Gene Gibson and the Interview Room

the death of her son Joshua Ecki. This week, Jene Gibson was awarded one point three million dollars by the Western Australian government for the time nearly five years that he spent in prison for a crime he had no involvement in. If it was so obvious to the mother of the victim, why wasn't it obvious to the police.

In fact, there were flaws throughout this case, and they're going to largely mirror those you've heard about in Curtain, the podcast about Kevin Henry and other Aboriginal peoples around Australia who have been imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. For those not aware of the case, Joshua Necki's body was found on the side of the road in twoenty

and ten in a February after leaving a nightclub. Mister Gibson was implicated in witness statements and was arrested by police and held right up until the day he was released. Along the way, he was interviewed, but the police didn't bring in a proper translator. Mister Gibson speaks his traditional language. In fact, he speaks many languages, but English is not a language that he is familiar with. It's not one

that's spoken widely in his community. And yet somehow he would come to admit to his involvement in a crime he wasn't even present. For the fact is the police still have large questions to answer. In fact, those answers

have never come. How did a man who was not in the vicinity of the crime, who had no involvement or connection to the victim, where there was no forensic evidence to link him to the crime, where all there was was the statements of two witnesses whose evidence could barely be relied upon, would result in a man spending nearly five years in prison for a crime he did not commit. Partially, this happened because mister Gibson was forced to plead guilty. He confessed to his role in the crime,

a role he took no part in. That occurred because, just like Kevin Henry. There were no lawyers present. Just like Kevin Henry, there was two police officers who were desperate to get a conviction. Just like Kevin Henry, there was people who knew more about this case than they were letting on, who were pointing the finger without any evidence to match. Just like Kevin Henry, the police failed to investigate what really happened on that night, and had they bothered to do so, they may have had a

chance to catch the real killer. Sadly, for his mother and for mister Warnecki, his killer has never been caught. That is clearly the fault of the police. And it's also the fault of the police that Jean Gibson, an

innocent man, spent nearly five years in prison. Perhaps one point three million dollars does not even come close to rectifying the damages that have been done to his life, to his family's life, to the family of the victim, and to the greater community, who once again are reminded how incompetent the police can be, and worse that they can collude to send an innocent man to prison. This week, I want to spend a little bit of time on this case and look at where the failings are occurring

because this continues to happen right around Australia. There's been calls following the release of mister Gibson, and once again with the payment made to him this week, that further changes need to be made about the way police interview Aboriginal and Torrestrait Islander people, the way they conduct themselves in those interviews, and the way those interviews are managed. But once again there's a complete failure to look at

what the real reason is. Mister Gibson should never have been interviewed in the first place, let alone be forced to confess to a crime he did not commit. Nowhere else to someone who is not within the vicinity of a crime, has no links whatsoever to a crime, end up being accused by police in an interview room of committing murder. That's specially true when there is no other

evidence to suggest their involvement, not a single shred. And of course the police couldn't know what mister Gibson was saying because he was attempting to speak in his own language. Mister Gibson is so good at his own traditional languages that before this was done to him by the police of Western Australia. He was the frontman of a successful Aboriginal band that toured the Pilber region. All that was taken away from mister Gibson, despite all his talent and

all his ability. The fact that he was an Aboriginal man meant that he was instantly targeted by police. The fact he was an Aboriginal man meant that two dodgy witness statements were all these police needed to be sure he'd committed a crime, a crime so serious it was murder. But of course he had not committed that crime. The question is not about working around the edges of what takes place. There's been calls that mister Gibson should have

been able to have a proper interpreter. At some point he was provided an interpreter, but only to read to

him the statement of his own confession. Once again, as we've spoken about in this podcast, whether it's from Western Australia and cases like Kevin Henry to a client of mine, I've spoken about in the United States, we have people confessing to crimes in written statements in languages they were not able to write in, meaning quite clearly the arresting police and those supposed to be investigating and serving us

as a community. Wrote those statements knowing full well that the details in those statements could not be confirmed, could not be known to the person who was going to put their name to that statement, and knowing full well that when that person put their name their signature to that false statement under severe uress by those very police, that that person would go to prison for many years. As we've spoken about in this podcast, that meant Jane

Gibson spent five years of his life behind bars. For Kevin Henry, It's meant twenty six years behind bars, and in Florida in the United States, it meant unheldy As was executed, murdered for a crime he did not commit. Tinkering around the edges as to whether and when interpreters abrought in for such clients, Tinkering around the edges as to whether and when lawyers are permitted to enter the

interview room will not change these very conditions. It's fair to say that the police and the justice system work on the basis of punishing those who commit the most heinous crimes short of cold blooded murder. What more heinous crime could a police officer commit than sending an innocent man or woman to prison for a crime they knew had not been committed by that person. At what point is a police officer not just given deak duty for a few weeks, but themselves sent to prison for what

is quite clearly a criminal act. When will the laws that are applied to everyone else in this country apply to those who wear a badge. They're tasked with protecting and serving our community. They're given an enormous responsibility that is to find and seek justice for them those who

have been most wronged. And yet time and time again we find examples where they are the ones doing the wrong, where the lives of many people, victims of their worst crimes and new victims because of their actions, are being destroyed. Perhaps it's time to set an example by imprisoning the

police who commit these criminal acts. This week, rightly, the taxpayers of Western Australia paid Gene Gibson one point three million dollars plus an extra two hundred thousand dollars dollars to manage the trust in which that will be held for mister Gibson so he can access that money throughout his lifetime. But this is not the first time it's happened in Australia, nor is it the first time it's

happened in WA. In fact, the Attorney General who this week signed off on the check for mister Gibson was himself active in seeking the release of an innocent man a number of years ago, so he knows all too well how often the police get it wrong, and perhaps that played on mister Quigley's mind as to why he did sign this check for Jane and why it is an ex gratia payment allowing mister Gibson to take further actions and seek further damages from those who wrongfully convicted him.

The case mister Quigley was involved in was when he was himself a member of Parliament and lobbied for the release of Andrew Mallard, who spent twelve years in prison for a two thousand and six murder of a Perth jeweler, Pamela Lawrence, that he didn't commit. It was finally quashed by the Western Australian High Court and the taxpayers handed over three point twenty five million dollars to mister Mallard.

Once again, it might sound like a large amount of money, but given the torment and torture mister Mallard had gone through. Given the more than a decade of his life he wrongly spent in prison, is it enough? And once again nothing was done to the police officers who caused this

grave injustice to occur. When mister Ward, an Aboriginal man, died of heatstroke in two thousand and eight while being transported in a prison van in horrific conditions, three point two million dollars was awarded by the West Australian government. That's the value the West Australian government placed on the life of an Aboriginal elder, three point two million dollars. Yet no life of a police officer was detained for

one day. Those transporting the prison van in which mister Ward was held where he died in horrific circumstances, were not charged with murder and sent to prison for twenty five years, like was the conviction for so many others who have been wrongfully convicted, like the Mickelberg brothers also in Western Australia, who spent eight and six years in prison for the Perth Mint scandal and robbery that they didn't commit. John Button, also in Western Australia, spent five

years in prison after being wrongfully convicted of manslaughter. He was awarded just four hundred and sixty thousand dollars. Darryl Beamish, a death man, was originally sentenced to death but spent fifteen years in prison for the nineteen fifty nine murder of a chocolate heiress. The payment he received just four hundred and twenty five thousand dollars. The real killer, a serial killer known as Eric Edgar Cook, had already confessed. Once again. In all these cases, the evidence was available

from day one. Mister Mallard couldn't have committed the murder. In the case of mister Ward, it was a minor crime. There was no need for him to be transported. The fact he died on that trip is criminal. Mister Button and Mickelberg brothers too, served their time in prison despite there being virtually no evidence of their guilt and their

conviction all quashed. And yet despite this, and despite the Royal Commission into black debts in custody, we still have these cases occurring largely to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but not exclusively. But before I move on and give some suggestions as to ways we can overcome some of these issues. I want to point to one final, deeply disturbing aspect of some of the cases I've mentioned in

the podcast today. Not only was mister Gibson not able to speak English and required and interpret us so that the police officers could speak to him clearly, thoughtfully and properly over such a serious matter. When mister Gibson spoke a number of traditional languages, he also suffered a mental impairment.

This should have been known to police and probably was, and yet their treatment of him then forcing him into this confession continued Andrew Mallard as I spoke about, who served twelve years in a Western Australian prison for a murder he didn't commit, also suffered serious mental health issues.

None of this was taken into account. In fact, there were grave problems along the way with his case, not only the interviewing process that took place of him his mental state at the time, but also a forensic report

that was not disclosed to his defense team. Justice Michael Kirby, when the case finally made the High Court of Australia, said that just that forensic place report alone and the fact that it was withheld, should have meant mister Mallard was given a retrial, but even after those comments from High Court Justice Kirby, the DPP would say that they still considered mister Malliard the primary suspect for the murder and that should any credible evidence come up in the future,

that they would seek to prosecute him again. Imagine having that hanging over your head, having already served all this time in prison for a crime you did not commit, suffering a mental illness as he did, having been brutalized by the state. The DPP, having got it wrong, already having been told how wrong they got it by High Court Justice Michael Kirby, still were going to chase this man,

an innocent man, Andrew Mallard. That was until the pressure mounted so heavily that there was a review of the case and the Commission on Crime and Corruption in Western Australia began looking at a cold case review. What it uncovered was the truth mister Mallard had not committed the crime. In fact, very early on in the review, a palm

print was discovered. It matched a mister Roachford. He'd already confessed to murdering his girlfriend seven weeks after Miss Lawrence was killed in the murder that mister Mallard would be charged with. Why wasn't this followed up on? In fact, mister Roachford's appearance, in particular, his beer, was far more consistent with the original accounts of eyewitnesses than that of

the appearance of mister Mallard. Their appearances were strikingly different, one being that mister Mallard is very tall, and yet this did not come up. Further examination of the evidence discovered more forensic material, blue paint and flakes of it that had been found in missus Lawrence's wounds that were present at the crime scene were found on the rucksack

of mister Roachford. Finally, the police were going to get their chance to charge the right man, but on the same day he was announced as a person of significant interest in the murder, mister Roachford took his own life, where he was already spending time as a convicted murderer

in Albany Maximum security prison. How did the police miss a known murderer where there was forensic material to show he'd committed the murder, where his description matched that of the murderer, and when the man they had mister Andrew Mallard, was not present, whose description did not match, where there was no forensic evidence, and who suffered a severe mental illness.

So how can we prevent these tragedies from occurring? Clearly, from all the cases we've mentioned today and the ones we've spoken about previously in the podcast, such as that of Brenton Butler, who was finally found innocent but spent considerable time in prison for a murder he did not commit.

A young boy, teenage boy, an African American boy, who was assaulted by police and forced to confess that was detailed in the documentary that won an Academy Award Murder on a Sunday morning, and we heard earlier on in this podcast series from his defense attorney, Patrick McGinnis. What's evident is that in many of these cases, in fact, all of those I've spoken about today, as well as Kevin Henry's and Brenton Butler's, Ahl Diaz's, Gene Gibson's, and

Andrew Mallard's, the issue begins in the interview room. The issue begins when police officers are left alone with innocent people. The issue begins when police officers are left alone with these people needing to solve a murder, a murder for which they currently have no forensic evidence, so they are assuming, suggesting, coercing, and under duress, often forcing people to confess to murders

without any supporting evidence. The original crime that leads to these innocent people spending years in prison Kevin Henry still behind bars, occurs in that interview room. It's quite clear that the police in Australia cannot be trusted when it comes to interviewing aboriginal and other vulnerable people one on one, whether a person declines legal assistance or not. That interview room requires reques hoarding all of the time by CCTV and audio. Unlike in the case of mister Henry, those

video cameras should be turned on. Unlike in the case of mister Henry, those audio tapes should not be allowed to be tampered with or ever in the possession of the police officers who conduct that interview. In fact, the cassette tapes that recorded Kevin Henry's false confession were purchased by one of the police officers in Rockhampton. They were then given to him after the interview was conducted. He then held them in his personal possession and we don't

know for how long. What we do know is that those tapes sound very funny. They sound as if they could been tampered with. These are not just our own claims, but what the judge believed at the initial trial. What was also on those tapes was cleared that Kevin Henry was coerced into confessing. Again, these are not just our claims or the claims of mister Henry. This was backed up at trial when the judge found that this evidence

was inadmissible. Clearly, we need highly trained, highly qualified individuals to independently monitor interviews when it comes to police conducting an interview around a serious crime. We also need those who were qualified in interpreting Aboriginal languages so that people like mister Henry and mister Gibson, who speak traditional language and who are either illiterate or not proficient in English have someone there to guide them through what is being

written down. Just like Cavin Henry, Jene Gibson put his name to a statement he couldn't read, forced by the police to do so without knowing that what he was signing was a piece of paper that would send him to prison for years. An independent person needs to be in that room to ensure that each and every individual understands fully what is being placed on that paper and

what a person is signing up to. Where there is mental health issues involved, particularly when as in all these cases, the police are abundantly aware that a mental health issue is clearly involved with the person who is being interviewed. That person should be assessed by an independent psychologist and it be decided how much support they need for that interview to take place and when the appropriate time is

for that interview to be conducted. Police also need special training, and not just around the edges one off training where they learn a little bit of cultural competence taught to them, often by a football player, a former NRL star or the like. If we're going to send people to prison for the rest of their life, this has to be a process we take seriously. This has to involve people with the highest education in the field, people who understand these issues. It has to be people that the police

can't intimidate. In all these cases, police not only intimidated the person that would confess, but intimidated witnesses as well, people who could have had they not been interfered with by the police. Divided the very evidence that would free the innocent man. The police might like to think of themselves as watching society and watching the community, picking out the bad ones amongst us and ensuring they end up

in court. The problem is where that court case begins, where innocence is presumed, where a jury of the peers will find a person innocent or guilty, is not a fair process because before any of that takes place, the police have ensured that the result will only go one way. How else do you explain the overincarceration of Aboriginal people in Australia and throughout the Torres Strait. That means Aboriginal interstrat Island people's are the most imprisoned on planet Earth.

This is a cold hard fact. These are just the very basics and all these relate to is the initial interview. But I suggest if we start to get the professionals into the interview room, if the police are not allowed to conduct their business like a shakedown rather than a search for truth, which it should be, we will start to see further flaws open up in the process. A community should rightly be able to demand justice when the most horrific crimes are committed, but a community like Josh's

mother and Linda's family. The victims left behind should also have the confidence that the person who goes to prison for the rest of their life is in fact the killer. Anything less cannot be tolerated, and this will only change when we begin to we lacked the politicians who administer and write the legislation that governs police activity. Who watches the watchers start to serve the community and not the police force or the police union. This means being aware

of where your politicians stand on these issues. This means lobbying your politicians to ensure that these practices are put into place. This means making sure your local politician understands that they, as well as the police, serve you and not the other way around. We intend to continue to expose these injustices, to continue to expose the way the police continually get murder cases in Australia wrong and continue to send innocent people like Kevin Henry to prison, And

I'll leave you with just one life message. Gene Gibson was awarded one point three million dollars for five years wrongly behind bars for a murder he did not commit. The same level of evidence used to convict him wrongly is the same level of evidence used to convict Kevin Henry, that is none. The State of Queensland is going to have to pay a large sum of money. I suggest the sooner Kevin Henry is released the better. The sooner

that happens, Kevin can get on with his life. The sooner that happens, the police officers that conducted this investigation can themselves be investigated, that the failings in this case can be further exposed, and that perhaps finally the real killer will be found and Linda's family can have justice.

Make no mistake behind the scenes, as this podcast goes on, we are doing the work to ensure that happens, and we'll leave no stone unturned until Kevin Henry walks free an innocent man, and the State of Queensland and the government will pay a large sum of money for what they've done. That was episode fifty two of Curtain the Podcast.

To support our work, please go to our Facebook page and Twitter page Curtain the Podcast, check out our website www dot curtinthepodcast dot com, and please consider a monetary contribution to this podcast and our behind the scenes work to help Kevin Henry and many other Aboriginal and Torrestrait Islander people wrongfully convict. You'll find the link for our Patreon page on our website