Trial by Jury - it's no operetta

The following statement was published in Crikey to-day.

Last year, twelve jurors found three Western Australian men guilty of the murder of Phillip Walsham nine years ago. The men were at the centre of last year's controversial Australian Story three-part series "Beyond Reasonable Doubt". Last Friday, the Western Australian Court of Appeal quashed the convictions of the men who were serving life jail terms. The following statement was released yesterday. It represents the opinion of the majority of the jurors:
Every stakeholder in this case has been allowed to express their opinion in the media with the exception of the twelve people who were charged with the responsibility of making an extremely difficult decision.
As a jury, the justice system forbids us to have a public voice on what occurred within the jury room during the trial. This we respect.
We would, however, like to express our deep frustration at a number of things that have occurred since our decision was handed down.
There are a number of issues that we would like to address, along with our concern and disgust at the obvious bias and inaccuracy of much of the media representation.
We did not choose to be jurors on this trial. We were initially selected by means of a ballot system, with final approval by the defendants, the defence and the prosecution. Once selected we all acted professionally throughout the trial.
We all took the role of juror very seriously. We are all intelligent and professional people who were prepared to listen to both sides of the case and were more than capable of analysing the evidence presented to us.
When we went into deliberations we did so carefully, thoroughly and did not allow emotion to enter into our decision-making process. Our decision was based purely on the evidence put to us.
We all support and recognise the need for, and right of, appeal.
We recognise that it is the prerogative of the appeal judges to overturn a jury’s decision.
Unfortunately, a decision that took many days to reach has now been ruled as “unsafe and unsatisfactory”. What part of our decision was “unsatisfactory”? We made the only decision we felt possible on the evidence presented to us over the ten weeks. Does the decision of the appeal judges undergo the same thorough scrutiny?
We are disgusted with the subsequent public attack on the jury – specifically, our integrity and ability to make reasoned decisions. It is easy to blame and speculate about the jury when their decision does not suit. Remember, the system chose us. We did not choose to be on the case.
Our experience has led us to believe that the jury system is a farce. If the judicial system deems that a jury is unable to make reasoned decisions in a high profile and/or prolonged case, then surely those cases should only be heard before a panel of appeal judges. Why do juries even exist? Criticism of the decision we accept, what we object to is the public maligning of us personally. Again, the system chose us.
The media reporting of the case has been scandalous. Certain commentators have stated they heard all ten weeks of the trial. Not one media representative heard all the evidence presented – the evidence on which the jury based their decision. Much of what has been put in the public domain by so-called commentators, both in newspapers and on the internet, has been biased, speculative and factually inaccurate.
One constant criticism leveled at the jury has been the amount of speculation allegedly made by them in the process of them reaching their verdict. How ironic it is that those same people are now speculating themselves about the alleged prejudices of the jury and their ability to make decisions without emotion.
Do those charged with the responsibility of informing the public have an obligation to be factually correct and unbiased? Unfortunately, it appears not. Some, it appears, align themselves with one side and present only the information beneficial to their case. Sadly, the West Australian public in general have not been given an unbiased account of the facts and as such go on believing that another miscarriage of justice has been averted.
This was a legitimate trial by twelve peers. Is this really justice?

@@@@@@@

Have you come to the end of this statement, dear Reader, feeling slightly troubled, perturbed? Miss Eagle has been concerned for some time about erosion of the principles surrounding and undergirding trial by jury. For nations whose law is founded on British common law, being innocent until proven guilty and trial by jury are foundations of our freedom.

When there are outcries about our judicial system, it seems to Miss E that large sectors of the community have forgotten, if they had ever learned it in the first place, that - in our system - it has traditionally been held that rather ten guilty people go free than one innocent person is condemned.

Scotland has, by tradition, had majority verdicts - but do we really need majority verdicts? The cost of running the judicial system means that major trials which are expected to be lengthy frequently carry "understudy" jurors. Queries frequently arise about where jurors are equipped to make decisions based on highly specialised or abstruse expert opinion. We are seeing moves to remove the principle of double jeopardy. We see the possibility of jury interference - particularly in the dramatised documentary, Joh's Jury, which told the story of a widely held view of interference which resulted in a hung jury.

All these factors and more lead to consideration of more widespread use of judicial rather than jury trials. Judicial trials are more common in civil cases than criminal cases in higher jurisdictions although one has to be alert to changes which allow more power to the summary jurisdiction of Magistrates without referral to higher jurisdictions.

We hear a lot to-day about requiring of new immigrants seeking citizenship a knowledge of Australian values. Miss Eagle hasn't noticed that any of these values make reference to being innocent until proven guilty, to the right of trial by a jury of one's peers.

And, on the topic of a jury of one's peers, one wonders whether this could be streamlined. Juries are not publicised under our system - that is why the statement above is highly unusual. Miss E - along with most Australians - would not advocate the way of the U.S. where individual jurors speak to the media soon after a trial. But Miss E is not aware how many Aboriginal people were on the jury in the recent Chris Hurley trial following the death of Cameron (Mulrunji) Doomadgee. Would an all white jury verdict differ from the verdict where Aboriginal people were included in such a situation?

Plain and simple - Miss Eagle believes that Australia waters down or over-rides the trial by jury system with great caution. However slight the erosion, this might pose/or already poses a threat to the entire principle. Judicial oversight cannot, in Miss E's view, become the 100% decision making process at law. There must be room for authentic peer review.

Chris Hurley: on trial in Townsville

Miss Eagle has had much to say on this blog in relation to the death of Cameron Doomadgee, Mulrunji. To-day, in Townsville the trial of Chris Hurley began. Miss Eagle will not be commenting on this matter during the trial. At this stage, the fact that Chris Hurley is on trial is sufficient. Those who are interested should be able to find sufficient press coverage. Miss Eagle would only remind you, dear Reader, that if more information is needed the Coroner's report into Mulrunji's death and her recommendations can be accessed here.

CHRIS HURLEY TO TRIAL OVER DEATH OF MULRUNJI

Policeman faces death in custody trial
is the headline in The Age in Melbourne to-day.
The item puts the situation in an historic context
but if one knew nothing of the Australian penal system
one might think that a policeman is facing a death sentence.
Sensationalism?

Meanwhile, over at The Courier Mail in Brisbane, Queensland
the headline is terse.
Hurley trial in June
The reporting is succinct. Bare detail.
Trying not to offend anyone are we?
Like the Queensland Police?
Like Peter Beattie and the Queensland Government?

The Queensland Police Service - A law unto themselves?

Queensland Police meeting at the Broncos Leagues Club in Brisbane
Photo: Peter Wills in The Courier Mail

Are they, as The Courier Mail headline says, a law unto themselves?

Miss Eagle has no problem with police moving to support their own. Miss Eagle has no problem with police marching on Queensland's Parliament to support their own - although she notes Gracelyn Smallwood's well-made point:

Ms Smallwood said it was "cute" that the police union was talking for the first time in 16 years about the recommendations of the Black Deaths in Custody inquiry. "We have not heard one word in all that time from the police union, and it is a handy diversion for them to come up with now - when one of their own is charged over the death of Mulrunji," she said. "It will be good to see them march. They will appreciate then what Aboriginal people have had to do for 207 years. "Perhaps we will line the path of the march and photograph them individually and get their numbers - like they have been doing to Aboriginal people and other protest groups in this state all these years."

Miss Eagle seeks one qualifying statement from the Queensland Police Service and the Queensland Police Union:

That Queensland Police are not above the law

Police to meet: a positive response to their calls will enhance good governance

Queensland Police are meeting to-day. Miss Eagle supports them in their efforts to get the Beattie government to implement recommendations of the 1991 Black Deaths in Custody report, which called for round-the-clock supervision of indigenous people in custody, video surveillance and the removal of "danger points" (such as hanging devices). This is long overdue. At a minimum, police are calling for an extra 200 officers in remote communities.

As Miss Eagle has said in a previous post, policing in Aboriginal communities is a difficult task. Police need more support in carrying out the tasks expected of them. Government needs to provide support for the communities which the police serve so that the enforcement arm of government is not expected to pick up the pieces from government neglect.

If from the death of Mulrunji and the painful journey of Chris Hurley emerges positive change, this will be a good thing.

Queensland: where good governance is absent to-day, coming the next?

Over at Freedom to Differ, Peter Black has pointed out why he believes it is wrong to now prosecute Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley for the death of Mulrunji.

Peter Black takes a more sanguine view of the justice system in Queensland than does Miss Eagle. Don't mean to be mean, Peter, but can't help thinking that this might be because you are immersed in the system; your living is dependent upon it; and your career might be impeded by a contrary opinion.

Miss Eagle, on the other hand, is a life long Queenslander who has flown the coop - pleased to escape the ineptitude of governance in Queensland including the administration of justice.

Government and Law function in a social milieu - a complex web of interests, social networks, and culture. In Queensland, the administration of justice and involvement of police in the administration of justice and the enforcement of law has not always served the people of Queensland well.

In such a milieu, memory has great value and one does not automatically erase such memories with the stroke of a bureaucratic pen or the issuing of a report or a political statement.

The Commission of Inquiry into Possible Illegal Activities and Associated Police Misconduct which resulted in the 1989 report by Tony Fitzgerald, The Fitzgerald Inquiry Report, demonstrated police corruption in Queensland. In addition, a close relationship between government and the police was brought into the light of day. This relationship did not provide beneficial results in the administration or the enforcement of law in Queensland for the general benefit of Queenslanders.

There are a number of noteworthy outcomes following Fitzgerald's Inquiry:

1. There were only four politicians who went to gaol in the wash-up of the Inquiry.


2. Of those who were tried and convicted and spent time in gaol, an argument can be made that they were scapegoats.


3. Two politicians were former Liberal Politicians who swung to the National Party when the Liberal Party, the junior coalition partner in Queensland, suffered severe reversals and the National Party fortunes moved to encompass urban centres not only a traditional rural base. Don Lane, a former Special Branch detective, and Brian Austin were seen by Liberals as defectors. Two politicians were junior ministers, Geoff Muntz and Leisha Harvey. They were junior, foolish, and not the shiniest apples in the National Party barrel. To sum up, who were the scapegoats? Two turncoats, and two silly junior ministers.


4. Joh Bjelke-Petersen stood trial in 1991. The jury did not reach a verdict. The jury foreman was a Young National, Luke Shaw. There are strong views in some sections of the community suggesting that there was a deliberate plan to pervert the course of justice and ensure that Joh was not convicted.

Then there is the case of Di Fingleton. The High Court of Australia upheld her appeal against her Queensland conviction. In doing so, it relied on two Queensland statutes.

Section 30 of Queensland’s Criminal Code provides:

“Except as expressly provided by this Code, a judicial officer is not criminally responsible for anything done or omitted to be done by the judicial officer in the exercise of the officer’s judicial functions, although the act done is in excess of the officer’s judicial authority, or although the officer is bound to do the act omitted to be done.”

Section 21A of the Magistrates Act provides:

“A magistrate has, in the performance or exercise of an administrative function or power conferred on the magistrate under an Act, the same protection and immunity as a magistrate has in a judicial proceeding in a Magistrates Court.”

In short, Di Fingleton should never have been tried in a court of law. Miss Eagle wonders who recommended that Di Fingleton should come to trial? Who recommended that Queensland statutes should be overridden and ignored? What could the Chief Justice of Queensland done? What did the Queensland Bar do or fail to do?

Then Miss Eagle recalls what Terry O'Gorman said in calling for a review of the Mulrunji case:

"Nick Cowdrey QC is notoriously independent and he's the only DPP of the eight states and territories of the Commonwealth who has tenure - the others are on contracts."

Miss Eagle is disturbed by what she sees in Queensland - a complex web of interests, social networks, and culture in which good governance and sound administration, not only in relation to justice and law, suffer.

The powerless still have much to fear in Queensland.

Please note, dear Reader, Miss Eagle has tried to be circumspect in what she has said. She has also been selective in the cases highlighted. She could have mentioned others.

Police in Aboriginal communities

Aboriginal Community Police Officer Don St Clair, Alice Springs Police.

Joined the ACPO Scheme in December 1997

The Queensland Police Union is threatening to cut ties with Aboriginal communities.

Interesting idea! When the going gets tough, the tough get right out of there!

Miss Eagle is interested in this little interchange:

QPU spokesman Denis Fitzgerald says it may be time to sever ties completely. "If they don't want the police there, get them out," he said. "Let tribal law take over, let them police their own communities." Mr Fitzgerald says watch-houses need to be upgraded if officers are wanted."No watch-house in an Aboriginal community anywhere is this state can possibly comply with black death-in-custody recommendations," he said.The union says 200 extra police and more video cameras would be a start, but Queensland Premier Peter Beattie has rejected across-the-board changes."In small communities, it is simply a waste of money," he said.

Interesting to see the Queensland Police Union having some input into Aboriginal policy matters. These comments are worthy of closer scrutiny.

1. Let tribal law take over. Aboriginal citizens are as entitled as anyone else to have police in their communities. As for tribal law, what tribal law should be implemented on Palm Island? Palm Island is a mess of whitefella's making when, a century ago, people were rounded up from various Aboriginal nations across North Queensland and herded into the Aboriginal penal settlement known as Palm Island. Really, its a bit like herding Canadians, Americans, Australians, British, and South Africans into one place and deciding whose law should take precedence. Traditional law does have a place alongside whitefella law in Aboriginal communities, just as Aboriginal culture does have a place alongside whitefella culture, but Palm Island is not the place to experiment.


2. No watch-house in an Aboriginal community anywhere is this state can possibly comply with black death-in-custody recommendations. Miss Eagle suspects that this statement is true. She wonders if the QPU has raised this matter before. However, the death of Mulrunji (Cameron Doomadgee) - based on the Coroner's report - does not appear to be attributable to short-comings in watch-house design in Aboriginal communities. There is a whitefella law - one of two laws in western European tradition and found in other parts of the world. It says: "Love your neighbour as yourself." If police on Palm Island had taken as much interest in the welfare of Mulrunji as they did in their own welfare, he would be alive to-day and Chris Hurley would not be about to face the justice system with the possibility of a prison sentence.


3. The union says 200 extra police and more video cameras would be a start. This does not sound an unreasonable request. However, these solutions do not address the issues of police attitudes and the attitudes of the Queensland Government to Aboriginal people and issues relating to poor race relations in Queenland, and in particular North Queensland.


4. Queensland Premier Peter Beattie has rejected across-the-board changes."In small communities, it is simply a waste of money," he said. Why is Miss Eagle not surprised at this statement! No money invested in Aboriginal people and their communities outside the law. When this leads to involvement with the law arising from poverty, unemployment, life on the dole, poor access to education, housing and so on and so on, there is no inclination to invest money to ensure the safety of Aboriginal people either through enlightened attitudes of the Queensland Police or through fully implementing the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.

Australia is not trying to address the issues of Aboriginal Australia. It is not lacking in goodwill of a rather generalised and fuzzy nature. It's just white Australia is not bothered about doing what really counts where it really counts.

Whitefellas are not just prepared to increase taxes to deal with the issue. They are not prepared to open up employment and education on a large scale to Aboriginal people. They are not prepared, on a wide scale, to come to grips with and acquire knowledge of Aboriginal culture. They are not prepared to sacrifice an ounce of their own comfort to ensure other Australians have the same opportunities.

Traditional Aboriginal communities are out of sight and out of mind and white Australia is quite content with that situation as it is with the out of sight out of mind prison system which has a strong Aboriginal population.

Miss Eagle has long held the view that she will know when there is no discrimination against Aboriginal people. It will be when she walks into a David Jones store and finds a traditional Aboriginal woman working on the cosmetics counter providing retail services to all Australians. This is such a long time coming that Miss Eagle thinks hell will freeze over first.

Please note: Miss Eagle has not intended the above comment as a side swipe at David Jones. The first floor of David Jones stores are sacred women's spaces in Miss Eagle's scheme of things. This is why she wants to see Aboriginal women in there too.

Do something about the Office of the DPP in Queensland

Terry O'Gorman, president of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties (ACCL), has called for "greater accountability at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in Queensland." This follows the handling of the case of Cameron (Mulrunji) Doomadgee.

There is no doubt that the Queensland Government, in the interests of good and sound governance and probity, have to do something in relation to public prosecutions in Queensland. The Doomadgee case is not the first time that the office has been the centre of controversy. Even things such as the administration of forensic evidence in an efficient, effective and timely method have been the matter of public debate.

However, this is only one aspect of governance which needs to be overhauled in Queensland. Good governance in Queensland gives every appearance of being an endangered species.

Mike Reynolds applauds one in 219 years event

Mike Reynolds, Member for Townsville (in which Palm island is situated) and Speaker of the Queensland Parliament, speaking of the decision to charge Chris Hurley in relation to the death of Cameron (Mulrunji) Doomadgee, has said

he has spoken to many people on Palm Island who feel they have been vindicated by the decision to have the case heard before a court. "Everyone is saying that this is one of the most important days in the 219 years in regard to justice for Indigenous people," he said.

Onya, Mike!

An historic first relating to the death of Cameron (Mulrunji) Doomadgee

Andrew Boe is the lawyer for the family of Cameron (Mulrunji) Doomadgee. Andrew told an Australia Day crowd in Brisbane to-day that the decision to charge Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley in relation to the death of Mulrunji is a landmark decision.

"This is the first time that a criminal charge has followed a death in custody in Australia's history.

The Queensland Police should leave it to the law - all that Aboriginal people have ever asked

Hell hath no fury like Queensland policemen scorned.

What are they afraid of when the whole matter is to come before a judge and jury.

If there is no case to answer, a jury will clear Chris Hurley and he will return to work. If he continues to work with the death of Mulrunji (Cameron Doomadgee) hanging over his head, there will always be a smell. There will be smoke. People will say that where there is smoke there is fire.

If Chris Hurley is culpable, what do the Queensland Police want? A guilty man to go free, to work among them, to survive to get away with something worse another day?

Miss Eagle has every sympathy for policemen carrying out their duties. Aboriginal communities can provide quite unique policing challenges and police should be able to rely on their superiors and their trade union. However, we are all equal before the law - or that's the general idea - whether we are police or civilians, black or white.

Once upon a time police in Queensland were corporately described as the Queensland Police Force. Those were the bad old days: the bad old days when Joh Bjelke-Petersen was Premier, many influential police were corrupt, and Miss Eagle - a born and bred Queenslander - was pleased that Joh only had police in his pocket and was not Prime Minister with an army, a navy, and an air force at his disposal.

CHRIS HURLEY SUSPENDED OVER MULRUNJI'S DEATH

AT LONG LAST!
JUSTICE WILL TAKE ITS COURSE

Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley

Following the decision of Queensland Attorney-General, Kerry Shine, to charge Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley in relation to the death of Cameron (Mulrunji) Doomadgee, the Queensland Police Commissioner has issued the following press release:

Officer suspended following legal advice

As a result of today’s advice by Sir Laurence Street and the Attorney-General’s decision to proceed with legal action, Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley will be suspended from further duties until the matter is resolved through the judicial process.

Commissioner of Police Bob Atkinson stated given this status it would not be appropriate to comment further about the case at this time.

Last updated 26/01/2007

Media and Public Affairs Branch

07 3015 2444

CHRIS HURLEY TO FACE JUSTICE OVER MULRUNJI'S DEATH

News has just come through that Sir Laurence Street in his review of the decision of the Queensland Director of Public Prosecution has declared that there is sufficient evidence to charge Chris Hurley in relation to the death of Cameron Doomadgee (Mulrunji) and that there may be sufficient evidence to convict. While Miss Eagle has provided links to the Media Release of Queensland Attorney-General Kerry Shine she believes that it warrants publication in full on this blog.

Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Minister Assisting the Premier in Western QueenslandThe Honourable Kerry Shine
Friday, January 26, 2007

POLICE OFFICER TO FACE LEGAL ACTION

IN RELATION TO PALM ISLAND DEATH

Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Kerry Shine, today confirmed he had received Sir Laurence Street’s legal opinion in relation to possible charges resulting from the death of Mulrunji on Palm Island in 2004.
Mr Shine said Sir Laurence, a former New South Wales Chief Justice, had considered the brief of evidence provided by the Director of Public Prosecution Leanne Clare.
Sir Laurence was asked to consider

(1) whether sufficient admissible evidence exists to support the institution of criminal proceedings against any person with respect to the death of Mulrunji; and

(2) whether a reasonable prospect of a conviction before a reasonable jury exists in the event a prosecution is brought against any person.
“Sir Laurence has advised me that he believes there is sufficient admissible evidence exists to support the institution of criminal proceedings against Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley for manslaughter of Mulrunji,” Mr Shine said.
“Furthermore, Sir Laurence believes there is a reasonable prospect of a conviction.”
Mr Shine said Sir Laurence had emphasised that his role was not to determine whether Senior Sergeant Hurley was guilty of an offence, but rather to determine whether he should be put on trial.
“In light of Sir Laurence’s opinion, and having given very careful consideration to the matter myself, I have decided it is in the public interest that this matter should be resolved in a court,” he said.
“I have today instructed the Crown Solicitor to take the necessary steps to initiate a prosecution as soon as possible.”
“I ask that, given the pending legal proceedings, the media show restraint in their reporting of this matter so that Senior Sergeant Hurley can be assured of a fair trial.”
Mr Shine said the fact that Sir Laurence had formed a different opinion to that of Ms Clare was in no way a slight on her.
“The best legal minds often differ on matters of law – even in the High Court of Australia it is common for differing judgements to be recorded,” he said.
“In my view, Ms Clare has acted within the scope of her duty and her authority.”
Mr Shine said the Government’s intention remained to table Sir Laurence’s opinion in State Parliament.
“We will do so as soon as it is legally appropriate, but it is likely this will not be until after the court case to ensure the fairness of the prosecution is not compromised,” Mr Shine said.

26 January 2007

Media contact: Kirby Anderson 0418 197 350

*****

Miss Eagle asks:

Why did the issue of justice not come naturally to the Government of Queensland and its employees (the DPP; the Police) in this case?

What does this case have to say about the state of governance at all levels in Queensland?

Mr Beattie put on display Queensland backwardness in relationships with the first people of this nation. What will he do to bring about best practice, 21st century standards, in race relations in Queensland?

Above all, Mr Beattie, why did you have to be pushed?

Why did so many people in so many places have to expend so much energy in so much sorrow to ensure that the Queensland Police faced justice on this issue?

Protests for Justice for Mulrunji : Palm Island, Townsville, Brisbane and Sydney

Wayne Wharton in Brisbane

Noel Pearson on Palm Island

Ernie Dingo in Sydney

The people of Palm

The scene in Brisbane

Alec Doomadgee on Palm

Cousin of Mulrunji - Cameron Doomadgee

Premier of Queensland - Peter Beattie - on Palm Island

And he tried to do that to-day!

Justice

Col Dillon says that Aboriginal people can't get justice in the Qld legal system

Rallying for Mulrunji

A major rally will be held in Townsville to-day (Palm Island is out from Townsville) to protest the failure of the Queensland Govt to prosecute Chris Hurley in relation to the death in policy custody on Palm Island of Mulrunji (Cameron Doomadgee). Warren Mundine, President of the Australian Labor Party, will lead the rally on Palm Island on the day that ALP Premier Peter Beattie arrives on Palm Island to put the official government spin and gloss on a very poor, arrogant, and insensitive decision. Read here about how key investigators - on whose information the decision was based - were friends of Chris Hurley.

It is interesting to see reports that Warren Snowdon and Trish Crossin, both left Labor Federal politicians from the Northern Territory, have made public comments critical of the decision not to prosecute but hosing down Mundine's calls for a campaign of civil disobedience.

Why their insistence that a campaign of civil disobedience must be avoided? Are they fearful that Mundine's proposal will have a degree of a success? Or do they think that a Labor government should be immune from such a campaign?

Miss Eagle would have thought that Labor governments should be immune from making such decisions as those that have been taken favouring the Queensland Police Force. Miss Eagle thinks that Labor Governments should be incapable of the insensitive and racist policies that the Beattie Government implements time and time again.

Is it any wonder that so many of Labor's stalwart supporters believe that it has lost its way? It frequently appears that justice is no more likely to be available for Aboriginal people from Labor governments than it is at the hands of the right wing ideologues inhabiting the Liberal and National Parties in Australia.

Brisbane rally: protestors will ask that Hurley stands trial for Mulrunji's death

To-day there will be a rally in Brisbane

to protest the failure of the Queensland Government

to prosecute the death of Mulrunji (Cameron Doomadgee)

in police custody on Palm Island.

For first hand information,

please go to Let's Take Over where David J has the details.

Aboriginal leaders speak for a trial on Mulrunji's death

Aboriginal leaders are speaking out against the Queensland Government's decision not to prosecute Chris Hurley for the death of Mulrunji (Cameron Doomadgee) on Palm Island.

Paddy Jerome

in The Courier Mail

Warren Mundine
in The Australian

Noel Pearson
in The Sydney Morning Herald

Murrandoo Yanner

on ABC North Queensland

Colin Dillon: integrity then, integrity now.

Some years ago, when the Fitzgerald Inquiry was established to enquire into police corruption in Queensland the first witness heard by the Inquiry was a policeman called Colin Dillon. Colin Dillon was a rarity in the Queensland Police Force. He is an Aboriginal man. Dillon appeared before the enquiry to tell his story about how he had been given a bottle of Chivas Regal whisky by a corrupt policeman. Dillon did not know what to do or to whom he should turn. So he kept the bottle of whisky and when the Fitzgerald Inquiry was established he walked into its offices and placed the unopened bottle of Chivas Regal on the counter and told the Inquiry his story. He had talked to the bottle each day as he shaved. But Col, from a Jehovah's Witness background, was not a drinker. You see, dear Reader, Col Dillon was then and is to-day a man of great integrity.

Col Dillon has now announced his resignation from his job with the Department of Community Services following the decision of the Queensland Government to abolish the Department of Aboriginal and Islander Affairs and a ruling not to charge a policeman over a death in custody on Palm Island.

Once more Col Dillon lets his actions speak so much louder than his words.

Col Dillon - Man of integrity

Who cares? Another death in police custody.

In Queensland, which man's life has more value?

That of Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley of the Queensland Police?

Or that of Mulrunji (Cameron Doomadgee)

killed with the the involvement of Snr Sgt Chris Hurley while in police custody

on Palm Island, off Townsville, North Queensland?

For more information on this matter, please see Miss Eagle's posts here and here.

Mulrunji (Cameron) Doomadgee

Requiescat in Pace

A case to answer? Snr Sgt Chris Hurley.
Monday 20 November 2006 marked the second anniversary of Mulrunji (Cameron) Doomadgee.

One of the great shames of Australia is the deaths of aboriginal people in police custody. The most recent death is that of Mulrunji. Miss Eagle has posted on this previously and has included the damning Coroner's Report on his death.

Aboriginal people are concerned that no charges have yet been laid in relation to the death. Sam Watson, poet and leading Aboriginal activist in Brisbane, gave voice to this at a rally this week.


Miss Eagle echoes the title of her previous post. In the Coroner's Report there was vindication - but will there be justice?