This podcast contains information and details relating to suicide. We urge anyone struggling with their emotions to contact Lifeline I'm thirteen eleven fourteen thirteen eleven fourteen, or visit them at lifeline dot org dot au.
Hello, Welcome to the tenth installment of Conversations and the last one for the year.
Liam, Welcome Allison. It's been a long journey, hasn't it it has.
I am in Perth with Liam and Tim. I saw Tim earlier, but unfortunately Tim has got stuck in that Rebello trial, which is fascinating, right.
That is an interesting case Cracker.
Also the fact that the friends were stuffed up in that case too.
It's interesting, isn't it? But not as interesting as the case that we've been looking at for all these past weeks months. And we live in hope that the new team, as they call it, the new investigative Team, the task force that they've put into place, looking at the new leads that they have. Now. I know there's been some
conjecture on this, even from within police ranks. There are still some policemen I don't think police women, but I'm willing to bet that there are still some policemen in senior ranks who don't treat and are not treating, at least mentally, some of these pieces of information as new
leads on Amy's case. Now, whether or not that is a mental block that they have because they don't want to for various reasons over the course of the journey, because they're involved in the case on various levels, that's
a matter of conjecture. But can I just say to you anyone, anyone with an investigative background who is not treating the pieces of information that have been brought to light through this podcast and through some of our very loyal listeners and people who have been prepared to ring crime stoppers and do the right thing after all these years, give for whatever information they've had, whatever information they think
could be valuable to police to consider. If there are still people who don't think they constitute solid new leads, I'm sorry, but they're living on another planet.
Well not just leads, but evidence.
I'm treating that as the same thing. It's a lead, it's evidence, it's you know, it's material information, Allison.
Yes, exactly. And I think it's just really important that we look at everything. Yeah, I mean, we talk about an open mind and open mind is an interesting conceptism that when people say open mind, because I think anybody who was involved with the case in the early stages shouldn't be working on it now.
No, I agree with that. I agree with that. I think they have a lot of copy book in that sense. I mean they've shown that they have a very narrow view of what took place or the possibilities, permutations, combinations of what may have happened may not have happened. So I think let's just push them to the sideline. They can spend their time happily thinking about other things. But I think for Amy and for Amy's family, especially for her two girls, we have to have an open mind.
As you say, it's an open book at this stage. In fact, the coroner said it was an open finding, so I think that's pretty consistent. So we know that homicide is certainly on the table.
Yes, absolutely, Look, I've been speaking to other people as well, legal people. One of them has talked about now and a lot of our listeners up to finding the wood buyer, right the wood buyer who Amy was sending all these messages to David Simmons about getting back with the wood, so that they could sell the wood to the wood buyer. He was coming at three fifteen pm on that day, yes, so she needed him to be home because that's when she collects the kids, right, So the boys were home
by then. What did this wood buyer see when he turned up? That's that's what I want to know. Because he couldn't communicate with David Simmons, or he or she it could have been a female couldn't communicate with him because his phone wasn't working. That's why he was communicating with Amy, and Amy's trying to get the message through. So I think I think police should be looking for this wood buyer.
Do you know if the wood buyer has ever been contacted? I mean, has there ever been a statement, a formal statement taken from the wood buyer? No? No, At the moment, it's a complete mystery figure.
Yes, it is a complete mystery figure. But I think that new task force, if they're going to be doing their job properly and comprehensively, they need to find this wood buyer.
Wouldn't the wood buyer's number be on Amy's phone?
Correct? I gather they still have it, I mean more the family have it, but maybe they should be getting hold of it because obviously, as you know, they missed the photo with the bruises too.
Mainly they did they did that was in the case of photos on her phone that we found and they said they'd lost it. It's interesting, isn't it. There's a few different things, and to be fair, I mean, there may be different things. I'm hoping, fingers crossed, there maybe a lot of different things that this new team, this new task for us, is looking at behind the scenes they don't want us to know about and they don't want other people to be aware of at all. And
that's a good thing. That's you know, obviously an investigative strategy that they may be employing that you know, you can't discuss every aspect of the case. And we hope, we hope there may be a range of initiatives that that team is performing at the moment that is way way beyond what our imagination can conjure up that would
be helpful. I mean, we do know, for example, we've come into contact Allison, as you know, in the last couple of days, we've come into contact with a couple of people who were so of Amy's, were friends of Amy's, and they have told us that the police have taken statements,
been back to them again. This new team has been back to them, taken new statements from them because they had contact with Amy in literally in the days that before she died, and that was as late or as recently as of second week as September, not that long ago at all, so that's very heartening. I was really heartened to hear that. I thought, Okay, well, they've been
doing the footwork. They've been knocking on the doors, going to people, trying to get fresh background on what happened in the hours and days leading up to Amy's death. So that gives me some hope.
Another bit of information that I've come across in Perth that I wasn't aware of until today is Shelley Stanley. Them finding Shelley Stanley because she has more information.
Who is Shelley's.
Shelley Stanley is the or friend, an old friend of Amy's. She only knew Amy because her former partner was friends with David Simmons. So what had happened is they used to go out and I remember I don't know if he recalled, but anyway, she remembers the way that he
used to talk to her and was quite defensive. She put in a statement to police about that, and he accused her when she was trying to defend Amy, he accused her of being or lesbian or something, you know, like it was that sort of yeah, she said, and I don't I'm going to tell you. I'm going to do it in two ways in cases legaled out. So first of all, she told a story about what the
boys used to get up to involving hunting. Now, what I can tell you is that I used to go pig hunting with it with just a knife, the three of them, so that that's already on the record. But what I wasn't aware of is that they would film themselves slaughtering the pigs and then head back home and make the girls watch it with them while they bring beers.
Which is a bit their partners.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a bit strange, right.
Yeah, I wouldn't think that's that sort of a normal fraught autternoon fair for most blokes.
I think it's significant because we talked about domestic violence, right, And the reason I think it's significant is because they have evidence of domestic violence witnesses. Even on that day that Amy was being you know it was in a violent physical altercation with David Simmons.
Well, you know, again to be fair, I mean that's what police look at, don't they. That's what they in their investigative sort of template. They look at patterns of behavior and they can come from character as well as actions, can't they. So you know, it's all part of that mosaic that makes up the you know, the whole, the whole case. There's no question mark is there that it
was a coercive relationship. I mean we know that from first hand evidence given from Amy's mum, from her closest friends, from those people around her at various times over the sort of the one two preceding years. So I don't think, I don't think, you know, that's not a question mark at all. The question is is how far does that behavior go?
Speaking of David simmons behavior, we saw a bit of it this week because this was the week. The reason I am in Perth is I came to the court hearing. I was hoping to see the court hearing of the allegations or the charges against David Simmons, one being the most serious being assaulting a public officer, a police officer, which he's pleaded not guilty to, also obstruct, which is
pleaded not guilty to. And there were two others which he did I think was disorderly behavior and something else a bit more minor that he has pleaded guilty to. So lo and behold limb. We were down at the court. I was down at the court very early, ready because obviously last time we were there, he didn't necessarily expect this last time, but he came quite early. So I was there from seven point thirty waiting for him, and he was due to be there by nine o'clock and he didn't show up.
Didn't turn up, didn't turn up, no a no show.
Yes, nobody is surprised about that, though.
Well well, well yeah, okay, I'm still a bit surprised because it's you know, it's a serious charge. It is a serious charge, I mean, assaulting a public officer. And last time he got a delay when we confronted him last time, so this appearance was supposed to be that, you know, sort of the ultimate appearance. So what happened he didn't front were they court there.
Court doesn't like that, obviously. It's a waste of resources, time, money, all that sort of thing. So they issued an arrest warrant for him, and that would have been I don't know about ten o'clock, eleven o'clock something like that. So that was that. It was just like, even if he did show up, it wouldn't proceed. So we were informed of that and that was the case. So I stuck
around till about lunchtime, thinking, well, what's the point? I mean, yeah, and by that stage everyone had kind of cleared off. I wish I had stayed though, because it turns out that he did turn up about two fifteen two thirty that afternoon, and they just obviously withdrew the arrest warrant and rescheduled it for the sixth of January.
For the sixth of January, so they just push it forward.
Yeah, so he's got Christmas out.
So what happens in the interim, as you say, I mean, very important. He's pled not guilty, But what happens to public safety like this is, you know, forget David Simmons for a while. I mean, this is another issue. I guess. I don't want to go too far down a rabbit hole, but that's the bench warrants. I mean, we're just treating the court as a joke, isn't it.
Well, there's no real ramifications, is there. And funnily enough, I looked at some of his other charges which you would have seen on as well, and some of those include driving without a license, fraudulent number plates. You know, different cook pretty minor comparatively, like we're not talking about assault of public officer is a serious offense. But you know,
just bearing in mind that he pleaded not guilty. We are aware that he has been convicted of assaulting a police officer before, and he served nine months for that.
Certainly has well, let's just go through a few here we go, no authority to drive, disqualified from holding or obtaining, used an unlicensed vehicle on a road. See another offense. Drove caused or permitted a vehicle with a forged, replica or false plate to be driven on a road, Breach of bail. As you say, assaulting the public officer, that's the current charge. He's pled, not guilty. Obstructing public officers not guilty, that's still to be decided. Disorderly behavior in public.
Yes, we saw in the next day driving a vehicle. I don't know about the number plates, but we do not he doesn't have a license, So straight away he's backbreaking, aw incredible in everything that I can see, he is untouchable incredible.
So what do we got? Just coming back to the sort of important leads that have been given that we know of, that we know of, and as I say, I hope there's some that we don't know of, but the things that have been also communicated to us, Well, let's go back to the Joshua Brdon information because surely that's going to be a focal point for the new
team that's been put together to reinvestigate the case. Wouldn't you think, just off the top of your head, that information about Joshua Brdon that was given by a third party is very interesting.
It is. There are a couple of things with that one. Joshua Brden maintains that he did not say anything like this and that he wasn't there on the.
Night, so he insists it's just rubbish.
But in this case, there is also a message to the person who remembers him saying this, which says in twenty eight says he recalls finding his best mate's wife, who was like a sister to him, with her quote head blown off.
Everything he said to the coroner and the police. He wasn't supposed to be there. He's not there.
Yes, well, he maintains he wasn't there. But as we pointed out in the timeline, there is issues with the timeline because he says he recalls getting a message at four forty seven or four forty eight from his mate Kid when he was leaving, But then he also says in his evidence that he saw David Simmons put the girls in the car, but that didn't happen until after five. Amy died around ten past five.
Yeah, the timeline doesn't make sense for him. But also if he writes that in a message, that doesn't make sense either. How can he not get that out of his head? That visual picture of Amy as he puts it, her head blown off if he's not there to see it.
There is a lot of inconsistencies with the evidence. And yeah, as would be in a lot of cases, right, I mean, this isn't rare, no.
No, this is where this is how cases go.
Well, that's right, but as you know, with briefs of evidence, they'll do up a whole brief and then they'll put a little cover sheet on the front and say dear Director of Public Prosecutions, we believe there's enough evidence to go forward, or we don't believe there's enough evidence to go forward, and then that's it. How much power or influence does that little cover letter have do you think?
Oh? I think a lot, Yeah, I think a lot.
These to me are the indisputable facts, the factual based evidence not circumstantial by three biomechanical experts in Amy's death was highly consistent with her not killing herself and someone
else shooting her. Every crime reconstruction has limitations, but this is also based on her capacity to shoot herself with either hand and the people that were actually there, which I still find quite troubling that more weight isn't given to those three uniform police officers who were there first on scene had an argument with the detectives, saying that she wouldn't have been able to shoot herself like that was there, you know. So I just still think and
that's been backed up by the biomechanical experts. So that's new evidence that previously not considered. Photo of Amy with bruises around her neck crimary construction by Scott rohder Renee mckeirne's snitch message on Amy's anniversary with David Simmons, not as a couple, but in his presence when she posted on Rachel's Facebook page on the anniversary of Amy's death.
Suicideologist evidence on how likely or unlikely Amy's death was a suicide, taking in all information of the pack car, daughter strapped in the backseat, where she was found, method of death, etc. A doctor or mental health expert providing evidence to discuss how extensive the use of cetellopran is and how common the docy Jamie was or uncommon. They should also discuss the side effects of someone who suddenly stops taking cetelepran and the effects of methamphetamine and excessive
alcohol use on a person's behavior. Statements from several witnesses saying Bridon says he never forgot and also his message in relation to that.
That's significant, right, Oh yeah, yeah, well absolutely you'd think so, will you? Now? Look, if people want to send us a letter, what's the address?
It is the Truth about Amy or one Word at seven dot com dot AU.
Okay, So, Evelyn says, Hi, guys, I've been listening to the podcast as episodes are released each week. Everlyn says I was home when my father killed my mum. Pretty horrific story.
It is so that the home she's in is where her father killed her mum.
She says. We are about to hit the twenty three year mark this Saturday, twenty third anniversary, and although a lot of time has passed, I can tell you my mom wasn't fighting my dad. She was begging. My mum was pleading. She was offering the future graduations and weddings of their kids, grandkids that have one day, whatever she could to de escalate the situation. We know leaving is the most dangerous time for a woman, and not only that, but my mum and Amy both had kids they needed
to protect too. And thank you Evelyn for sharing that with us. I can imagine it's been pretty difficult for you for.
It's so sad. Oh, Evelyn, thank you so much for sharing that with us. And I am just horrified for what has happened. And I'm glad that you're okay, and I feel my condolence is to your mom. It's just a horrible thing. And I find there's a bit of double standard sometimes when you're interpreting the evidence that in that case it's turned against Amy in a way that fits the narrative as opposed to just what is more likely.
And that's why I think it's really really important that you have external experts, you have people who are qualified in these areas rather than anyone, because it's not well with everyone, right. Everyone has their own they're brought up in a culture or an environment, and they have, whether they like it or not, they have different ways that they interpret things based on their own upbringing.
And the trouble is too, that a lot of people put themselves in this position. When they're thinking about it, they think about what they would do, and that's really that's tragically wrong, Alison, because that's the reason you need these experts is because they are trained and proficient at thinking about what that particular person physically is capable of and also culturally mentally. You know, according to a lot of things gender included would potentially do not do you
know what I mean? Not put your own template us somebody externally. So there's a lot of different variables, isn't there, Speaking of which you know, what I am looking forward to down the track is to have a chat to Laura Richards. She's a crime analyst of some note isn't she based overseas, But she's been following this case.
Yes, very closely, as she did with Marion Barter. And she is amazing and she's very good in the criminal behavioral and analytical sphere, in certainly with Rick Blum in Marion Barter's case. You know, just the way you'd answer questions and things like that, and as you always say, no skin in the game, and that's really important too, write. I really do find the external analysts and you know, they're putting their name, their reputation, everything on the line.
They want to get it right and they have the experience to do so that. You know, when I was talking about the suicidologists, right, we can talk about you know, police officers come across suicide all the time, right, so do lots of us in journalism. But the reality is these sociologists, like what Michael Barnes said, there are hundreds of thousands of cases that they look at and the same with Laura. So Laura is going to be amazing.
And you know her credibility, the involvement she's had with you know, implementing or getting implemented coercive control laws in Australia. I mean, she's just really a lot of influence.
She's brilliant. I mean I think you know, she'd probably be one of the best criminal behavioral analysts going around. Absolutely, So, No, that'll be fascinating. I'm really looking forward to that. We should mention again to that petition because it's really if someone's listening and they haven't signed it, well.
I was, I'm thinking maybe I was going to mention that now that it is going to the DPP. Depending on what happens there, we may need to like if the DPP, who knows what's going to happen, right, Well, that's the problem. Yeah, I mean, that's the thing that we still have. But but there are different things that
will update on. What we do need to tell people about, though, is the Silent March coming up organized by the Center for Women's Safety in Perth on the twenty fifth of November, the thirty fourth March against Domestic and Family Violence.
Yeah, I couldn't believe that the thirty fourth March. There's no way I would have thought that would have been as many as that. So it just goes to show you, doesn't it. It's very much more on the radar now though. Yeah, And absolutely, there'll be people there marching. I think they're marching from basically the city, aren't they from Forest Place up to Parliament House in Perth? So you know that's yeah,
as you say, twenty fifth of November. So that's going to be a very good focal point for Amy's case because a lot of Amy's family and friends and supporters will be there and anyone is encouraged to come along and wear pink support.
Amy, Amy's favorite color. You weren't here last week, Liam, But Tom Percy said something to me I was not expecting, or said something to both him and I should say, and I was not expecting this about the domestic violence. What he witnesses is that domestic violence is worse now than it ever has been. And the reason he says he believes that to be the case is methamphetamine.
Really his position that it's worse now than it's ever been.
Yet his experienced being in the courts, obviously being legal system for such a long time, he says it's worse now than ever. See.
That's that's disappointing, isn't it. I mean absolutely Tom sees the worst of it coming and going in every walk of life and with incredibly well well experienced Tom you know, I mean, he really is up there in terms of street behavior. So for him to say that's that's quite shocking, isn't it. It's a terrible drug. I mean, it's not many drugs that are good drugs, but that is a shocker, isn't it? In terms of behavioral change, and you know, getting the worst out of people. Meth is it's not
number one, it's certainly in the top three. That march is organized by the Center for Women's Safety in Perth, and yes, so just in case you want to get in touch with them, But twenty fifth of November just just another reminder that'll be good.
It will be good, so we'll send people out there. Also, we'll obviously be covering if David Simmons turns up to his new hearing into assaulting public officer allegedly in January, the January the sixth, twenty five, so that there's that coming up as well. And look, I have to say now, Liam, as I look back and everything that's happened. I mean, we launched on the twenty th June this year, it's now November.
It feels like, Look, I've got to say this the whole sort of saga. And I think we touched on this when we talked to Xanthi Mallet, because she made the point that it's not a cold case in her opinion and the way the whole definition of cold case goes. I mean, I'm not trying to be technical here, Don't
get me wrong, I'm not being playing semantics. But what was really interesting about her expression about that is that it's not a case that has been decided and then brought back up or do you know what I mean, There's been no sort of it is fright from the start. It has been a case with a huge question mark on it, and it's quite fresh in terms of history. It's twenty ten years old, so during that whole the way it's been structured, it's not a cold case at all.
It's a current case and we know there's a current team investigating it. So I just think it's amazing. Al we've been going now since the twenty third of June, so it's five solid months, five solid months, a lot of episodes, structured episodes of the podcast, and then obviously conversations like this where we have a chat and you know, go back over a few bits and pieces and try
and sort of keep the home fires burning. But we've still got a couple of episodes to come, going back to a more structured podcast episode, how we can reintroduce some of those new leads and new ideas and things that have happened, some of those developments. But you see, there's an amazing amount of water under the bridge already, isn't there just in those five months.
It feels like it's painfully slow. Said that, but it really isn't when you look at what has actually happened in that five months. I mean, we've gone from I don't know if we've really had much, you know, sort of flat fanfare from w plice and what they were doing. But we did get you know, pretty early on, I think it was, you know, that they would be reinvestigating the new lead. So that was probably about a month ago that they announced a team that would be reinvestigating
this case. So that's really significant. And then the team turned into a task force. That's right, and now they're going to provide a brief to the DVP, which was obviously very big for us that that was going to happen.
Yeah, but you know, nothing happens in a vacuum, and they haven't done anything without being pushed. Let's be honest, and you can't have hundreds of thousands of people downloading the podcast and saying yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, we can see what you can see. We see the suspicions that you see. We're not making it up. We don't have to make it up. Truth is stranger than fiction. And this case is a classic. This case is that cliche, isn't it all over writ large? So the police really
had no choice. And don't get me wrong, I'm not not giving them credit. I'll give them full credit when the thing is finished, when it's fixed, when some charges have been laid somewhere, because you know, bad thing should not go unpunished, right, so the whole meaning of the word justice. You know, let's let's be real about this, so you know, let's talk about other cliches. The expression kicking and screaming is perfect for this as well, because
that's what's happened. That's how we've got to this stage. That team has been set up because they've been pushed into it kicking and screaming, and some of them are still screaming rather than concentrating on the brief, but that's you know, that's another story.
The proof is in the pudding, though, isn't it. Because we all sit here now, aren't we. We're kind of sitting here with clenched fists, and just is it going to be done properly? That's that's the problem, to be able to put your faith wholeheartedly in that. Obviously, we've got evidence that was there at the time that wasn't
interrogated properly. So there's also that it's not just a new evidence, and that's frustrating because if it's not interrogated properly, and the same with this new evidence, then you have to find more new evidence because they say, oh, no, we looked at that, and we're like, nah.
No, it's the application now, that's what you're talking about. And I think that it's just the general sense of the public, you know, being let up the garden path, and people get it. They get it. Even the hierarchy at the police headquarters they don't give people enough credit for just injecting a bit of common sense and looking at the case and going something's not right there. Mate.
It doesn't pass the pub test. I mean just a few days ago, you know, you and I have been to you, and I've been to a pub where Amy used to work, right in the heartland of where we're talking, all the local community, and those people still now they've got signs up in support of her. They've got even a little shrine there for Amy. You know, it's lovely. I mean, they've got supportive posters up for the podcast
to try to show that they support, you know. I mean, it's not about us, it's not about you and me. It's just I'm just saying, you know, they are trying to do everything they can at their level to show support because guess what, all the people who are running the place, people who are working at the place, people who come in to have a drink, they get it, and they read all about the bits and pieces over
the years they knew her. It's not difficult. So if the application to this case is made right, and then after the interrogation as you put it, you know, for bits and pieces, and the whole thing is teased out properly as it should have been in the first place, then if someone turns around say you know what, it's a genuine mystery, then maybe people will say, okay, well we can see what you know, you can plainly see what you've done and how you've done it, and you
know you've clearly given this the right application. But don't treat us like idiots and then pretend that it's a conclusion that suits your you know, the sort of tail wagging the dog, so you can put the file in the bottom drawer and wash your hands and say that's it, tick the box, case closed, because that just wouldn't be right.
You know, for the first time, when we went out to Armadale for the first time, I actually understood a little bit more about what this environment where the way Amy lived. The interesting thing was is that even though everyone was upset and emotional and outraged, they weren't surprised either, right, either are our listeners. They're not surprised. And that's sad.
It's sad. It is sad because that area has been plagued by a high crime rate over the past years for both petty theft and breaking enters. And I guess you know, you could say minor assaults, you know, crimes related to sort of violent acts in one way or the other, and I think you know you tend to so it's the boiling frog argument. Doesn't it. You grow up in that environment, you just tend to think, oh, well, you know, that's just what we get. That's sort of
how it rolls. And if police turn up at the odd event and you know, they don't necessarily do their homework as they should have, it's sort of like, oh yeah, okay, that's a volume argument because they're jaded and they don't really want to be there as well, and so on and so forth, and that's the atmosphere that you sort of then think, oh, well, you know, we probably we sort of we get what we deserve, but it shouldn't
be like that at all. And that's been if we go full circle to when we first started the podcast, you know, in the first couple of episodes, where we explored that didn't we that sort of concept.
Even when those two officers were wrapped over the knuckles, they were told that they did the wrong thing, but there wasn't a lot of weight given even though they did the wrong thing. The implication was that it would have been the same outcome anyway, hadn't they not done the wrong thing, because it was su sight well.
I think it was a deep Hopefully it's not around as much now, but who knows. That's another argument. That's another podcast, I think, And I think there's a bit of an Ingrain culture among you know, certainly among certain members of major crime in Western Australia twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen, twenty thirteen. Look at those that particular period. You know, there was a lot of people who were doing their utmost to make sure they were all looked after internally.
But you know, if there were external problems, the shutters would come down and that would be the end of it. Quite a few cases out that you could go through actually to mention problems with around about that time. Okay, it's interesting, but as I say, that's an another story.
It is. And look, I know I usually do these for an hour and I've lost track of time, but I just every time you talk about this, it gives me another question. But one of the things, Yes, so with the inquest, you've got to remember also they went into that in quest with the whole idea that Amy shot herself with the left hand, but then of course with the with the burn mark that came from the muzzle because it was plastic or whatever remnants and remember
lock Art's principles. We'll get back to that, So which shows that you know that that was with the muzzle and that she couldn't have used that, And so then they go straight to the right hand. Why don't you consider the point that she just didn't do it. Yeah, yeah, that's the other issue with that.
Well, that's what I'm saying about the end justifying the means. You know, it's the tail wagon the dog, and I think that's the way they've done this whole thing. It's like playing snakes and ladders, but backwards, isn't it. Everything sort of tried. They try to make it fit. Yeah, we know that the two detectives. It took five years, but they they were found to be negligent in their duty.
Yeah, negligent in your duty, but not wrong. So my I guess my concern with that is they were negligent in their duty by calling off the forensics, but the result of them calling off the forensics isn't different to what the result would have been anyway. That is the impression that you're left with when you look at what happened.
Yeah, but it's wheeze all words, isn't it. Because if you're negligent, you haven't done your job. Properly. That's what that means. So if you haven't done your job properly, and the job is to figure out whether there's a murder scene or what's happened, the whole thing goes up in smoke. This comes back to the whole point of how important a good police service is because when things go wrong, you are absolutely one hundred percent reliant upon them.
You are so dependent. And I'm talking about all of us, you know, every one of us. If we haven't forbid found ourselves in that situation, we are beholden to, you know, to their actions and their and their serviceability and their concept of duty and loyalty. You know, we are literally sort of left, you know, there's nobody else. That's it. That's it. That's sort of the start and the end when those people turn up.
But it's not all. I it's not a case of that's that's the end. We can't get justice now, Oh no, not at all.
I mean, that's that's that's it. It's just a lot more difficult. Yeah, but that's no, it's no solace is it to Amy's family.
Well, on that note, I want to thank you Liam and Tim. You're out there and we will speak to you soon. I feel like I'm, you know, speaking to somebody who's a long way away. But you're only at court at the Rebellau case, which is fascinating.
Yeah, that's an amazing case. But Tim spends most of his time down at the Supreme Court. I don't know if his family ever gets to see him, but he's been he's been great for us.
Oh he has well, he does. They do shut the court sometimes so he has to come home.
Oh really, really, I thought one of those camp stretches down there. He's believable.
He is. No, he's amazing. And we'll obviously continue working with Tim on this. But like with anything that this important, this big, it takes a lot of people. You don't work in a silo.
No, exactly, exactly. Well, Well done to you well for continuing to portion directing traffic in it, because it's not easy.
I've got to keep going like there's no you know, we'll be back in the new year with season two, and we have a few more standalone episodes which are coming up, which they're going to be absolutely fantastic, really really strong. So I'll be calling you to do some more voice before the end of the year I am, but they're really good and of course Laura Richards so we'll catch up with her soon. So thank you and wishing everybody all our listener it's a very wonderful festive season.
As I said, you'll have more episodes after this, but I'm just going to say goodbye because obviously the conversations is a bit more, you know, talking directly to you. So thank you for your support. We can't do this without you, and come down to the March, the Silent March on the twenty fifth of November. We're pink in support for Amy.
Thank you, and just a final word, wishing the new investigative team looking at this case a safe and prosperous and I mean that in every sense of the word. A prosperous new year. I think so