The public has had a long held fascination with detectives. Detective see a side 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, said, I'm taking the public into the world in which I operated. 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 into contact with crime is left unchanged. Join me now as I take you into this world. Welcome to another episode of I Catch Killers. The world of crime is a murky place, but when the crooked cops joined forces with the criminals, politicians and judicial officers,
things can get out of hand. That's exactly what happened in a particular shameful time in New South Wales's history. We're talking here about the seventies and eighties in Sydney, where money, drugs and violence corrupted our streets. We're going to get an extraordinary insight into this world for award winning journalist Neil Mercer. He's going to give us a definitive inside story of Nettie Smith and Roger Rogerson, which he also wrote a book about called The Kingping and
the Crooked Cop. Rogerson at one stage was a respected cop. Nettie was a gangster and a rapist. But they are also partners in crime, murderers and drug traffickers. They both died in jail. Today we're going to look at their lives, the corrupt world they operated in, and the damage they caused. You're going to be shocked by this one. Neil Mercer, Welcome to I Catch Killers.
Thank you for having me. Good to be here.
Well, I have been a copoll was a cop for a long time, and obviously I knew of Roger Rogerson and Nettie Smith and all the corruption and the world that they lived in, and I thought they knew most of it. But I've been reading your book, The Kingping and the Crooked Cop, and I've got to say the depth of it is quite remarkable. They were so brazen.
Well, thank you for that, but yeah, you're right, they were so brazen, and you know, when I started researching it, I thought I pretty much knew Roger's story. But then I delve deeper and deeper, particularly going back into the seventies, and there was stuff that just look. I was amazed at some of the things that came out and the Roger's manipulation of the system, of his fellow cops, of judges, of courts, of all that sort of thing, and also
his amazingly close relationship with Ned. I mean, you listen to some of the intercepted phone calls from say the early eighties, and it's like Ned and here in the armhold up squad together, or you know, in the cops together. It's extraordinary.
They are literally partners in crime.
They were, I mean, just talking about those intercepts did phone calls, I think they were nine. In eighty three, the AFP, the Federal police had taps on Ned's phone and Ned's phoning Darlinghurst Police station, where Roger is then stationed, and he's saying, oh, I've got five hundred gold coins. Can you find out if they've been nicked? And Roger says, oh, no,
no problem, goes away. He calls the property office or whatever, it is, and subsequent conversation with Ned, No, there's no record of these coins being stolen, and so you know, Ned's trying to figure out how he can fence these five hundred gold coins and he's enlisting Roger's help to make sure that, you know, maybe they can't be traced and all that sort of stuff. And you know, another phone call, same time, there's Ned on the phone to Roger and another detective. Do you want me to bring
the ten? Do you want me to bring the ten? We can whack it up three ways, and the cops, the cops obviously going oh no, don't. Don't sort of say that over the phone mate, you know, and it doesn't need much imagination Gary to to know what Ned's talking about, bring the ten and whack it up three ways, talking about ten grand.
It's always funny when you're listening to people on the phone intercepts and whether it's cops, crooks or whoever, and everyone's assuming the phone's off, so they just tend.
To talk a bit quiet. I love it when they say, look, we can't talk over the phone, but blah blah blah, blah blah blah, and they go on and on and on, but I don't want to say too much over the phone, and then they do exactly that. But you know, one of the interesting things about those telephone intercepts, this is nine in eighty three. Nothing happened. Roger was not disciplined. The new South Wales police hierarchy was told about them and did well. Bugger all.
That's what I found the remarkable, how brazen it is. But just breaking down first that relationship between Roger and Ned. Then I'm talking here in the general sense. I was taught when I came into policing, and it was certainly tightened the relationship between detectives and informats. And when I
was a young cop, it was nothing. Whether you're doing I'm going to go see an informant at the pub and you'd go out with an older detective and you meet some colorful character and you'd sit there and have a couple of beers and information. It was so loose, It really was loose. It was virtually you put in your duty book seeing an informant. You didn't have to put the name, you didn't have to say what it
was about. And that was the level of accountability. Thankfully, that has changed to the point where if you have any communication with a registered source, you need to document the full nature of the conversation, the person, the time, the location, that type of thing. We needed that didn't we It was obvious.
Most certainly needed that. And I think it's probably that tightening up is probably due in part to the relationship between Roger and NED, because you know, it's exactly that he would disappear from Roger would disappear from the armed hold up squad. Nobody knew where he was. He was off seeing an informant. Well, it could have been anybody. It was off a Ned. There were lunches, there were more than a few beers, and he I guess his superiors thought that was all okay because that's the way
it had always been done. But this relationship with Ned became much closer and closer and closer, until you know, they I wouldn't say they were great friends, but they were close, and it was you scratch my back, I'll scratch you all back, and money changed hands. And you know there was no supervision of that police officer informant relationship. I mean, you know, he got away with whatever he wanted to. Well, they got away with murder got away with a lot.
The other thing about the relationships with informants, and this is something that was drummed in the me and I hopefully pass that on to others, that the flow of information is one way, and it's difficult because I've had a lot of informants in my career and they can be charismatic people, and you've really got to hold tight on your moral compass and make sure the exchange of information goes one way. They give you information, you're not
feeding them information. But it looks like all those barriers were blurred in the relationship between Ned and Roger.
I think that's right. I mean, and I understand that that problem. I understand why cops would have that difficult thing, because the informant wants something in return. You know, they're not doing it for altruistic reasons. They want maybe you know, a financial reward or you know this better than me. But Roger, well, he's always he always maintained he's no longer with us, obviously, but he always maintained that Ned was his informant, one of his best informants. But it's
clear that money was changing hands. And just as I said, with the five hundred gold coins. You know, I think Ned's words were, I've got something we can make an earn on. And I mean, you know that's we're pretty blatant, make an urn on. What does that mean? Well, make a quid five hundred gold coins. Let's see if we can get rid of them somewhere.
And I think it was even there was a passage in there divvy it up three ways or whatever.
You know, and that I think that was a separate thing. That money was to be paid by Ned to Roger and another detective on behalf of another reasonably minor criminal, Harvey Jones, And yeah, shall I bring the ten we can and whack it up three ways? And there are other conversations where they'd go they'd been out for drinks the night before, and you're alluding to this where you know, you do take informance to the pub and you do
have a couple of beers. But they were there were some intercepted phone calls where Ned's saying, oh, you know, I drank you under the table last night. Mate, Oh no, no, I did you like a dinner? And Ned says, I'll give that, give you that four hundred that I borrowed off you to the detective and the detective and then they say, yeah, yeah, I'll you know, no rush, you can bring the four hundred whenever. And Ned says something like it makes a bit of a change, doesn't it.
You know, you're usually taking it off me now, I mean it is, so you know, they're usually taking money off Ned or protecting him for whatever he'd done or was accused of doing. It was latent, and I guess it wasn't just Roger, but I think Roger was the epitome of the post. Here was the poster boy, and you know, you look at him and he was at one stage such a good detective in homicide or the fore Runner homicide and then in the armhold up squad.
But he he's seriously, seriously, as we all now know, ran very much off the rails.
I suppose when we're talking about those type of conversations that were captured on listening devices or telephone intercepts, it's not with the benefit of hindsight we're putting the puzzles together. It's fairly obvious what was going on, but there didn't seem to be mappetite for it. Before we really break down the rise the crimes and the fall of both Roger and Neddie. Let's find out a little bit about you. So, Neil, I know you've been around a long time, like I have.
Been around, I guess. Look, I started my journalistic career in nineteen seventy two, which makes me officially a dinosaur. But I didn't really start reporting on crime until around nineteen eighty one, and that my first experience was the shooting of Warren land Francie. Okay, prior to that, i'd done I worked in the old Parliament House in Cambridge. I'd covered the Sydney City Council, so I hadn't done
any crime reporting. And I fell into it pretty much accidentally, not by design, And I went round when Land Franchie was shot in nineteen eighty one by Roger in the Lane Way. A week or so later, I went round to see Warren lan Franchi's dad, Keith, and you deviewed him. And that was the first time I'd ever done a crime story. Really.
Okay, yeah, well you jumped into the DP.
As I later discovered, I'd got in it, as you say, at the deep end, because a year or so after that, I interviewed Roger for the very first time. That was nineteen eighty two, and then I started interviewing people around King's Cross and getting to know you know in later years Abe Saffron and so yeah, I came in completely unknowing at a level that I just did not understand in nineteen eighty one eighty two, I had no idea what I was getting into.
Well, it comes out in the book that yeah, you understood that environment. And I have an idea of the environment having been a police officer, and yeah, you get what it was about, and little nuances and just the way things work. Let's have you described Roger Rogerson for us? How would you describe him as a person.
When I the very first day I met Roger, it was just up from Darlinghurst Police Station and it was the first interview he'd done on the record since he shot Land Franchi the year before. We went to a coffee shop in Oxford Street, just near Taylor Square and Sydney and all I remember, or the thing I remember the most, is he had these piercing blue eyes and I'm scribbling notes, so I'm looking down a lot, but every time I looked up, he was just staring at
me and intently. That's what I remember about Roger. I wrote the story for the Herald. He phoned me the next day. He liked it because I'd been fair. He said, you've given me a fair go. If there's anything I can ever do to help, give me a call. He was good company. He enjoyed a beer. He had a terrific memory. He knew so many crooks and other people. He could be charming. He'd walk little old ladies across
the road. He'd help out neighbors cleaning their gutters. I mean, he's this fascinating personality because there's all the good things he did. But at the same time, we know he had that cold, calculating, manipulative streak. I didn't really see a lot of that, but it became evident in later years when he was charged with, say, the attempted murder of Michael Drury. But yeah, Roger was If you met
him in the pub, he'd be terrific company. If you introduced him to friends, he'd be hello, how are you going, good to meet you? What do you do? He'd be interested in people. He wasn't a enigma. I think, in a lot.
Of ways, certainly a complex character because I know a lot of people work with a lot of people that worked with Roger, and there's a consistency that comes through that. He was always charming, He was charismatic, he was a big personality. He was fun to be with. But looking at what we know about Roger now, it's almost like you're looking at that. Is that just part of his facade to manipulate people and control people?
Look, it could be. It's hard to know. I guess you'd have to be a psychiatrist or a psychologist to start figuring that out. And some people say, oh, he was a side a path or a sociopath. That's that's not my bag. But you look, I think people went into court to give character evidence for him. He did things for neighbors and so on without being asked whether it's part of a facade, but that he was doing those things long before he gets into trouble. You know,
I've struggled to work him out. What I did find is that the more I looked, the more it seemed to be he had this ability to manipulate people. I don't know. I've asked myself was I manipulated?
You know?
As a reporter, I don't think so. I always knew who Roger was because I came in at that level of the land Franchi shooting. When the land Franchi family said, you know, Roger's murdered him, Keith said, he's murdered my son. So I was never under any illusions about Roger. But yeah, he whether it was part of the facade. Look, I don't know that we'll ever know. He was, as you say, a born leader, courageous, all that stuff, and I think in the end, Gary, I think it was really ego
and power that drove him. I'm not even sure he was driven by money. I think he was driven by the fact that I know Lenny McPherson. I've got him as an informant. I've got this informant I know everybody in the.
Underworld, classic Prince of the City.
He's the Prince of the city, that's right. And his superiors, some of whom he's worked with closely as a junior. By now, a lot of them are way up high in the CIP and he's a golden boy and they overlook I'm assuming a lot of his foibles. But yeah, Prince of the City he was.
It's remarkable the influence he had as a detective sergeant. My career started just as his career finished. But I was in the toll up squad probably five years after he finished. I remember being in the witness box and this is the line of questioning. I'm a young, fresh faced detective in the witness box. So you're in the stick ups. A. Yes, so you load people, you verbal people, you bash people, of which I say, you're the tough guys,
aren't you. And Roger Rogerson's your hero, isn't he. I'n't been asked questions about Roger Rogerson in the witness box about the matter that's got nothing to do with him, five years after he's left. And that's that power, that informal power that he had, the influence.
He did, He certainly had influence way beyond his rank of detective sergeant. I mean, he's a senior investigator, but you know, he had influence with the head of the CIB, you know, up to assistant commissioners, if not commissioner level, because they all knew him and they knew he was very effective. Yeah. I mean, Roger, I guess, was the poster boy, as you said, for that hard nosed front line detective in the armed hold up Squad in the
seventies and eighties. Having said that, I think we do need to remember, and I'm not diminishing his faults or what he did wrong. The sixties and seventies in particular, there were a lot of armed robberies. There were a lot of very bad men or desperate men running around with shotguns, sticking those guns in the faces of young
bank tellers and sometimes shooting them. And the modus operandi, it seems to me, looking back now of the armed hold up Squad was to meet force with force, and that's evident in a couple of the shootings that Roger was part of. You know, the suspected armed robbers were surrounded with overwhelming force.
And I'm glad you mentioned that, Neil, because I try to explain it to people now because it's almost like a time gone by. But when I was a young detective in the eighties, armed hold ups were particularly violent. They were frequent. It was a day wouldn't go by where a bank wasn't robbed or an armor guard van hit, and people would come in with shotguns, and people would let those shotguns off and shoot innocent people. And the trauma that was passed on to the people that witnessed.
It was extreme. It was force meeting force in the armholed up squad, not condaining. And this is where policing can be tricky, that you've got to hold a strong moral compass. Yeah you can play hard, but if you slip that little bit then it starts to set slippery slope. Hopefully not to the extent of Roger. But yeah, it was a different time and different rules and it wasn't just the police, the courts. We could have unsworn statements
in the dock. I look back at that and think how ludicrous that two detectives could go into a room with a suspect and come out and say he refused to sign the interview, but this is what he said and give evidence in court and a lot of times that evidence was accepted.
It was accepted pretty much all the time by judges, magistrates in Sydney, in New South Wales and I suspect around Australia in a particular era and police, and you would know this from talking to the old detectives. They would say, oh, look, we know that say Neil did the armed robbery, but we're a bit shy on some evidence. We'll just give it a helping hand by saying he did a record of interview that's unsigned. Well, the record
of interview was typed up by the detectives. And I've read a lot of those and some of them are well, look, I shouldn't say they're humorous, but after a while, and you read a lot of them unsigned where they are the krim? This is a hardened crim. He's found in his bedroom early in the morning with allegedly with some money, although only about one thousand out of the fifteen thousand that he nicked. And he says something like, oh, well, now that you've found the money, what can I say?
I was in it? You got me, and this is a bloke.
It wasn't really creative.
Fort No, it wasn't.
I mean, you're too good for me. Detect you.
I was in it, but I didn't fire the shots. And these are this is literally the words that are coming out.
I'll tell you, but I'm not signing the statement.
Yeah, I'm happy to tell you everything, but I will not sign because that's the code by which I have lived. I mean, really, and as you say, Gary, the cops get all the blame for this and okay, fair enough, but there was a whole system of solicitors, barristers, magistrates and judges who went along with it exactly.
And then they're smart people. We could have scene through what was going on. And yeah it's again and I treed the careful path here because we can't condone it, no what's happened. But police are the ones that the finger gets pointed at, and that's fair. You know, they get the que los with they do good work and you know they're the ones that cop it when it's bad.
So yeah, it's it was an interesting time. And I just want to put on record here because I'm sitting here going to talk about corruption in the police force in a deep dive and people might go, well, what a hypocrite you are, Gary, you're sitting here. Why are you sitting here because I was charge of an offence. I just want to say, recording the conversation on the telephone I'm having with a suspect is yeah, nothing I'm ashamed of. So I just want to put that up
front now. I don't want to sit here like that.
I think you're dead right, and I think the New South Wales Police Force in having ignored a lot of the stuff that Rogerson and others did. I think the New South Wales Police Force has now got a reputation of sometimes eating its own. I call it eating their own. They turn on people for things that should be like, oh, okay, you've made a mistake, but you've got thirty years service up, you know. Let's you know you've made a mistake and I'm not suggesting you did. But too often it's like out,
you're out. You know that a ton of bricks comes down on you know, a detective sergeant or somebody, and it seems to me it's completely unnecessary. So yeah, I think it's sometimes they overreact, you know, and people bear the front of it.
Look and I think, focus on the important things and we won't get sidetracked. But the recent media talk about the commissioner having bottles of gin, like what have we got something better to focus on? Like really, like at a commissioner, do you think that she would be concerned about who gets the bottles of gin? Like it's something it's something that's been around for a long time.
I just think that that, to me is crazy And I don't know what people have got against the commissioner. I think she's made some mistakes. But the bottle of gin. I think that was her predecessor that started that. And when I heard that Gary, I think I was reading something about Roger. You know, it might have been the attempted murder of Michael Drury And I'm going a bottle of gin? Is this what we've come to? I mean, seriously, this is not corruption? Well I don't think it is.
Silly. And the fact that the focus is on that, what does this world come to? I know? But anyway, we digress Neddie. Tell us about Neddie? What do we know about Neddie Smith?
Neddie? I mean, in contrast to Roger, I think Neddie's path was sort of set fairly early, pretty much from his childhood. He never knew his father. It appears his dad was a US serviceman because Ned's born late nineteen forty four, so at the end of the Second World War, doesn't know his dad. Unhappy childhood, goes to boys' homes, gets into trouble fairly early, the usual sort of stuff, you know, maybe a bit of stealing or you know, reasonably minor stuff. So his path, if you like, as
to stink from Rogers was to me. His trajectory was set from a very early age. And he you know, he goes on to commit a gang rape in nineteen sixty seven, and that's the first time he gets a significant lagging. I think he gets seven years for that. And after that, like a lot of them in those days, have come out of boys' homes, they've done this horrible crime. They meet a lot of people in jail. He sort
of graduates into a whole range of other things. But only the time I met Ned, I think it was the beginning of eighty seven, was just before he was charged with murder. I was working at sixty Minutes, and the sixty Minutes report of Mike Munroe said, look, I Reckon need Smith might have a story to tell us, something about a green light. Anyway, he says, I've arranged lunch with Ned. So I went along with Mike Munroe.
I thought we'd go to, you know, the Iron Duke Hotel in Alexandria and have a favorite one, have a few schooners and a couple of pies or something. Oh no, no, no, that's not Ned Ned's. We're going to Pruniers in Wallara, which I think is now called Chiswick. This is this is fine dining, this is star there once starts. I've been there once too, with Ned starched, white tablecloths, old
fashioned waiters, blah blah blah. Anyway, Monroe and I are sitting there, We've got the sixty minutes expense card, the abbex, and it's going well. Ned was incredibly respectful. He was almost deferential in his manner, very softly spoken, hulking sort of man. He seemed probably bigger than he was, or that's how I remember him. And we're having a good lunch and we're drinking a few Crown lagers and I
can't remember what we're eating. But not long after, Mike Munroe and myself sit down at Pruneer's with Ned in walks another sorry in walks a former New South Wales detective sergeant by name of Murray Riley, who has recently got out of jail for empting to smuggle in a whole pile of marijuana. Murray Riley knows Ned and comes over to our table, obviously sees Mike Munroe for sixty minutes,
introductions all around. Murray goes back to his table, which is full of youngish blokes, all dressed in sort of like pastors, like it was Miami Vice, the old TV series and Love for a good Picture. There loafers, no socks, you know. So there's I think there's about four or five of them sitting at their table, and from time to time I sort of look around and Murray Riley, who Ned called the Prince of Promises, he's sort of waving, and I noticed they're getting really stuck into the verve.
Clicko champagne. Anyway, you know, during lunch, we say to Ned, what do you do? How are you making a crust? And he says, oh, I'm an invalid pension or I'm doing the best I can, et cetera. The usual. I go to get the bill with my sixty minutes AMEX. It's over a thousand dollars. I think it was eleven or twelve hundred, I can't remember. And I go to Ned very respectfully and say, Ned, we can't, we can't
pay all this. Our boss will have a fit. And he sort of looks over at Riley's table, who are cacking themselves with laughter, and he reaches into his pocket and I've never forgotten this. He pulls out this huge what a fifty dollars, notes like he's got a big hand, but it's just choc a block of fifties, peels off about five hundred six hundred and says there you go. Thanks, ned really appreciate it. And then he drives off in a brand new Mercedes. And I'm saying to Monroe, that's
that's some bension. He's got their mate. But he was. Look, that was the only time I met him. Really. I spoke to him once or twice after that, but not he was just I suspect when he was you know, with certain people, he could be very respectful, but we know that you know, he'd been convicted of a gang rape.
Yeah, when you've got the nature of a crime like that, I think book and go, okay, respect a tough guy, a gangster, he does this. That so Katie lives by. But when you've crossed the line, when you're going in the gang rape, it shows the type of person that you're dealing with. There's nothing you can't dress that up.
He tried to in later years, and for the book, I eventually got hold of the transcript of that case that were at least the committal proceedings and the victim had gone to the police the very next day with her mum. She was examined by a government medical officer. He gave evidence because Ned's solicitor was trying to suggest that there was nothing untoward here. And the government medical officer said she had bruises all over her body and
she had been pinned. Her arms were bruised. It was consistent with her being pinned down, and he had no doubt she had been raped. So, no matter how much Ned tried to dress it up that she'd enjoy it violent, it was a violent gag rate and she said the victim said he was the ring leader. It never would have happened without Ned Smith.
And yeah, Roger and that we're going to talk about their relationship next. But that to me, and I'm thinking from a policeman's point of view, there's certain people that you associate with and then there's certain natures of crime. And yeah, that one's got a big mark, wouldn't trust him, don't like him, wouldn't do a thing for him, committed crime like that. So that just shows to me, and this is just my thinking, how low Roger stoops to hang out with him and spend time with him and
get involved in what they've done. When did they first meet? At what stage? Are there careers that should have been in opposite directions?
But they first meet in nineteen seventy six, Ned Smith and a good mate of his, another armed Robert called Bobby Chapman, have tried to do a robbery on a payroll that was heading towards field as bakery a company, you know, a bakery company, and the two blokes who are picking up the cash because in those days everybody got paid in cash, so the cash had to get from the bank to the office, whichever office that was.
Ned and his mate Bobby Chapman try to Robert fail, but shots afied, one of which just very narrowly misses the bloke driving the car Lodgers in the part of the car very close to his head, so he is almost killed. This is the first time that Roger catches up with Ned. It's not in the way it was portrayed in Blue Murder. But Ned Smith and Bobby Chapman
are both arrested. You know, they're charged, but you know, Bobby Chapman is accused of firing the shots, and in later years Chapman says Ned dubbed me in for that. But it's at that stage that Roger starts to develop the relationship with Ned Smith because he can see he's been in jail for a long time, he's mixing with various criminals and he could be useful. So it's sort of I guess it flourishes from there. But just to give you some idea of the way, it sort of
cut both ways. I mean, this guy, Bobby Chapman, was accused of firing the shots in that botch to get away. When it comes to trial, Roger gets in the box. Bear in mind, Roger has taken a statement allegedly from Bobby Chapman in which he says, oh, yeah, I fired the shots, but it was an accident unsigned unsigned. Yep. Funny about that, because Bobby Chapman is as hard as nails and wouldn't say boodoor goose. Anyway, there's this record of interview Roger swears it's true, where Bobby Chapman says
I fired the shots but it was accidental. Gets to trial. Roger send to the witness box and, much to the dismay and amazement of all, says, I've done further investigation. I've now found out that the shots weren't fired by Bobby by Chapman. They are fired by a bloke called
Robert McKinnon who's an associate of Ned and Chapman. McKinnon has disappeared, and the Crown Prosecutor is going, hang on, You've got a statement that you took from Bobby Chapman saying he fired but it was an accident, and now you're telling me, which you swear is true. But on the other hand, you've now found this guy, Robert McKinnon, who fired the shots, and you're saying you've got that information from an informant. Of course, Robert McKinnon can never
be found. The trial is aborted and Chapman, who's already in jail for something else, gets a much lesser sentence than he would have. It's a complete backflip and it defies logic.
And that comes through in quite a few things, and we'll talk about one shortly where the consequences were someone innocent person ended up dead. But I've heard people talk about Roger people with I respect and said he was brilliant in the witness box, that charisma he came across, honest, he brilliant, memory presented well to the jury, charm people, that type of thing. But what front has he got
to do do that? I'm just as you were telling that story, I'm sitting here thinking, how would you do that? In the witness Yeah, Neil, you confess to me, But now I know it's not Neil. It was in fact John. Do you know that? Oh, some informant told me it was John, but didn't That's right.
As the Crown prosecutor said, this was outside court apparently said you can't have it both ways. You can't swear that Chapman made the statement, the unsigned statement in which he confesses to firing the shots, and now come in and tell us that it wasn't him, it was some other bloke who, conveniently for everyone, has disappeared off the
face of the earth, never to be found. Yeah, the front, I mean, he just seemed to and I'm reading this transcript, he seems to be completely unphased by any suggestion of inconsistency, wrongdoing. He's just He's Roger, He's the prince of the city.
Above it. Now, it would be fair to interpret that change of evidence would lend itself very nicely to receiving money to help someone get off, I suspect.
So Roger in later years said that Bobby Chapman was his informant. He also described him as the toughest man he'd ever met. I know that Chapman always denied being the informant. I spoke to somebody for the book and that person said, well, there might be another explanation. Bobby was paying him, you know. And Bobby did have a fair amount of cash around that time in his I think it was in his wife's grandmother's safe. Maybe I.
Laugh because of he's a by gone era. It is the laughing. Is not that the consequences that play out from this, but it just seems too ridiculous. We look back now and how the hell did that all happen?
Well, how could you get away with it? And even back then in that instance of Bobby Chapman and the Crown prosecutor took him outside the trials boarded and the Crown prosecutors I don't believe there is an informant. He didn't believe it at the time, but there was nothing he could do. And it wasn't the first time that Roger changed his evidence. There were a couple of other instances where he arrests a heroin dealer. This is around
nine in eighty two eighty three. The guy is driving a very I think it was a purple Triumph stag and in the car they find like eight bags of white powder, sets of scales, other bags, so it's consistent with somebody being a I suppose street level heroin dealer. Roger arrests him, charges him, gets to court, and Roger gets in the witness box, having arrest this bloke, you know, got to the stage of the trial and says, I've
made further investigations. Again, I believe that this person is innocent and that everything was planted in the car and on his person by his enemies because he had enemies in the local business community. And again this time was a magistrate. I think Matte Straight's going, what what you've charged this guy? You've said, you know, you've presented the evidence, and now you're telling me it's not true. He's a victim. And the guy gets off. I mean, Gary, you're right,
I mean the front. I don't know if it's confidence or hubris or ego or whatever it was the combination, but to actually sit there and be able to say that with a straight face and think you can carry it off. That tells you, I think a lot about Roger.
I think it also says a little bit about the power of the police back in those days, because you've got the magistrates here, the people in the legal for attorney they'd be seeing there, and the journalists as well, everyone that'd know what was going on, Like you don't have to be Einstein to join the dots on those situations. But it was allowed to run.
And yeah, magistrates would have Well, in this case, the magistrate blew up and Roger had to go to the police headquarters and get some sort of formal documentation to drop the charges because the magistrate.
Was that's rights refused.
He refused. But you're right in so many cases, and it goes back to the old verbals and the old load ups. You know, it was an accepted practice. They were very very different times. It was accepted by some lawyers and some magistrates and judges because it worked for so many years.
And I suppose it was allowed to a degree. And this is not saying that's right it was allowed. Would agree in that. Now in policing, we've got so many tools to use. When we're talking forensics, be electronic, physical surveillance, that type of thing, so it's easier to gather the
facts and gather the evidence. Back in the day, well, if someone got mooded on the street, there's no CCTV footage, there's no phone records, there's no cameras there, so you know, maybe it was a Okay, we're not happy with it, but we'll let the balance stay there in favor of the police.
I think there was that element that very much. And Rogerson argued this with me in an interview he did. I think we screened it on Four Corners where he talked about that sort of culture where he said there were three squads that did at the consorting squad armed hold up and the stick ups. But he said it was just accepted and it was done to people who
were quote getting out of line. And it's as you've just explained, they didn't have listening devices, telephone intercepts, CCTV all that stuff, and as far as Roger was concerned, this was actually and it's been called this. No, I don't think Roger ever called anything corruption, but it's been described as noble cause corruption where police would go, we know Neil's done it he's getting out of hand, he's
running around the streets with a gun. We're going to put him behind bars, and we'll do it by hook or by crook. And look again, it's difficult to sometimes explain to people that that's how things were, and there was an element of well, you know what, if Neil was running around with a shotgun in the street, good on them. I know it's illegal and I know it shouldn't happen, but they are very different times, and the
very different times for everybody journalism policing the law. I mean, it's still wrong.
I think it's important to make that, and that's more important to say it's still wrong. But I remember remember having a conversation with a particular detective where some let's call it hard police work was done and the person was put away, and I've gone, you're sure that's going to stand up in court and if we lose it, we lose it. But what do you want let him run around and shoot innocent people? And I'm thinking I
wouldn't have charged the person. I didn't think there was enough evidence, and I had some respect for the person that had the ticker to charge this person, knowing that there's going to be criticism and when I challenged the person on it said, well, what do you want us to do? Let him run a round shooting innocent people. And I thought, well, I understand that and noble cause corruption that was really drummed into us. So I'm talking mid eighties when I started in the police, and it
was really drummed into us. So where we were learning and where we were evolving that obviously the Royal Commission in the New South Wales Police turned things up on its head again, but it was different times. But in reading your book and it gave me the preciation of how you moved the moral compass slightly, Roger. If we're talking what you talked about, there was a drug dealer has got off for being punished in crime if a
bribe was paid or whatever. There was another example in the book where someone actually an innocent person ended up there because of that same type of behavior. Can you talk us through that story.
Yeah, this is what I call the saga of robber by the name of Philip Weston, who was a Kiwi. He robbed a bank in New Zealand. He did some time there. He comes over to Australia and Western robs a bank at the end of nineteen seventy five. I think it's December twenty nine, nineteen seventy five. The armed hold up squad is on to him and his three
accomplices within twenty four hours. They've obviously got a very good informant, and Western is arrested in bondi junction I think on January one, nineteen seventy six, at gunpoint by police. He goes for a gun. It's a violent struggle, you know. They visit his flat where he's been living. There's armoralite rifles, there's handguns. There's false passports, there's false driver's licenses, wigs, et cetera, et cetera, the whole kitten kerboodle that a
serious crook needs. There's a number of detectives involved in the arrest of Philip Western and his three co accused. Roger's one of them. The key person here is Philip Western. He applies for bail, it's initially refused. He applies for bail again, and armhold up detectives oppose it vigorously, vigorously. No, No, if he gets out, he's going to do another armed robbery. Should not get out bail's refused, bail refused, bail refused.
I think they're in total, there's about eight applications, just keeps going and going and going. Roger gets involved, and all of a sudden, the tone of the armhold up squad is saying about Philip western changes quite dramatically. Oh look, Phillip's the black sheep of the family. I've met his mother, I've met his wife. She's living in they're both living in Manly. He's got two kids. They are people of the highest integrity. His mum needs Philip because you know,
she's been ripped off by a couple of shysters. It's a sob story. It just the ground shifts dramatically. He doesn't get bail that day, but you can see the groundwork is being laid. And eventually, and I think through Rogerson and one other detective who they're both now dead. Eventually Philip Weston appears at short notice and coincidentally or not,
the detectives who have been opposing his bail vigorously. One of them's on annual leave, the other one the day before or has gone off on a cruise round the South Pacific with his wife. Might be a coincidence might be not for.
A short short bail application.
Bail application comes on the next to the next day.
Just breaking this down, now, say the two key officers that were opposed to bail and had strong evidence they happened to be away. Ye, the bail application is made at short not.
Hes made at short notice. Roger doesn't get in the box, but a very good mate of his gets in the box before a judge of the district court. And despite this guy being involved in the arrest, he says, Oh, I know nothing about Western, I know nothing about his mum or anything like that. Blah blah blah. You know who can say if you lanser bail, he probably will. I don't know if he was arrested at gunpoint. It's wishy washy completely. I know nothing.
As reading you your book, I was thinking, well, what the hell are you doing in the witness spot.
Well, that's that's what the It later emerged, that's what the Crown prosecutors were saying. If you haven't if you can't present the evidence, if you don't know the evidence, why are you in court? As it turned out, he knew that detective knew exactly what sort of person Western was he failed to tell the crown. He failed to tell the judge. Western gets bail for a couple of weeks. He or sorry for about a week. He reports, but then he stops reporting to Paddington Police station. He's on
the run. Very shortly after that, he's at Westfield paramatter. Philip weston the arm drobber. A bank officer notices him near the front door of the bank, trying to get in. He confronts Western. There's a bit of a struggle. Western runs away, the bank manager chases him. In those days, would you believe bank managers were given revolvers to stop armed robbers? I mean, you know, the bank manager chases,
bravely chases Western, turns around and shoots him dead. There's an inquiry, but look and Roger's questioned, but it doesn't go anywhere because it's the inquiry you're having when you're
not having an inquiry. There's no doubt now that I've looked at the transcript of that inquiry and spoken to people who are involved, there's no doubt in my mind that all that circumstantial evidence points to Roger Rogerson manipulating the system so that Philip Western got bail, and there was a huge amount of money fifty thousand either paid or to be paid to Rogerson and the result of that man getting bail, an innocent bank manager was murdered
in broad daylight in the middle of a westfield shoping. He had two kids.
And if that's not enough to check yourself, if you were taking dollars on bribes to help people, and that's the consequences you have. You've a sworn police officer and you're involved in that. So what happened to Western.
Wells wanted for murder. He's not just for jumping his bail. He's the the suspect in the murder of this bank manager, forty year old bank manager, wife, two kids. You know, it's been in the bank. It's his life, or it was. Western's on the run. Roger pretty much takes control of the hunt for Philip Weston. He's a key planner in the whole thing. Western is finally located north of Sydney, Avoca,
about eighty ninety k's north of Sydney. I think in a little shack on a beach, the armhold up squad And was it the special not It wasn't special weapons in those days, but it was the equivalent. They're all armed with profests and shotguns. They surround Philip Western early one morning. Tear gas goes into the little beach shack where Western is. He's got a gun. Shots are fired from inside. He sticks his head through a bathroom window
to be confronted by three officers, all with shotguns. They fear they're going to be shot, so they open fire. Philip Western is shot dead. And I don't think on the documentation that I've seen, I don't think there is anything well, I'm not sure I fun toward is the right word, but I don't think there's anything suspicious about the actual death of Western. It's what preceded that, how he got bail. But you know, with Western's death, conveniently
for Roger, Trail is dead. The Trail there's nothing, there's no allegation that can be proved. One of the interesting things was that I found in some of the documents Gary was that if Western had been taken alive, the person who was going to drive him back to Sydney was Rogerson. Well, obviously with a couple of other police. But you sort of look at that and you go, wow, he sort of had all bases covered.
Yeah, and I'm looking at an operation of that nature and the complexity of it all that if doing corruptly what he had done, He's juggling so many different things.
It's extraordinary, really, I mean. But such was his standing that he.
Could didn't get questioned.
He didn't get questioned.
So that was the end of Western.
That was the end of Western. There was an inquiry run by somebody from the Public Service Board and Roger was called and that's where a lot of this evidence came out. But it just never went anywhere, And there was some allegations of wrongdoing, never went anywhere. It was just they were in a tiny little paper one day, forgotten the next, We're just sailed on.
Without mentioning names. You've spoken to the police that were very angry about what happened in that situation too, the people that saw it for what it was and no action taken.
I spoke to and this is in very recent years, or in fact last year. One of the armhold Ups GOD members who had vigorously opposed Philip Western's pail is still with us. And I wrote him a letter and I said, oh, do you remember anything about this case? And he phoned me about a week later and he said, yeah, I do remember it. He said, men died because of what Roger did. I don't want to talk over the phone. Come and see me. This guy's in his middle, still still.
Old school paranoia, never lose.
I don't talk over the phone. And I'm thinking, okay, I go to see him, and he says, I've got no doubt Rogerson was paid. The word was he was paid fifty grand, or was going to be paid fifty grand. That's why Western was trying to rob the bank to pay Roger. And he is he was a good mate of Roger's at one point. And very shortly after Western was shot at a vocer and he comes back from his Russian cruise liner trip around the South Pacific. He's unceremoniously kicked out of the armhold up squad.
That's how he's true.
That's how he is treated. Because Roger knew that he was no longer, couldn't be trust, couldn't be trusted, that would be that would be it. And even though they'd been mates, they shared a card to work, their families knew each other. That was it. He was out, and it was pretty much I wouldn't say the end of his police career, but it never really recovered.
Soul destroying. I'd say, if you're fighting against the culture and that's and the organization that you're trying to protect doesn't support you, and you just get flicked. I can imagine what he was, what he was going through. The thing that really came out to me on it, Neil, and this is I feel like I'm naive because I know about the crimes you're talking about in different things. But when they've done something like that, I would think if they got away with what played out there, that
would be the end of it. Surely, surely a half decent human being and say, enough is enough, we've lost our way. Someone with a moral compass must put the hand up and go stuff this, this is where we're going down the wrong path. But it didn't.
It never happened. And I think Western Philip Weston, the bloke who gets shot up at a voca, was portrayed as a madman, mad dog, you know, and the newspapers of the day, you know, and fair enough they're getting the information from the police, you know. Don't approach him, don't go near him. He's going to and Rogerson or one of Rogerson's closest colleagues puts in this report saying he will he will shoot it out with police. He hates the armed hold up squad. He will take every
officer with him. So don't approach him. Whatever you do, like, you know, leave it to us.
So it's almost setting up the public to be ready that when he was arrested, he was shot and killed and the police won the gunfight.
They won the gun fight, don't get me wrong. I mean, Philip Western had done a very bad scene obviously, but he wouldn't have been out on bail in my opinion, and given the the material that I've uncovered over the last few years, he would not have been out on bail if not.
For Roger and that bank manager had still he'd still be alive. Yeah, I know that's the consequences of it, can I Yeah, I said it was going to be a heavy conversation. We're go into a murky world, but we'll push through. The shooting of Lawrence burn.
Lawrence Byrn was shot in nineteen seventy eight. Who by well, no prize is for guessing here, Garry, He's shot by Roger Rogerson. Lawrence Butcher Burn. His nickname was Butcher. He's an armed robber. He's got a record. Roger in fact, tells me many many years ago that he'd arrested Butcher
a couple of times he'd done armed robberies. But the armhold Up Squad has a tip off at least two or three weeks before that Butcher is going to rob the South the payroff sorry, the takings of South Sydney Juniors on a Sunday, because every Sunday the club taking is from the previous Friday, Saturday and so on are taken in an old combe with maybe one or two old blokes as security and deposited in a night's safe
in a bank in Anzac Parade. So we're talking about you know, Anzac Parade, Randwick, the Kingsford, Yeah, pretty much sort of middlers, not the CBD.
But just on the outskirts.
It's just on the outskirts, and they observe Butchery Burn. One week he's clearly surveiling the old combe as it comes towards the bank. But that's all he's doing. And they know it's Butcher because Butcher is actually in jail at this time. But he's doing day release. So on the Saturday before Butcher is shot, he's in jail. Somebody finds the jail and says we need Butcher for an urgent painting job because he had been working for on day release for a painting and decorating company. And the
jail goes, oh okay. So Butcher walks out the door that Sunday morning, meets up with two mates and they go to rob the takings of South Sydney Juniors. You know, the old Combe turns up, you know, same time, same place, same station, every week, So predictable.
Butch.
He's there with his two co accues. But so is the armed hold up squad. And Roger has got a bulletproofessed. He's got his shotgun, a Remington shotgun which apparently has some very powerful shot, not just your normal pellets. There are many many police there in cars. Roger says, I saw Butcher burn starting to point his shotgun in my direction. I open fire. Roger fire's four blasts from his shotgun. His colleague, the late arts at least four shots from
his service revolver. Some of them go through the windscreens, some of them go into the tires. Car takes off down Anzac Pray. This is ten thirty on a Sunday morning, middle of February. Car takes off. Other police who are there in the stakeout start opening fire. One officer empties six shots from his smith and Wesson. A police car gives chase. An officer leans out of the car, firing his shotgun at the escaping crims, who are apparently firing
back through the back window, which is now shattered. The car's riddled with bullets. It gets about a few hundred meters down Anzac Prayed and comes to a stop, tires shot out. A Butchy has been mortally wounded. The two other guys in the car incredibly, one of them has a sort of a slight wound, but they're still alive. Nobody quite knows how, because as Roger described this to me in later years, I think he said this at
one of his shows that he did. He said that car was full of more holes than your mother's colander. And Butcher fell out of the car dead onto the raid. Well, not quite as Roger described it in later years, but Butch he did fall out of the car. He died six days later in hospital and at the very very short inquest that followed that, as far as I can make out, barely got reported. Butcher was shot either by Roger's shotgun or the other bloke who was firing the shotgun.
But Roger took the credit. So it was you know, we'll wait for him. We know he's coming out of jail, we know he's going to do the job. We'll just wait. And you know, there were people on the footpath, there were the couple of old blokes in the combe who were taking the money, and all of a sudden there's a gunfight in the middle of Anzac Parade in Sydney. At least twenty shots were fire, and I think that's probably an underestimate.
Yeah, and look, planning operations like that, there's there's certain times and it always improves and it's tightened up. But that's yeah, it's messy in the regards unless you're there, I suppose I can't really comment, but it's amazing that another shooting that Rogers had dealings with the deceased person.
Yeah, that's right. He knew him, as he said himself. He told me he knew Butcher. People knew who Butcher was. And look if Butcher was pointing his shotgun at Roger and maybe the blokes in the comby van problems. There's no problems. Yeah, and the shots were definitely fired. So I'm not saying that this maybe falls into the you know, the worst category. I guess it goes to policing in
those days where that's how things were done. The robbers were on their way, there's no listening devices for the car. You can't listen to their mobile phones. You've got to let it unfold well.
And from tactical policing got to because there was a couple of other police shootings and we board in the policy of contained in the gashat and that was in place at the Link Cafe. But then different things for you know, if it's a terrorist situation, because you've got to evolve and adapt. But yeah, I look at the latter part of my career, look at the early part
of my career. At the early part of my career, I remember sitting in banks or outside banks with guns waiting for someone to come and robert and arrest them. And it wasn't a great You didn't need to get signed off by senior police officers. It was basically the detective's office. What are you doing O this Blake's going to go Robert Bank. We're going to wait for him and catch him. Catch him there. That was the way
I think things were done. I think they need to tail tighten up the jail security if I'm not wrong. It was a phone call from a company that was no longer it exists.
It was a phone call from a company that I think had gone into well liquidation or what. It was a very small company which was run by a guy who had met Butcher in jail. So he had a criminal record himself. And he was interviewed and he said, I never phoned the jail. I hadn't employed Butchy for like six months. I never phoned anybody. So somebody has phoned the jail someone and said we need butchery. Maybe it was one of his co accused, but they just led him out.
Not a lot of checks and balance, No, there weren't. No we'll have a break in a sect. But you know, you just talked about Anzac parade ten to thirty on a Sunday morning and yeah, fourthy or so shots and in car chases. Can you imagine that happening today? The attention, it's almost like it's something that thankfully it doesn't happen, but it's almost like something that's.
It's a by god era, and you know, that's the way things were done. There were shotguns in the back of police cars, people took off and armed robbery was about to happen, as you say, although in Butcher's case they had like a couple of weeks warning. So look, maybe things could have been done differently. That's not my area. All I can do is say, here's what we know from the coronial inquest, and these are the statements of the police themselves. But look, there was no criticism of Rogerson,
there was no criticism of anybody. But he had pulled a gun or a shotgun and another bloke who also had a gun had fired back. But it wouldn't happen now, it wouldn't happen.
Well, it was a sign of the times, wasn't it. The police were untouchable in terms of the view of the public. The police are just doing their job. The bad guys would be arguing against it. But the general public and the way the media reported that whatever the police did, it was for the good of society.
So that's right of the question, that's right, and in those days, you know, you had crime reporters who had a very good relationship with detectives. In particular, I think you could say better almost you know, with homicide, because crime, well like now sold newspapers in those days, particularly tabloids, and there was nothing wrong with that. But reporters were very close to detectives like Rogerson, not necessarily a whole range of detectives, and they are not going to be critical.
And there wasn't that investigative side happening back in the seventies.
Na.
I think the first time it really came into being was probably with land Francie. It started that started the question, started people questioning, hang on, there's something seriously wrong here, something either with the methods or the end result or the end you know, what's happened.
Something smelly there. We'll get onto that in part two. But we talk about and I feel the need to defend police too because we talk about corrupt small portion.
I know people, I know detectives that worked in those squads in those times, and I've got nothing but that mast respect for him and the rotten apple like Roger and others bring our reputation down, and I know I'll sit here and say, from a former detective, I despise people like that that have tarnished the reputation of the hard working, hard working detectives.
Yeah. Look, I agree with the absolutely because I know some of those people from the old Harmed Armed hold Up Squad and other squads, and in my view, they were really, really good detectives. And it's what you alluded to earlier. They worked with Roger. I don't think a lot of them knew exactly what he was doing. I think he manipulated his colleagues, some of them, not all of them, but yeah, they didn't know what he was doing or planning or you know. So I think a
lot of them were unfairly tarnished by Roger. And I would like to make that point too, that I think there are a lot of good detectives. Everybody goes, oh, they're all corrupt, they were all rotten. It was a shocking era. Well no, it's not that simple. There were good detectives there and Roger, well, boy did he tarnish a few reputations.
Unsay the least, that's probably a good way to win m Part one. We'll be back shortly with part two. Thanks now, thank you