens there. That's always an interesting chat. On my catch
killers have upset a couple of sovereign citizens on things
(59:45):
that we've said from people that were impacted by sovereign citizens.
I'd also like to take a dive into your thoughts
on artificial intelligence AI and how that's going to impact
on law down down the track, because I think that's
an interesting area to go to. And I do want
to speak to you about the reason as a magistrate,
(01:00:07):
and we talk about a lonely job and a risky job.
There was a period in time for one particular person
where you were had to move out of your home
and put in a secure location because of the threats
made against you. So whole range of things to talk about.
Speaker 2 (01:00:22):
Have we only got another How are we going to
possibly do that?
Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
We could extend it. I'm sure we we'll manage our best.
I'm sure we'll come and go Okay, great, Thanks, cheers,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com