The return of 'Around the Courts' with Sean Fewster

Published May 6, 2025, 11:49 PM

Sean Fewster is back as we dive into the case of 'the disappearing shack'.

Listen live on the FIVEAA Player.

Follow us on Facebook, X and Instagram.

Subscribe on YouTube

David Pemberthy and Will Goodings six to nine five double a breakfast. It's time to go around the courts with Sean Fusta on fine, double a breakfast right on twenty minutes to wait well, first and foremost, Sewan Custer. Great to have you back.

Good morning, guys, good morning. Thank you so much for having me back. It's been a real pleasure to have a really nice break, but it's an even bigger pleasure to be back with you and all of our listeners.

Yeah, it's good to have you and it's nice to have you back. With a bit of a mystery case, the case of the Disappearing shack.

It's been a while this one. You boys might remember that the Advertiser broke this story a little while ago. We're talking about this salmon shack built on a million dollar view on the Fluria Peninsula's Hison Trail, overlooking the cliffs there just you know, this spectacular, magnificent view. Shack's been there since nineteen thirty four. There's a family who say that they've been operating it, living in out of it, using it as a holiday home. Barry Robertson his family since about nineteen sixty four a couple of years ago. The shed's just gone out of nowhere, demolished, vanished, very strange set of circumstances, and obviously mister Robertson his family very upset about this. The government got involved, investigators got involved, and a man was arrested, a man by the name of George laver Anthiatis, who denied all wrongdoing, despite the fact that according to police and photos that were supplied by the to the Advertiser, there were photos of mister lever Anthiatists going in and out of the shack as it was in various stages of disrepair and demolition and tool kits and all sorts of things everywhere. Now, out of the blue, mister Laverniatis, who was supposed to stand trial this week, they suddenly pleaded guilty, which means that next week, I believe it is we're finally going to get some answers as to what this is all about and what the heck is going on.

So what's the theory, John, or are your hands tied as to preventing you from speculating?

What I can tell you is this, there's been a lot of people who have claimed that there's all sorts of shenanigans going on because of where the shack was located. The shack is one of these things that was located on Crown Land, and some of the listeners may know that that's been a thorny issue for the state government for a very long time because during the Great Depression a lot of people put up these little temporary buildings all over the state. They're still there. Some of them are considered heritage, some of them are not considered heritage. Some of them are on some pretty incredible parcels of land. As we say, this was look overlooking, you know, the view you would want from the Fluria Peninsula. And there was some ruction prior to the destruction of the shed between mister Robertson and a US based South Australian born realtor called Julian Galbraith Johnston. Now mister Johnston was building a really specky place just next door. Of course, suspicion turned to mister Johnson, who quite rightly denied any wrongdoing. Has never been with an offense. He's never even been so much as accused of an offense. But a lot of people said, oh, well, you know, big realtors moving in wants to put up a big specky house. He's obviously just knocked the sham salmon shed down. Mister Johnson's made very clear that's not what's happened. He's not involved in any way, shape or form. But we still don't know any compelling alternate theory. So unfortunately rumor and gossip continues to go around. This was the sort of thing we weren't going to get outthers for for a very long time because it was going to go to trial. So I'm fascinated to know why out of nowhere, mister Lavarnzi artist is pleaded guilty in what the case put to the judge.

Is going to be as do we know whether is the guilty pleaded the initial charges, yes, he did so negotiation on you know less a charge we don't do a lot of property damage. What kind of sanctions are we talking about for something like that, Well.

We're looking here at a maximum of ten years, depending on the sorts of property that's been damaged. But as we've been talking about on Just Lawful just recently, that sort of property damage it whack is usually reserved for things like arsen and setting a bush fire. That's when you're looking at sort of the upper end of ten years. I don't know whether knocking down a salmon shed, regardless of the size of its view and the picturesque nature of its location, would get you all the way up to ten years. But just because they've not negotiated the charges down doesn't mean in closed court hearings there hasn't been negotiation on the basis of the plea. And that's something we don't talk about very often. With what Daniel likes to call non binary charge bartering or whatever phrase he's invented for charge determination and flea bargaining, sometimes you can actually barter down the circumstances of the offense rather than the charges themselves.

Okay, so that goes to what the court's accepted version of events, that's right.

Yeah, And if you think sort of on a macro scale, we can talk about things like the Nima case many years ago, where the nature of that shooting was tied it up to being a certain set of events and a certain set of agreed facts. So sometimes that happens too, and that could well be the case here because it happened in a closed court. We just don't know. Sorry, not a closed court. Someone will get upset with me for that. A court that's not open to the public.

What's the distinction between a closed court and one that's not open to the public.

Oh, apparently it's a legislative distinction. And if you say closed court and that doesn't exactly match the wording of the legislation, people get very okay.

So so functionally they're the same.

Well functionally, but you know, words have a meaning, of course, Well.

Yeah, certainly in your line of work and that of the court. Where are we at with just law for at the moment, sure.

We are just wrapping up one of the more intriguing stories we've had about a man who decided that the best way to get back in the good graces of his church was to poison the elder's milk and juice with weird killer.

Jee one might to go about it.

That's definitely a sacrament that you're not expecting when you got onto the pulpit, But nonetheless that's what he decided to do, and the consequences were far reaching, not only in terms of the criminal law, but also a civil action that followed because he might have messed up the fan Emily's bakery business at the same time, sound.

Fascinating having and we missed you and yeah good neav you back.

On deck, Thanks boy, seeing you next week.

Sure view Sure the chief court reporter of the Advertiser, the host of Just Lawful, and of course regular guest here on five Double a breakfast with around the courts.

David & Will

David Penberthy and Will Goodings with the latest South Australian news, sport and entertainment. 6- 
Social links
Follow podcast
Recent clips
Browse 5,760 clip(s)