Just before nine o'clock last night, the jury returned guilty verdicts against all three defendants.
It was absolute shambles, to tell you the truth, just absolutely really colored.
Blood on his clothing the day after the alleged attemp.
On a shallow mud bank and the fitz Roy River.
Basically, I think most of the people are used to me, there 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. Our producer is Paul Watts. Music by Clint Curtis and produced in collaboration with the Brisbane Indigenous Media Association and a warning. This series contains the names of deceased peoples and has distressing content that might upset some listeners.
For the better part of the year, we've been trying to piece together what happened on a Saturday night a quarter of a century ago in Rockhampton Central Queensland. That night was August thirty, first, ninety nine one. It was the last tragic hours of an Aboriginal woman named Linda's life, a beautiful, accomplished mother of four who we have reason to believe never received justice. Of course, there are several reasons why it's hard to piece together the events of that night.
If you've been listening for the past nine weeks you would know a few of them. One, there was a great deal of alcohol consumed the night Linda died at a place called Tenuba House, which literally sits on the banks of the Fitzroy River. Two key witnesses who gave statements to police changed the details of their statements. Many were intoxicated when they gave those statements, and some gave
multiple statements. Three. The trial over Linda's death occurred one year after, and many of the witnesses on the stand not only had hazy memories but gave totally contradictory statements. All of these reasons make it hard for us to ascertain what really happened on that night.
But as we have told you over the past few months, there are ways we can start to establish who may be lying and who may be telling the truth. We've been trying to piece together as semblance of fact in the witness statements. In this episode, we're going to go back again to the night of Linda's death.
Now, we've told you that Linda was briefly assaulted by three women that night, but a couple of weeks ago we began to look into what happened directly after her assault. We know that most of the people drinking it tone but that night left Linda lying near the steps of the house and went to my alcohol at the Crown Hotel, a short five minute walk away. Only two people stayed behind.
Now, we told you in episode eight that Kevin had a very small window of opportunity to have done what police alleged him to have done that night. It was as small as fifteen to thirty minutes. In that timeframe, Kevin was alleged to have dragged Linted to an area called Root Valley, where he was then convicted of raping her, then dragging her into the water where he got the
murder charge. But here is the thing. None of the witnesses that night, even the two who stayed behind at Tanuba the whole night, ever saw Kevin near Linda's body. In fact, according to several witnesses, he went to the Crown that night with all the.
Others Now, we did tell you there was only one witness who said Kevin wasn't at the Crown. We will call her s Now. Let me give you some background on there. She was only young at the time, about eighteen. This makes her particularly vulnerable. She was around adults, she was around a lot of drinking and violence. She was largely on her own at certain points, and it also makes her vulnerable when it comes to dealing with the police. A person at that age had not yet had a
great deal of exposure with these sort of events. She'd witnessed something terribly tragic, but what would happen next would lead to a lot of problems. She'd become highly unreliable.
Despite this, s was obviously seen as a key witness, and we know this because she was one of the few witnesses extensively covered by the local media at the time. In fact, this is how Channel nine sensationally reported her statement.
A trial has heard that a man accused of raping and murdering a Rockhampton woman had blood on his clothing the day after the alleged attack.
Day witnessed and recounted a conversation with the accused at the hostel the damous body was found. He said he raped her and stuck an iron bar in her throat, and she told how Henry had blood on his shirt.
If you were listening to that news clip, it would sound very, very bad for Kevin. But the reality is those short news clips were completely unethical because s statement completely fell apart in cross examination. In fact, this is what she said during cross examination. I will read out the part of David Murray, Kevin's barrister, and Amy will respond as there you don't know are there any other things you know about this s that you are not
telling it? No? Pardon No, Kevin never said to you that day, or to Susan while you were present with Susan, that he had thrown her in the river or done anything like that. Did he He never said that. No, never said he killed her, did he? No, You say Susan asked him if he killed her, and he said nothing.
Yeah, he said nothing.
So this conversation that you remember about him saying that he raped her too, was one that you made about eight months after the incident on the morning when you say you were full of drink when you heard it? Is that right?
I don't understand that.
Perhaps I did make that. You made the statement on Sunday last week, which is about eight months after the incident. A bit more, Yeah, and you remember it eight months later? Yeah, that's all. Now. That means S made her statement that Kevin had told her it raped Linda eight months after the event. In fact, it was the Sunday before the trial began. Not only that, S was proven to be lying at several points during her cross examination. And those
lies are crucial because S made multiple statements. In her first statement, like everyone else, she agrees largely to the events as we've described them. It's not until her second statement, which may actually be her third but the records are unclear, that she begins to implicate Kevin, and she does that very heavily. Now, remember this statement that implicates Kevin is made on the Sunday before the trial starts. This is eight months after the incident. Now there's some crucial elements
you have to remember about this. Why would a person change their statement completely just days before a trial starts. Why would the police take that statement on the Sunday just before the trial begins, from a person who is heavily intoxicated. Again, by her own admission, she gave that statement heavily intoxicated eight months after the event and the Sunday before the trial began, and it was only now
that she was implicating Kevin Henry. This raises a lot of concerns about much of her evidence, and that's largely exposed on the stand because on the day the events took place, she first tells prosecutors she hadn't drunk anything at all and she had a very clear recollection of what occurred. But immediately under cross examination, and I do mean immediately, she admitted that not only had she been
drinking that day too, she was heavily intoxicated. She'd also fabricated much of the details of what she said in that crucial statement. She admits this. She also concedes that after the events she'd spoken to most of the people
who were there that night. Now, in her initial statement and when she first appears on the stand, she claims that everything is coming from her crystal clear memory, but again this is just not true, and she admits that under cross examination she'd sat around with everyone at Tanuba
House there'd been a great deal of talk. She was heavily influenced by what was being told to her, both by those at Tanuba and more importantly by the police, and this is what led to her statement just days before the trial began, where she would finally and be the only person to directly implicate Kevin in this way.
Now, we just told you that s was one of the only witnesses whose statement made the local media, and it was the sensationalistic aspects of that statement that really made news in Rockhampton at the time. Her statements were covered quite extensively by the television news but also the local newspaper at the morning Bulletin. Those statements included the fact that she had seen Kevin with blood on his shirt and that he had told her that he had placed an iron bar in Linda's mouth.
But this is what the media didn't tell you. The claim that she saw blood on Kevin's clothes was totally misreported. Kevin had been wearing the same shirt from the night before, and it's true it did have blood on it, but it was his blood. It had been there since the day previously, when he got into a fight with another man at Tanuba. The issue of the iron bar should have also been easy for the media to rule out.
Not a single piece of forensic evidence, no other witness, in fact, not even the police, tend to anything remotely considered evidence that this was true. But the media simply led with S's statements, never checked the facts, never checked the issue that the two most sensational things she said were proven utterly false, and yet this is what they ran with. This is what the public and the members of the jury heard via the media.
The other thing that's interesting about this and important to note, is that s was also the only witness to claim Kevin stayed at Tanuba House that night, and she was found to be lying about that fact, So we know that her statement simply does not add up.
So with that in mind, surely if Kevin had stayed at Tanuba, other witnesses would have remembered it. But instead other witnesses state that Kevin went to the Crown Hotel with everybody else. And not only that, they state that he was not only at the Crown Hotel, but that he returned to Tanuba in a taxi with other people, including Susan Aubrey, one of the women convicted over the assault on Linda.
Now this is important because we've already told you that there's some confusion about when Kevin would have even had the time to do what he was alleged to have done. At no point does it look like he was alone. In fact, it's very likely simply gone to the Crown Hotel and come back, and that's what he originally said in his statement to police.
One of those people who saw Kevin after the women had committed the assault was a close relative of Susan's. We'll call her ARTI. This is what A said on the witness stand, And again I'll play David Murray and Amy will answer as a when did you next see Curtin? After leaving Tanuba on that afternoon, Just as I.
Was walking to the Grossfinode, Susan pulled up in a cab and asked us where we were going. I told her we were going to get a drink. There was Susan, Curtin and Bernie Ross in the taxi. She said she was going home to see her piccaninnies and then after what we got a drink and we went walked back down to Tanuba. They turned up there and was drinking.
All night there when he got back to Tanuba. Which way did you go under?
We went down the stairs.
Are they the same stairs where Linda was lying when you left? Yeah? Was Linda there when you went back?
No, not that I know of.
The next day someday. Were you still at Tanuba?
Yeah?
Was Curtin there as well?
Yeah.
Now A was not the only person to claim she saw Kevin in a cab with these two people returning to Tanuba that night. Another witness, who will call Jay, also had a similar story and just a reminder that Tanuba House was rock Hampton's old morgue and so I was referred to as the morgue in this testimony. Again, I'll play David Murray and Amy will answer as Jay.
I'm just unsure of this, but I thought you said to the learned prosecutor that you didn't see Kurtin again after you saw him outside the Crown until he got back to the morgue. Is that what you said, Yes, that's what you said in your evidence in chief. Yes, in your statement to the police you said this. A. Colin, Margie s Frank and me then walked to the gross Venner. When we got to the grosvender. A taxi pulled up and I saw Susan, Bernie and Curtin in it. So you did see.
Him again, Yeah, in the taxi.
Did you speak to anyone in the cab?
No?
You didn't. No, you just saw them pull up somewhere, did you.
Yes?
In your statement you said this to police. Susan then said she was going to Kent Street first and then she was going home. Then they drove.
Off, she said, told they.
So you did hear something said? They didn't just pull up and go again.
Yeah.
Perhaps you can save us a lot of time. Tell us which parts of this are true and which parts are wrong of the statement? Can you do that mine?
And we just had two other witness statements, and both of them talk about seeing Curtain that day returning from the Crown in a taxi with one passenger included Susan Aubrey. Can you put us a timeline of what happened? Can we establish that sort of timeline?
Yes, we can if you can look at all the witness statements here involved, and particularly these two. As we discussed last week, the window of opportunity was very narrow, and this actually narrows it even further so after the assault on Winda, we know that everyone except for two individuals stay behind at Tanuba House. Everyone else goes to the Crown. Here they all chip in and Susan Aubrey buys the alcohol. From there, some people walk back to Tanuba. Clearly, Kevin,
Susan and Bernie get into a taxi. Others had already started to walk to the Gross Venner where they then saw Susan, Bernie and Kurtin in the taxi. Therefore, at no point is Kevin alone because one thing we do know that f S claimed on the stand is that she was actually the first person back to Tanuba House before Kevin Henry, and by then the body was already gone.
So the narrow window of opportunity it's about ten to fifteen minutes when the police alleged Kevin dumped the body in the river, is a time when he was a at the Crown Hotel and then b in a taxi. When did he possibly commit this crime?
So, Martin, it seems like a pretty solid alibi. Shouldn't that have come up in trial? The facts that two witnesses actually saw him in a taxi with Susan Aubrey.
Well clearly the defense was trying to make this very clear. They painted a clear picture to the jury that Kevin was both at the Crown and then in a taxi at the time he was supposed to have committed this crime. But for whatever reason, the jury either were confused or ignored these pieces of evidence. And I think one of the reasons we can assume this happened is because of the very confusing nature of the witness statements. And that's
because police took multiple statements from these witnesses. They took them when they were intoxicated, and they took S's statement just on the Sunday before the trial began. So the jury have heard s first claim to be sober, to have seen everything that occurred, to have known who was
where and at what time. And then they've heard her admit know she was intoxicated, she didn't know what was going on, she'd been told events by others, not she seen anything with her own eyes that she could remember. And that that statement that implicated Kevin was given just days before the trial began. Whether the jury was able to piece this together clearly is perhaps why they don't understand that Kevin had an alibi such.
That Obviously, we have two witnesses, A and Jay, and as you mentioned, f it seems that all of them were found to be quite unreliable. So can we say that in the sense that alibi might be unreliable as well?
Well? It could be unreliable given that so much of what they say is simply just not true. But here's why I believe it is reliable. These are statements that they gave early on. These are statements they gave before for Kevin was implicated in Linda's murder. These are the statements that match after Kevin was charged with murder. It's the following statements, some like Essa's, made just days before
the trial, are the ones where the facts change. The facts that relate to Kevin's alibi are a statements taken immediately after the assault on Linda took place, when the police began their initial investigation. They all match up. They all say the same thing. They agreed that Susan Bernie and Curtin, Kevin Henry were in the taxi. It's not till much later on, after the police had decided to charge Kevin, that these witness statements suddenly change. They no
longer match up. They admit, at least some of them that they are intoxicated when they gave those statements, and only now does some of them begin to include Kevin Henry. But even those details are either totally false, as proven by the forensic evidence, or simply made up, as admitted by those very witnesses on the stand under cross examination.
I thought it was very interesting as well, because in Jay's statement, we sort of had have that almost a marker to show that when she got back, Linda's body was no longer there. So how long can is there a way to establish from that how long they might have been at the Crown, because it seems they've come back and obviously Linda's body has gone, And I think that's a really important part of her statement.
Yes, so she is one witness who went to the Crown, walked to the gross Swinner, and then went back to Tanuba along with s She was one of the along with s She was one of the people who were gone for the least amount of time, and we know she did very little while she was away. She chipped in to buy alcohol with Susan at the Crown. They did not drink there. They left immediately after and then after seeing Kevin in the taxi, they went back to Tanuba.
So again, based on the other facts we touched on in previous episodes, that window appears to still be around ten to fifteen minutes. Kevin is away from Kevin is away from Tanuba this whole time. In fact, virtually everyone who was at Tanuba is away from the house at this time, and the first person to return and all those following state the Winder's body was now gone.
The other thing that Jay said I thought was interesting is she talked about she was at Tanuba the next day and so was Curtin, So I think she even puts it as until at midday, I mean everyone was still there. So that was before the police accorded of the crime scene. That seems very important as well. I mean it seems that there were quite a lot of people who are at t Nubah the whole next day before police declared it a crime scene.
That's right, and that is very important for a number of reasons. Firstly, you've got a crime scene where many many people are coming and going. You've got items being disturbed, for prints being made, the possibility for someone or multiple people to begin to remove evidence, and cover things up. But you've also just got this basic issue of witnesses being able to collaborate to get their story straight before police arrive. And that's clear that that happened. The prosecutor
tried to insinuate. In fact, he asked for witnesses to state that they did not discuss what happened the night before, So we were led to believe, and this was partly reported that those sitting around did not discuss the events of the night before, including the brutal assault on Winder, But under cross examination, all those witnesses admit they did that there was a great deal of talk around to
Nuber House about what had happened the night before. There was clearly concern that soon the police would arrive, and some, particularly those who had committed the assault, were keen to get their story straight.
So might and if Kevin had a solid alibi, Were there other people that had an opportunity that night?
There were many, and we can start to detail those people. Now, I'm not suggesting any of these particular people were involved, but they were certainly around the area, had been seen at to nuber House and don't have an alibi. The first of those people is the fisherman. He's the man that alleges that Kevin Henry admitted to the crime the following day. This is the man who says he saw it in the newspaper that he was illiterate. This is a man who said Kevin Henry then came back the
next day and again admitted to a crime. This was a man, however, who, as we told you, had multiple names, had been convicted of fraud, who was facing charges at the time, was in fact wanted and had outstanding warrants. One woman in particular says that he used to come and go from Tanuba and he took an interest in the girls there and mardin.
It wasn't just a fisherman. There was also the man who allegedly confessed to his lawyer that he had murdered Linda.
So this is the gentleman who goes to his lawyer and claims he'd committed the murder. That lawyer then approaches the police and tells the police that a client of his has admitted to what's happened, but he's told by the police to go away. Now, witness saw this individual hanging around that night, whether he was there at the time when the body was moved. We cannot be sure,
but that's because the police did not investigate this. This is despite the fact a lawyer came to them saying a client of that lawyer had confessed to the crime. Maybe this individual was lying, maybe they had an alibi, or just maybe they were telling the truth, because they were certainly there that night, and they were possibly there when everyone else, including Kevin Henry, was gone.
Martin. This man, I mean, we've talked mostly about the Aboriginal community who hung around to Nuba, but this man, he was non Aboriginal, wasn't he.
That's right. He was a white gentleman from the town and was known to many of the witnesses not as a friend, but as someone who hung around. He predominantly stayed at a camp further up the river.
Now, our listeners might remember that at the start of this series we had an interview with a local Aboriginal elder in your Campden, Annie Judy Taddeo, who helped run to house at that time. She told me this, It wasn't always to say baseball them niggau sometimes u gangs.
Ally suppose if you want to call them gang, they'd come down sometimes within the nighttime and might have.
Some sticks or baseball back. Now that's important because there were other people known to hang around Tanuba that night. Martin, What do we know about these people?
We know they stayed in a camp just further up the bank of the Fitzroy River from Tanuba House. We also know that they would regularly come down to Tanuba and harass the Aboriginal people who called Tanuba home. They'd start fights, they'd intimidate people, they'd steal things, and many would particularly target the young girls that would come and go. In fact, they'd come down the very night before Linda
was assaulted. Multiple witnesses testify to this fact. We don't know exactly who these gentlemen are, but we do know they were non indigenous, at least according to the local indigenous people. We do know that they were causing a great deal of trouble, and we know they were targeting the youngest girls. And what happened next is quite important. As these non indigenous men were targeting the vulnerable Aboriginal women at Tanuba House, one person got up to chase
them away. That person was Kevin Henry. Now he was followed by others who would assist. Kevin took the lead in protecting the people at Tanouba that evening. This is important because Kevin was not a regular at Tanuba. He was from the Aboriginal community of Warabinda. He was simply staying in Tanouba while he was at Rockhampton. But clearly his actions show that he was protective of those there and as others had made a statement, Curtain was not
one to get into this sort of trouble. Now, these people that Kurtin Kevin Henry chased off, these nonindigenous people, got into a car near a local night spot called Flamingos and fled.
But despite this, and despite knowing that the Aboriginal people at Tanuba House were often the target of a white vigilantic mob, the police failed to follow this up.
And we just told you that Kevin tas these people to a car. Now, Remember, we believe, based on the forensic evidence, the tidal movements, the parallel line left in the mud, the fact that Kevin had no mud on his clothes, and all the information we've given you, that Linda's body had to be dumped on the other side
of the river. This would have required a car. None of the people at Tanuba House involved in the assault or those who simply stayed there, had access to a car that night, but only the night before Kevin Henry had chased these white vigilantes back to their car. Why did the police never investigate this vital fact?
That was episode nine of Curtain, a podcast delving into the nineteen ninety one murder of an Aboriginal woman named on the banks of Tanuba or the Fitzroy River in Rockampton, Central Queensland. For now, you can catch up on iTunes by typing in Curtain the Podcast, or go to our website www dot Curtain the Podcast dot com.
Also follow us on Facebook and Twitter at Curtain the Podcast.