Just before nine o'clock last night, the jury returns guilty verdicts against all three defendants. It was absolutely shambles, to tell you the truth, just absolutely really color blood on his clothing the day after the alleged a top.
On a shallow mud bank and it fits Roy River. Basically, I think most of the people are used to me.
Where are good people?
I think a really important question we need to ask is how many Indigenous prisoners in Australia are innocent.
This is Curtain, a podcast where we pull back the blinds to shine a light on the darkest parts of our justice system and ask who are the victims. I'm Amy Maguire and.
I'm Martin Hodgson, a senior advocate for the Foreign Prisoner Support Service. And a warning. This series contains the names of deceased peoples and has distressing content that might upset some listeners.
This week a special warning This episode will contain distressing content and maybe particularly upsetting for those who know the case and are familiar with what happened back twenty five years ago.
Now. Earlier last week we were planning on telling you more about Kevin Henry's parole and the Independent expert report we have received which shows the forensic analysis in this case was overly simplistic. But before we turned off the recorder last week, this happened.
Sorry to cut you off before we go. I have just got a message and it's gotten attachment what and it's oh man, we've got them.
What does it say?
Amy? As soon as we go off air, I'll tell you what I've received, and listeners next week you will hear what I've just received in an email and it's explosive.
Now, when we went off air and Martin told me the details of that, I knew he was an exaggerating. This was explosive.
But first we need to provide you with a bit of background. Late last year, I became aware of a piece of evidence that could prove absolutely essential to Kevin Henry's case. I've spent months searching for that piece of evidence. The evidence had come to light more than a decade ago. But despite it being sent to a number of different people, those who are actually funded to help prisoners like Kevin, it had been buried. In some cases, it had been destroyed.
And what does this piece of evidence refer to? Well, it's the question that many people have asked ever since we began telling you the details of this case, back from the very first episode, remember when we started by telling you about the tides.
An analysis of historic tide record woods from that night, as well as a long one hundred and fifty meter line in the mud parallel to the river bank, means we can be very certain that Linda, the beautiful mother of four who tragically lost her life, had been placed in the river on the racecourse side that is opposite to the Tanuba House side where police say Kevin Henry had placed her body.
Now, if you've ever been to rock Hamden, I'll tell you what Kevin would have had to do to make this story applausebore. Sometime in the fifteen minute window, when he was alone, he would have had to have found a car, would have had to place Linda in it at a time when no mode at Tanuba House could have seen him. He would have had to have driven through the main center of rock Hampden and over one
of the town's two bridges. We have the old and the new bridge, to the opposite side of the river where there's a racecourse, and then up further soccer and touch football fields.
Now, when we launched our first episode, we told you all of this, and immediately you began to ask questions. The main question is if Kevin didn't do it, who did and how did they do it? Did they do it by boat or did they have a car.
This evidence helps answer that question. It provides another story about what happened that night from a young woman who was there and who came forward to give her statement more than a decade ago. She has since passed away, but we will protect her identity. Today we will refer to her as Witness X.
Now. Witness X is an Aboriginal woman who was a teenager the night of Linda's murder. After Linda was found, she says she was intimidated by two men who threatened her her and told her to leave town. Out of fear for her safety and the safety of her family, she left Rockhampton, but roughly ten years ago she decided to come forward. She gave a detailed statement about what happened that night to a lawyer. The statement tells us what really happened that night.
Now, for legal reasons, we can't give you all of the details of her statement, but we can read out on air what this witness told a rock Hampden lawyer about what happened after Linda was assaulted. Now, Martin is going to read the statement to you, and he's going to pick up from the point. Witness X walks back down to Tanuba House after the assault has taken place.
Now this is Witness X. I walked down the stairs slow because it was dark, not much lighter round Tanuba House. I found a door and walked in kicked something on the floor. I could not see what it was. This thing on the ground was a person, I realized with a fright because the person grabbed me on the leg. I bent down to see who grabbed my leg, and all I could see was the eyes that rolled back.
I then asked the person if he she was all right, and this person tried to talk, but I couldn't hear properly. I then immediately walked into the next room, where I saw the same crowd that was up at the Crown in the room.
Now, for legal reasons, we can't name everyone that the Witness X mentions next, but we can say they include all of the three women who were convicted over the assault, and also Kevin.
Henry Curtin, Kevin Henry was asleep on a mattress. I asked them if that person in the other room was taking a fit. Someone said that she was okay, she'd come out of it soon. She does that all the time. I asked them if someone was going to ring the ambulance or police. No one answered me.
Now another note, we have to conceal yet another identity. We will call her Witness Why.
I then asked Witness Why for a smoke and asked which way to go out. They told me to leave through another door. I did and that led me up towards a big tree. I then ran into C H who was walking towards tenuber house. He asked me where Curtain was and I said, he's down there asleep. Just kept walking as fast as I could away from that house. When a green car came alongside of me, Witness Why sang out from the back seat and asked if I wanted to go for a ride. I said, where are
you going? Witness Why said to the other side of the river to dump rubbish. I was going to jump into the back seat with her, but c jumped out of the front and told me to sit in the front so he could sit in the back. With Witness why. The man driving was Willy West, who then drove over the bridge. Then I remember under a bridge. When we pulled up, Willie reversed back and there was a very bright light in front of us. C and Willie got out of the car to dump the rubbish. I asked
if they wanted any help. Witness why, I tapped me on the shoulder and said, let the brothers do it. As we were waiting, I asked Witness why where the bright light was coming from. She said from the touch football grounds. Witness Why. I kept talking about different things, but I could hear water behind us. It took a fair while for See and Willie to get back into the car. When we left, they dropped me off at
the road thunder and no one was there. A couple of days later, C and Willie West came to my house in Warabinda and they told me to keep my mouth shut because if I tell anyone, they're going to rape me and kill me the same way as the other woman. I moved away soon after this because I was afraid of what would happen to me and my kids.
Martin, is that how the statement ends?
Yes, so that's the way the witness's statement ends, and then at the bottom I will read for our listeners how an official statement that was taken then in Queensland finishes Justices Act eighteen eighty six. I acknowledge, by virtue of section one hundred and ten A five c two of the Justices Act eighteen eighty six that one, this written statement by me, dated the thirtieth of the ninth, two thousand and two, and contained in the pages numbered, is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
And I make this statement knowing that if it were admitted as evidence, I may be liable to prosecution for stating in it anything I know is false. This was signed by the witness, signed in Rockhampton on the thirtieth of September two thousand and two, and signed by the barrister who took and witnessed the statement.
So, Martin, there's quite a lot in that statement, and it was taken down a considerable time amount of time after the crime actually took place. How can we be certain that Witness X is a reliable witness?
Okay, So, based on what we've just heard, some of our listeners may be a little bit confused because we did have to conceal some identities. But the statement is from someone who we will continue to refer to as Witness X, and the important part of their statement is that while some people saw little bits and pieces of what happened that night, some were witnesses to the assault. Some people saw Kevin Henny throughout the night in different places.
Other people saw and could place other people that were there that night at certain times at perhaps t Enuba or the Crown Hotel. This witness was able to see absolutely everything from start to finish. And when I say everything, I mean all the crucial incidents. So this witness was able to see what happened to Linda, as in when she was still alive. This witness was able to see what happened to Linda as best as possible, as you heard at the very end. And really this witness is
quite unique in that circumstance. Now, how can we be know they're telling the truth. Well, this witness gave this statement, as you said, quite some time after the event and quite some time ago. All the evidence they gave is either corroborated by other witnesses, is corroborated by the forensic evidence,
or is corroborated by our own investigation. It's also important to know this witness had no involvement whatsoever in what happened that night, and it was never alleged that they did, and that this witness had absolutely no need or reason to lie. This person came forward because they wanted the
truth to be known. And basically the two things they wanted to be known is they knew where Kevin Henry was that night, and they knew who put the body in the river, Linda's body, and it was not, as you heard, Kevin Henry on the Tanuba House side of the river. It was other individuals on the racecourse side of the river who did have access to a car.
Now, this is a completely different version of events we're hearing from what the police actually alleged happened. But does Witness x's version of events fit with the logistics of where Linda's body was found and the timing of what was happening that night at Tanuba.
House, Yes, it does. I think one thing that everybody who's looked at the case over the years, and there's been quite a number of lawyers who have looked at it, is the timeline and the logistics just don't match up.
There's no sense to be made and it can't be proven, and never was that Kevin Henry had access to a car, had time to find a car, was able to place a body either on the other side of the river, which is what the forensic information would show, or on the Tanuba House side of the river, which would have required him to get completely wet and covered in mud
and have the blood all over his body. So this witness and what they say fits with the much more reasonable logical scenario and the scenario that is backed up by the forensic evidence, which is that the people needed a car, and she gives us that those people had a car that they needed to drive to the other
side of the river. Now, as people will have heard in earlier episodes, you re enacted driving to the other side of the river and to this day as it required back then it meant going over one bridge and under another. So this is just a little detail that this witness included that had to take place if what they said was true, and that witness did include that. And so there's a lot of little things in this statement, and trust me, I've picked through it like a fine
tooth comb. That there's little bits of evidence that someone who didn't see what happened wouldn't know. But this witness clearly knows and clearly saw what they saw, and yes, the logistics of what they describe fits absolutely with the evidence and absolutely with what I believe took place that night.
The interesting thing to me is how you began the statement when you recited it, and it was the event where she's actually tripped over almost a body that's obviously in a very bad state. We don't know who that body is, but it does sound a lot like Linda. What does that say about the potential of Linda being alive before she was put in the water, or whether she may have died before she was put in the water.
I think that it's a really hard thing to know from that statement alone. But obviously, again we can go back to the forensics. We have one thing we never really had, was a witness who could tell us what really happened to Linda after the assault. There's always been this huge gap, and even the police never really attempted to fill that gap. They purely just said, at some point, Kevin has dragged Linda down to the water. Now, there's
no forensic evidence for that, and nobody saw that. But what this witness says is that there was somebody under Tanuba who was in a very bad way, and this would match obviously with the fact we know that an assault had occurred, and this witness was clearly concerned about this individual because they inquired if anyone had called the police,
had anyone called an ambulance. So we can't be one hundred percent sure that this person was Linda who they saw, but I think it's a fair guess that that's who they saw, and it does suggest to us that while Linda was still alive at that point, she was in a very bad way, and that would have been following
the assault. And we do know from the forensic evidence both presented at trial and that we have now that the assault committed by the three women was horrific and would have left Linda in this sort of state where she may have appeared to be having a fit or be slipping in and out of consciousness as it appeared this person discovered.
The other interesting thing I thought was Witness X describes the lights from the Touch Football grounds and she also describes hearing water behind us as witness why is talking? Does that sort of give us any indication of where this drop off point could have been in relation to Linda's body.
Yes, and I think, as we pointed out very early in this series, that the forensic evidence always suggested that Linda's body was placed on the racecourse side of the river. Now, police never explored that scenario and never countenanced it as a possibility, but we certainly did because we looked at
the forensic evidence. And so what those lights from the touch football ground shows and the water that was behind the car would place the car in the exact position, with the back of the car to the river and the front of the car facing towards those fields, is the exact position where we months ago believe believed Linda's body was placed in the water. Now, at that time, we did not have access to this statement and we did not know its contents. What we were using was
absolute forensic data. And so what we have here now is an eyewitness whose statement backs up what that data showed us, and it does so in an incredibly accurate manner. And it's quite disturbing to read it for the first time, for the first few times to realize that so much of this could have been solved by the police in those very early days, had they done the basic work that we did when we first examined this case.
What does the whole statement say about Kevin. You've mentioned a few places where the witness has talked about Kevin Henry being asleep. Is that the only mention she makes of Kevin Henry in this statement.
No, So, for the purpose of protecting people's identity who have no involvement in the crime whatsoever, we did leave out some sections of the statement that were really just background information. But the witness does describe where Kevin was throughout that day, and it matches up very much with what we know happened to Kevin that day, which is that he consumed a large amount of alcohol and then he spent most of the afternoon and the evening asleep.
So this witness saw Kevin come across the road and sleep next to a gum tree. This witness saw Kevin Henry at the Crown, And we have to remember that this is something we've raised before, that part of Kevin's alibi is that he was at the Crown, and if he was, he couldn't possibly have committed the murder. And so this witness did, like others see Kevin Henry at the Crown and at the time the body was placed in the river, this witness saw Kevin Henry asleep under
Tenuba House. Now, again, all of this matches with the fact that, by Kevin's own admission, he drunk a considerable amount of alcohol that morning, and that he spent most of the rest of the day asleep and a brief period of time at the Crown Hotel, And all of this is confirmed by an eyewitness.
Now we've got two other men who Witness X says she saw dumping Linda's body in the river. One of these men we've concealed the identity, we've called him c But another man, Willie West. What do we know about him? And why have we chose and to say his name in full?
Okay, The reason we've decided to say his name in full is that his name was raised as a potential suspect at the initial trial. Now, that name was raised both by lawyers for the women and the lawyer for Kevin Henry, And that name was raised in full to the police in particular, and also to others who were there that day. This is not the first witness to place Willy West at the scene. We have other witnesses
who say that Willy West was at Tanuba House. We have other witnesses who say that Willy West was at the Crown Hotel. And the reason this is important is because the police deny all knowledge of this individual, and the police claimed that they did not take a statement from this individual, and that is despite the fact that
multiple witnesses raised this person's name. Now, based on what we know from this witness testimony, it appears this person, according to witness X, drove the car and was one of two men to place Linda's body in the river.
So I think we can very reasonably understand why the lawyers for the women and particularly Kevin Henry, repeatedly brought up the name Willie West and asked the police if they'd investigated that individual, had they taken a statement from that individual, and in fact, did they even know who that individual was. Now, again, the police denied knowing who
this person was, nor ever having taken a statement. But I think it's fair to know that the lawyers at the time knew something was up with this individual, and that's why they raised that person's name. And now we have the evidence about that individual.
I mean, the fact that he seems like he's one of the very few people at Tanuba House to have a car should have raised alarm bell bell straight away, because even from the very moment we knew that this crime, you would have needed some sort of vehicle in order to actually do this the way Linda's body was found, you would have had to have some sort of vehicle of some sort.
That's exactly right. And I think again that was one of those points that seems obvious to absolutely everybody involved from twenty five years ago until today, except for the investigating officers, that a car would have been required. And this is the only person that we know of and that was mentioned by witnesses to have access to a car. So I think that's why it stretched credulity for the lawyers to believe that the police had not interviewed this person nor knew who they were. And we have to
remember that absolutely everybody was interviewed. Anyone that was at ten Uber House was questioned at least once and up to five times by police. And as we've mentioned in previous episodes, some witnesses who were at t Uber House but had nothing whatsoever to do with the crime were followed for months, including a mister Wayne Saunders, who was followed out to the Rockhampton prison and he gave a statement he was accused of committing the crime and he
had no involvement whatsoever. But this individual Willie West, who this witness names, who clearly other witness name, and to Lawyer's raise, was not once interviewed by police. And I think that raises very serious doubts as to the quality of the investigation and to whether that investigation really found or sought to find the truth of what happened that night.
And not only that, this is just another piece of evidence, along with everything else we've provided you with over the past year that points towards Kevin Henry or Curtin's innocence. Join us next week for Curtain